Keith Henson's daughter's home page
henri
www.operatingthetan.com I find it incumbent on me to air this. The
contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/parents.html links to this page
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/keith.html
This is the website of Val Henson, Keith Henson's daughter.
It includes accusations I have never found particularly credible, as none of
the people who were the subjects or sources of the accusations had
anything to say about them. Carolyn Meinel, Henson's ex-wife, had
seemed to deny them.
These are the "child molester" accusations Scientology has been using for
years. I never found these believable or well referenced enough even to
address on operatingthetan, except insofar as Scientology had, in fact,
made such accusations.
Now, however, Henson's daughter has posted on the subject, making
allegations with a much higher degree of particularity. She has also included
what at least purports to be a statement by Gale Grant.
I have verified to my satisfaction that this actually is Val Henson. It is, as
far as I can ascertain, actually her website at a university with which she is
actually associated. Internet Archive verifies that the website has existed for
years. In the most recent copy of the page, June 2007, the accusations against
Henson are not present, which is consistent with the stated date of December
2007 on the webpage itself.
I can't verify that the claimed statement of Gale Grant (formerly Gale Henson)
is actually genuine. However, it would seem to be a particularly audacious lie
to manufacture such a document, with Gale Grant an existing person, able to
contradict it should she choose.
I reach no conclusions about these accusations. I do feel, however, that they
demand a response, unlike previous, vaporous allegations.
Having previously defended Henson vociferously, I feel that I'm obligated to
step forward with this if aware of it, even if it makes a fool of me. Either I
am a fool for having defended Henson, or I am a fool for airing this now.
But it was going to show up here, and it may as well be from me. I have no
editorial control of the site at present, and my only current connection with it
is I am the domain registrant. However, if I feel these allegations are
credible, or even unresolved, I will be obligated to transfer it to someone
else.
I am not happy with this. I hope I have committed the smaller harm of
relaying false accusations, than of having been completely wrong about
Keith Henson all these years.
cultxpt
> As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author ofwww.operatingthetan.comI find it incumbent on me to air this. The
> contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
The timing is a bit strange; while Keith is on probation. I wonder
if the terms of his probation would prevent him from responding?
This seems legit so can't be discounted. I just wish 2008 hadn't
started out as the Year the Critics Get Pummeled from Within. But
truth is truth, and I think important truths should see the light of
day. That's why I'm here. So here we go.
barbz
"henri" <he...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:tck2o357i6ji6puvj...@4ax.com...
The timing is odd. Keith is done with the cult crap and gets out of jail,
then this appears. I'm just sayin'
Quaoar
The singular characteristic of these pages is that there is not a single
verification that the author is, indeed, Keith Henson's daughter. You
state that the pages are authored by Keith Henson's daughter, but can
*you* provide proof positive that she is who she says she is?
Further, although "Henri" has been posting from the indicated email
address, how do we know that this "Henri" is Rob Clark? Can anyone
provide proof positive of "Henri's" identity?
Lacking proof positive of the identities of the parties involved, this
is just another invention without supporting facts, just as is
religiousfreedomwatch.org.
Q
Zinj
says...
<snip>
> The timing is odd. Keith is done with the cult crap and gets out of jail,
> then this appears. I'm just sayin'
Well, good thing that Rob 'aired' it and, just to be safe, vaporized
operatingthetan.org :)
Zinj
--
You Can Lead a Clam to Reason; but You Can't Make Him Think
R. Hill
> As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author ofwww.operatingthetan.comI find it incumbent on me to air this. The
> contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
I'm stunned.
I have a page on Keith Henson. I won't remove it, although I will
modified soon to provide a link to Val Henson's statements.
If Keith Henson is guilty of what he is accused here, he needs to be
held properly accountable in the *court of law*, convicted, and
punished accordingly. But as of now, I can't decide all by myself if
Keith Henson is guilty of what he is accused in these pages: I am not
a judge who is exposed to all evidences in a *court of law*. Only a
judge (or jury) is in position to decide whether he is guilty or not,
*not me*.
Ray.
Hartley Patterson
> Having previously defended Henson vociferously, I feel that I'm obligated to
> step forward with this if aware of it, even if it makes a fool of me. Either I
> am a fool for having defended Henson, or I am a fool for airing this now.
This was bound to turn up here eventually, so better a calm statement than
flaming from the start. Thank you, and no I don't think you are a fool in
either case. The Keith Henson who was persecuted by the cult and that most
of us defended still exists.
As those who read the article will see, the author indicates that she is
well aware of the true nature of the cult. If that is the case and the
parties involved do not want the cult meddling further in their private
lives, then I rather think that applies to us as well.
--
Hartley Patterson
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk
http://news-from-bree.blogspot.com
Dave Touretzky
R. Hill <rh...@xenu-directory.net> wrote:
>
> I have a page on Keith Henson. I won't remove it, although I will
> modified soon to provide a link to Val Henson's statements.
I think that's appropriate.
> If Keith Henson is guilty of what he is accused here, he needs to be
> held properly accountable in the *court of law*, convicted, and
> punished accordingly.
The statute of limitations would prohibit that. Althought there are
exceptions in the case of only recently-recovered memories of
childhood abuse, that doesn't appear to be the claim here, and even
those exceptions have time limits.
> But as of now, I can't decide all by myself if Keith Henson is
> guilty of what he is accused in these pages: I am not a judge who is
> exposed to all evidences in a *court of law*. Only a judge (or jury)
> is in position to decide whether he is guilty or not, *not me*.
Certainly we would want to hear Keith's take on this situation.
-- Dave
Tom Klemesrud
Well it doesn't ring true to me. Molesting four girls from 1974 to
1981... and the police never got involved? That's not what happens in
the real world. If the Scientologists knew this--and it appeared they
they did, because Robert Clarke reported that--why simply wouldn't the
Scientologists have used it?
I don't see any one of those four girls coming forward and testify, nor
do I see Val Henson doing anything more than what might be called false
memory syndrome, or worse. She takes it to the Internet but she doesn't
take it to the police.
I don't believe it. It's amazing that Robert Clarke would bring this up
now stands as he says, it's been all over the Internet for years.
It's more likely to me that this is some occult operation spurned on by
the Buttersquash folks.
moontaco
> On Jan 6, 3:29 pm, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
I would like to believe that Keith is innocent, but I am completely
open-minded on this subject.
One thing in these documents is rather confusing: Is one of Keith's
daughters alleging she was molested but keeping her identity secret?
The document at http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/keith.html is purportedly
written by Valerie (though it is written, mostly, in the first person
plural). In that document, it says, "I was only a few months shy of my
fourth birthday when Carolyn divorced Keith. I do have memories of
living with Keith, and of neglect and abuse on both his and Carolyn's
part, but I do not remember him molesting me. Various doctors over the
years have noted physical evidence suggestive of molestation, but
nothing conclusive. I can't give first-hand testimony about Keith's
child molestation; I can only assemble the testimony of others."
However, in Gale Henson Grant's statement, she says, "There's a lot
more to this story, including me being a policeman of my father, the
fact that Amber, my youngest sister, was not molested, the fear that
she would be, the eventual confession from another sister that he had
molested her as well, and the reality that he molested two of my
childhood friends, and I knew it." Who is the daughter who made "the
eventual confession" that Keith had molested her? In her own account,
Valerie says she has no recollection of being molested. Valerie's
account does repeatedly refer to "sisters" who were molested: are she
and Gale leaving out the one who is said to have confessed? (In an e-
mail Valerie says she received from Carolyn Meinel, there are
references to "Gale and [redacted]" [sic], so I assume the other
sister who claims to have been molested is the name redacted.)
I also find it odd that so little information about the supposed
molestation of Gale's childhood friends is given. I don't mean names,
just a bit of info like approximate dates and circumstances. Maybe
Valerie and Gale didn't see any point in going into that. And there
may not be any, but the lack of it makes the claim feel less than
credible to me.
Beth
AntiHatredAn...@gmail.com
> As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author ofwww.operatingthetan.comI find it incumbent on me to air this. The
> contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
The www.religiousfreedomwatch.org reported correctly about Keith
Henson.
I do not speak to my parents
I do not speak to or associate in any manner with my parents or any of
their spouses, past or present:
* Keith Henson
* Carolyn Meinel
* Arel Lucas
* John Bosma
* Mike Bertin
This public statement is made necessary because my biological father
and serial child molester, Keith Henson, is now out of prison (for
completely unrelated charges) and is once more an active participant
in some of my professional circles. What was previously awkward -
refusing to discuss my father with well-meaning professional
colleagues - has now become a major impediment to attending
professional conferences and other events. In addition, my first
stepfather, John Bosma, also continues to stalk me, most recently at a
professional conference at which I was an organizer.
The take-away is that I will not under any circumstances be in
physical proximity to my parents or their spouses, attend any event
they are present at, or be associated with any endeavor of theirs.
This is non-negotiable.
If you want more information on why I say that Keith Henson is a child
molester, read my Keith Henson is a child molester page. Do not read
this page unless absolutely necessary; it is not pleasant stuff.
barbz
"R. Hill" <rh...@xenu-directory.net> wrote in message
news:0936522e-24f0-4aca...@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
None of this changes what happened between Keith and Scientology.
AntiHatredAn...@gmail.com
> On Jan 6, 4:29 pm, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
Keith Henson's daughters speak: Keith Henson is a child molester
WARNING: The following text includes explicit detail about disturbing
and disgusting sexual crimes. Do not read it unless you are willing to
accept any harm or damage this will do to yourself.
Prologue
My name is Valerie Henson. Keith Henson is my biological father and a
serial child molester. He molested at least four girls between 1974
and 1981, including some of his own daughters. His youngest victim was
6 years old. None of the families involved, including ours, pressed
charges, believing that a conviction was unlikely. Keith escaped
without any punishment. Today, he is regarded as a hero by many for
his opposition to the Church of Scientology.
For years, Keith's daughters have refused to speak on the record about
our child-molesting father in order to protect each other from media
attention. We are going on the record now.
The Child Molester
Keith Henson (full name, Howard Keith Henson) has always been a figure
of some minor notoriety. He has been associated with several semi-
famous projects or movements, such as space colonization, memetics,
and storing people's frozen heads. Keith is best known for his long-
standing harassment of the Scientologists, a creepy, Borg-like cult.
What is less well-known about Keith Henson is that he molested at
least four girls between the ages 6 and 12 from 1974 to 1981,
including some of his own daughters. Our sister Gale finally told our
mother that Keith had molested her in 1981. Two other girls came
forward shortly afterwards; another did not reveal her molestation
until many years later. After they came forward, Keith confessed that
he had molested the girls to his wife, Carolyn Meinel. We are honestly
not sure how many children Keith molested in total.
The results were all too common for cases of sexual abuse: the police
were obviously skeptical, the law required family counseling before
they could move to the next step in the prosecution, the other victims
didn't want to testify in court, and Carolyn didn't want to prosecute
Keith because she didn't want him killed in prison when they found out
he was a child molester. In the end, no one pressed charges against
Keith. Carolyn divorced Keith, who immediately remarried to Arel
Lucas. Despite being intimately familiar with the circumstances of
Keith's divorce, Arel conceived and gave birth to another daughter
shortly thereafter, our half-sister Amber. Our sister Gale took
responsibility for protecting Amber, and forced Keith and Arel to
allow her to visit and quiz Amber on a regular basis by threatening to
prosecute Keith if they denied her access to Amber.
The Scientologists
Keith Henson would have faded from the public eye long ago but for one
reason: his campaign against the Church of Scientology. Keith devoted
several years of his life to annoying the Scientologists, picketing
isolated Scientology compounds, biting the arms of people, and posting
prolificly on Usenet. Although Keith's activities had little visible
effect, the Scientologists took Keith seriously and began
investigating him.
The Scientologists quickly found court documents in which Carolyn
Meinel explicitly accused Keith Henson of molesting their daughters.
They also found people who went on the record saying that Carolyn had
divorced Keith for molesting their daughters. Triumphantly, the
Scientologists publicized their findings - and were universally
disbelieved.
At present, many people believe that Keith Henson is a heroic freedom
fighter wrongfully persecuted by the Scientologists. I can't blame
them. The Scientologists had strong motivation to discredit Keith and
might have made up evidence in their desperation, and Keith Henson's
two wives and five daughters have evaded making any conclusive
statement about his child molesting. Most famously, Keith's first
wife, Carolyn Meinel, posted to Usenet an ambiguous message which
implied (but did not actually state) that the Scientologists were
lying about Keith's child molestation. For many years, Keith and
Carolyn's daughters refused to go on the record about Keith in any
way. Few people noticed our silence; even fewer suspected the true
cause of it.
The Daughters
We, Keith Henson and Carolyn Meinel's daughters, refused to speak on
the record about Keith Henson's child molesting habits for many years
- for all the usual reasons and then some. Like most rape, incest, and
molestation victims, the shame would fall mostly on us rather than the
criminal. None of us wanted to be "The daughter of Keith Henson, child
molester" on the national news. Our half-sister, Keith and Arel's
daughter Amber Henson, was happily living a normal childhood, thanks
to Gale's policing of Keith, and would be hurt far more than Keith if
we talked. To make matters far, far worse, we had to choose between
covering up for our child-molesting father and helping the Church of
Scientology - either way, we'd be helping criminals. The
Scientologists sent investigators to our houses on a regular basis,
trying to convince us to give us anything that they could use against
Keith. In the end, we kept silent mostly to protect our half-sister
Amber. We all gave the Scientologists the same advice: If you really
want to hurt Keith, ignore him.
The Scientologists eventually got Keith Henson convicted for
"interfering with a religion." Through Keith's deliberate actions, he
became a fugitive for many years and could not appear in public.
During that time, I became active and even well-known in computer-
related professional and social circles - the same circles where Keith
was well-known and respected. When people asked me if I was Keith
Henson's daughter, I told them that I didn't speak to him and didn't
want to talk about him and left it at that.
Keith eventually served his trivial prison sentence and is now out on
parole and back in the science fiction/electronic freedom/hacker
scene, the same group of people who make up a large part of my
professional and social network. Recently, I checked in to a
conference and saw my name on the roster, right below his. I wanted to
vomit, or scream, or both. I left the conference immediately.
I can't simply avoid Keith any longer. After the incident at the
conference, I asked my sisters if they would support me going public
about Keith. They agreed, and my sister Gale (Keith's first victim
that we know of) also decided to go on the record. We no longer care
if we benefit the Scientologists; we just hope they don't continue to
unwittingly support Keith by attacking him.
I am deeply sorry that we covered up for Keith for so long, but I
still think it was worth it for allowing Amber to grow up as normally
as possible.
The Wives
Keith Henson's two wives, Carolyn Meinel and Arel Lucas, support Keith
but have not, to my knowledge, ever directly denied that Keith
molested children. Keith's first wife, Carolyn Meinel, divorced Keith
specifically for molesting her daughters. She then later defended him
in a 1997 Usenet post, often summarized as as "Keith Henson's ex-wife
denies that he was a child molester." What Carolyn actually wrote was
carefully crafted to imply that Keith was not a child molester -
without actually denying it. Here is her 1997 alt.religion.scientology
posting:
I hope none of you who have been reading these "Who is Keith Henson"
posts
assume they are true. As his ex-wife, perhaps I know the real story.
In particular, I refer to the stuff about Dave Scheer testifying about
child molestation. For starters, why the heck would Dave Scheer get
entangled in our divorce? Even if Scheer did get involved, why would
he
know anything about child molestation? All Scheer could contribute is
hearsay, which does not belong in a legal document.
Scientologists make poor liars. Sheesh, guys, if this Dianetics stuff
is
so good, you would at least find ways to make yourselves look
credible.
Carolyn says she hopes you don't assume the stories are true - not
that they aren't true. She says that maybe she knows the real story -
but doesn't actually tell it. She asks why Dave Scheer would get
involved in their divorce - but doesn't answer why. She asks why, if
he did get involved, he would know anything - but doesn't answer that
either. She says that if he did know anything, it was hearsay and not
legal - but not that it wasn't true. She says Scientologists are poor
liars - but doesn't say they are lying about Keith. Finally, she says
that the Scientologists don't look credible - but doesn't say they
aren't credible in this case. Nowhere does Carolyn actually say that
Keith Henson is not a child molester.
If Carolyn knows that Keith is a child molester, then why did she post
this half-defense to Usenet? I confronted her about this after her
post was interpreted yet again as a defense of Keith. (This particular
quote was "His ex-wife laughed that one off and has denied the
accusation as fervently as he has.") From her email reply to me (full
text here):
I did not find that story at that link and I did not EVER laugh off
the incest story. I can only control what I do say, not what
anonymous people say I said. If you can find the correct link, I will
quietly contact the moderator (if one exists) in private to deny the
story and to say that I support my daughters. This is how I got that
Wikipedia story removed. I also called a TV reporter on the story
(Brandon Kline, KPNX Channel 12, (602) 694-1045) and told him that I
support my daughters and don't support Keith's side of the story.
Are you angry over my pointing out that David Scheer's allegation in
court that Keith molested all four of his kids was hearsay? I did
that to protect you and Virginia because the Scientologists were
exploiting Scheer's allegation and I didn't thinlk you wanted that
false story about you going around. Please remember there is a stigma
against rape survivors and that was my concern for you. At the time
of his testimony, Scheer was battling to keep Keith from taking over
Analog Precision and in his anger he went from fact to guesses. There
was no evidence that Keith sexually abused either of you. I never
allowed him access to you after April of 1981, immediately upon Gale
telling me what had been going on. You were both babies. Everyone who
has accused Keith of sexual abuse was at least eight years old when
he did it, so I doubt that he ever sexually abused babies, and the
sexual abuse counselors with whom I worked did not see any
possibility.
Because I respect Gale's and [redacted]'s wishes, when I was contacted
by
the prosecutor in Keith's trial in Riverside, CA, I refused to agree
to testify about Keith being dangerous. Once I was on the witness
stand, the Scientologist's lawyers could have grilled me about the
incest and Keith's threats. Gale and [redacted] did not wish to be the
target of the resulting media circus -- totally understandable.
Several notes and corrections on Carolyn's email: I removed some names
in order to reduce media attention for some people in our family who
still need to be protected. The youngest person we are certain Keith
molested was six years old when it started, not eight as Carolyn
claims. Carolyn doesn't know any more than we do how many of Keith's
daughters he molested since some were too young to remember; she
certainly didn't know when he molested Gale. Carolyn suggests that
Gale retracted her testimony about Keith several years later during a
custody dispute over one of our sisters between Carolyn and one of her
sisters. Gale disagrees with this statement.
Putting the best face on it, Carolyn's explanation is that she was
trying to protect any of her daughters from being publicly identified
as Keith's victims, regardless of whether they actually were his
victims, and it was an unfortunate side effect that she had to defend
Keith to do it. For some insight into Carolyn's beliefs regarding
husbands, when Carolyn learned that her second husband, John Bosma,
had attempted to molest me, for several months afterwards she told me
that she would stay married to him and start living with him again
once all her daughters left home. This despite the fact that John also
told her that he had fantasized about breaking my legs so he could
"take care of me." She concluded that it was not, in fact, her
Christian duty to stay married to John only after many months of
agonizing over the decision.
And finally, the first time Carolyn went on record about Keith's child
molestation was in an affadavit supporting her attempt to get Keith
Henson to pay child support (Keith is a deadbeat dad as well as a
child molester). Here is the relevant excerpt from the affadavit.
Arizona Superior Court, Pima County
NO. D-36084
AFFIDAVIT TO BE SIGNED
BY SPOUSE ON
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Petitioner
CAROLYN MEINEL HENSON
Respondent
HOWARD KEITH HENSON
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
County of Pima )
CAROLYN MEINEL HENSON, being first duly sworn, makes the following
answers and statements of fact as material evidence:
[...]
TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSES
$955 + MEDICAL
**$6,000 since May 1981 includes Gale's operation and four-day
hospital stay; Valerie and Virginia for pulmonary problems and
psychological counseling for Gale and [redacted] as a result of
father's sexual molestation of them.
Some of Keith's supporters have dismissed this evidence with the
facile argument that women often falsely accuse their husbands of
child molestation during divorce in order to get more money and assets
in the divorce settlement. This argument is incredibly offensive in
the general case, and completely inapplicable in this specific case.
Keith Henson did not then and does not now have any assets to take.
Keith has always been financially supported to one degree or another
by his wives and is frequently unemployed; he declared bankruptcy
during the Scientology court case. Carolyn filed this affadavit in the
first place in an unsuccessful attempt to get Keith to pay the child
support he owed. Even the house we lived in at the time of the divorce
was nearly worthless, as it was undermined by tunnels and not safe to
live in. The idea that Carolyn named her daughters as victims of child
molestation in public court papers in order to extort money from Keith
doesn't even pass the laugh test.
Keith's second wife, Arel Lucas, also defends him despite knowing his
history of child molestation. Arel had been living with our family for
several years as Keith's de facto second wife in a bigamous
relationship when Carolyn found out Keith was molesting children.
After the divorce, Arel, with full knowledge of the circumstances,
married Keith and raised a daughter with him. Our best clue as to why
Arel married, supported, and defends Keith while knowing that he
molested his previous daughters is a comment she made to Gale. Arel
told Gale that it was natural for little girls to have sexual feelings
for their fathers, and if Keith molested her, it's because Gale (6
years old at the time) wanted it.
Arel stands by Keith and ridicules the accusations of child
molestation, but seldom outright denies them either. In this example,
Arel says, "If he should be returned to California and jailed here, it
could be a death sentence, since the $cientologists have been doing
their best to hang a 'child molester' jacket on him for years now." If
Arel were to make a statement, the only relevant testimony that she
can give is that she knew that Carolyn divorced Keith for molesting
their daughters, and that Gale threatened to prosecute Keith for his
molestation of her if Arel and Keith did not allow her to visit Amber
on a regular basis. As far as we can tell, Arel believes that Keith
molested his daughters but that it was consensual (!) and Keith did
not do anything wrong.
The Sources
Gale Grant (formerly Henson), Carolyn Meinel, and I (Valerie Henson)
are willing to speak on the record, and give whatever other help we
can to uncover Keith's history of child molestation. We still won't
work directly with the Scientologists for the simple reason that no
one will believe what they say.
Gale Grant (formerly Gale Henson) was Keith's first victim (that we
know of). She is willing to talk to reporters, give dates, places, and
names, and help dig up records. Her story, below, of Keith's
molestation of her and three other children is deeply upsetting; don't
read it unless you absolutely have to.
Gale Grant's description of Keith Henson's child molestation
(definitely not work-safe)
In her 2007 email to me, Carolyn offered to help dig up evidence
against Keith Henson. From the email:
If you should decide to encourage Gale or [redacted] to finally take
action to put Keith in prison for what he did to them, I can help by
hunting up contact information of the two counselors who heard Keith's
confession -- Dr. Don Eckerstorm [sic; Eckerstrom] and Cindy
Noshay. Presumably some public records also remain. I can even testify
to Keith's confession to me. I wrote down summaries of what he told me
at the time and kept them.
Note that prosecuting Keith is impossible because the statue of
limitations has run out. The last time a Scientologist-hired
investigator showed up at my house, he didn't care about Keith's 1974
- 1981 child molestation, he only wanted to know if we had any
suspicion that Keith had molested children more recently.
I was only a few months shy of my fourth birthday when Carolyn
divorced Keith. I do have memories of living with Keith, and of
neglect and abuse on both his and Carolyn's part, but I do not
remember him molesting me. Various doctors over the years have noted
physical evidence suggestive of molestation, but nothing conclusive. I
can't give first-hand testimony about Keith's child molestation; I can
only assemble the testimony of others. I too am willing to talk to
reporters, give dates, places, and names, and help dig up records.
Painfully, but not surprisingly, our half-sister Amber Henson has
decided that she cannot and will not believe that her father molested
her half-sisters. She still gives interviews defending and supporting
Keith, to our sorrow and frustration. This willful blindness is
unfortunately common with allegations of incest; it's hard to believe
that someone you love and trust as much as your father could commit
such terrible crimes. It's often much easier to believe that your
sisters (or cousins or aunts) are lying.
Closing
Ironically, one of the most accurate descriptions of Keith Henson's
behavior over the past few decades comes from the Scientologists, in
their summary of Keith Henson, reproduced in a Usenet posting (Message-
ID: 36205604...@news.tiac.net). Leaving aside the obvious
Scientology propaganda, their description of Keith Henson's
motivations and actions is painfully accurate. This quote is
particularly insightful:
According to Henson's neighbors who lived in Tucson near Henson,
he and his then wife were into drugs and were neglectful of their
children [...] Henson has always been more interested in seeing his
name in print than he is in trying to do something constructive and
worthwhile in his life.
Keith can claim absolutely no credit for any of the achievements of
his daughters. The most he can claim is that he harmed some of us less
than others. Everything we accomplish or achieve is in spite of him.
Finally, a notification for the benefit Keith Henson and his
supporters: From now on, I will make every effort I can to make the
truth about Keith Henson known. In particular, if I see Keith Henson
in public, I will make sure everyone around us knows that he is a
child molester and that I have the evidence to show it. If you don't
want this to happen in your bailiwick, tell Keith that he isn't
welcome.
Valerie Henson
San Francisco, December 2007
val dot henson at gmail dot com
>
>
> > As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author ofwww.operatingthetan.comIfind it incumbent on me to air this. The
> > contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
> >http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/parents.htmllinksto this pagehttp://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/keith.html
> Thewww.religiousfreedomwatch.orgreported correctly about Keith
Patty Pieniadz
Don't forget the evil gypsy queen.
Patty
R. Hill
> Hartley Patterson wrote:
> > he...@nowhere.com:
>
> >>Having previously defended Henson vociferously, I feel that I'm obligated to
> >>step forward with this if aware of it, even if it makes a fool of me. Either I
> >>am a fool for having defended Henson, or I am a fool for airing this now.
>
> > This was bound to turn up here eventually, so better a calm statement than
> > flaming from the start. Thank you, and no I don't think you are a fool in
> > either case. The Keith Henson who was persecuted by the cult and that most
> > of us defended still exists.
>
> > As those who read the article will see, the author indicates that she is
> > well aware of the true nature of the cult. If that is the case and the
> > parties involved do not want the cult meddling further in their private
> > lives, then I rather think that applies to us as well.
>
> Well it doesn't ring true to me. Molesting four girls from 1974 to
> 1981... and the police never got involved?
These things happen in the real world. We had a high profile case in
my province:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Cloutier
She decided to go public with this *25 years later*. This went to
court, he pleaded guilty, and went to jail.
Kilia
> "henri" <he...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:tck2o357i6ji6puvj...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author of
> > contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their
> accuracy
> > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
Yea, I agree with you, barb...just odd that this turned up now when
Keith has been out of jail for some time. *very odd, indeed*
Tom Klemesrud
> On Jan 6, 11:39 pm, Tom Klemesrud <tomk...@netscape.del.net> wrote:
>
>>Hartley Patterson wrote:
>>
>>>he...@nowhere.com:
>>
>>>>Having previously defended Henson vociferously, I feel that I'm obligated to
>>>>step forward with this if aware of it, even if it makes a fool of me. Either I
>>>>am a fool for having defended Henson, or I am a fool for airing this now.
>>
>>>This was bound to turn up here eventually, so better a calm statement than
>>>flaming from the start. Thank you, and no I don't think you are a fool in
>>>either case. The Keith Henson who was persecuted by the cult and that most
>>>of us defended still exists.
>>
>>>As those who read the article will see, the author indicates that she is
>>>well aware of the true nature of the cult. If that is the case and the
>>>parties involved do not want the cult meddling further in their private
>>>lives, then I rather think that applies to us as well.
>>
>>Well it doesn't ring true to me. Molesting four girls from 1974 to
>>1981... and the police never got involved?
>
>
> These things happen in the real world. We had a high profile case in
> my province:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Cloutier
>
> She decided to go public with this *25 years later*. This went to
> court, he pleaded guilty, and went to jail.
Sure these things happen in the real world, but usually the police get a
whiff of it. And this allegation there are at least four girls involved
and now I'm so word. That doesn't happen in the real world.
It's like my case with BloodyButt. My friend at the IRS criminal
investigation division said "the reason why we believe you rather than
her is she didn't go to the police to complain, she went to the Church
of Scientology."
AntiHatredAn...@gmail.com
Henson is a DISGUSTING criminal. Robert Clark is doing damage control
now. He doesn't want to sink with Henson.
THE TRUTH
by Gale Eden Grant
The first time my father, Howard Keith Henson, molested me I
was six
years old. The details are not important to me any more, but they may
be to those who don't believe that he is such a depraved human being.
So I will reluctantly divulge them. We were on our way to Los Angles,
coming from Tucson, and stopped at a motel for the night. We had a
room with two twin beds, and in the early morning my father got into
my bed and said, "I want to teach you something." He then proceeded to
fool with my clitoris and masturbate himself until he climaxed. Here
is where I should say that it was horrible, and I was scarred for
life. That would not be true. I was perplexed, uninjured, and slightly
awakened to the joy of stimulation. I was six. We lived in a trailer
somewhere in the LA area for the next two months, during which time he
awakened me many mornings with the same "teaching."
I trusted him. I loved him. It makes me weep to remember how
it was
to be that way. For the following two years, until I was eight years
old, and Arel Lucas moved in to our home, he continued my education.
Once Arel moved in, and my mother gave him permission to be with her,
he stopped educating me. I would like to say that I was relieved to no
longer have his depraved attention, but that would not be true. I was
jealous. But I knew it was weird. At eight years old, I became the
child scorned. I experienced all of the emotions that one should only
have to go through when one is much older.
Keith left me alone for the following four years, until I was
twelve.
It was the first day of seventh grade that he got into my bed again.
Arel and our mother were both out of town, and it shouldn't have been
any shock to me that he would predate upon me again, but it was. He
said, "You're old enough to experience a real orgasm." And reached
down. I threw my covers off and climbed over the head board of my bed
to escape. On the morning of my first day of junior high school, I
took the shower of the raped woman - there wasn't enough hot water to
wash away the shame of my father's depravity.
A few months later I began to menstruate. I was terrified that
my
father would decide that I was ready for real sex, and try to continue
"teaching." I managed to hide it for a few months, but my mother
discovered evidence that made her happy, and myself terrified. When
she told me she was going to tell Keith, I begged her not to. When she
persisted in asking why I finally came out with, "He taught me how to
masturbate." This was the only way I could describe what I'd
experienced. This led to a long over-due divorce, felony charges that
were eventually dropped, and my mother's second marriage to an only
slightly less depraved man.
There's a lot more to this story, including me being a
policeman of
my father, the fact that Amber, my youngest sister, was not molested,
the fear that she would be, the eventual confession from another
sister that he had molested her as well, and the reality that he
molested two of my childhood friends, and I knew it. I was there. I
remember saying to one of them, "Isn't my father wonderful?" when I
knew he'd just fingered her. Yuck. I Know from an unfortunate
consequence of birth in to this family how disgusting life can be, and
how depraved fathers can influence ones life. I know from reading a
lot that I should end this with a "Yet, despite all, everything is
well," yet I can't. Valerie is being stalked by our star-fucking
father, our sisters are in conflict, our mother is deeply myopic due
to her inability to identify truth from reality, and I am having to
sit here and write all of this down so that my hideous father can be
finally exposed.
And here is the most obnoxious part of this... Keith will love
this
exposure, will revel in it. The hurt and pain and sorrow he has
exposed his family to is all about him becoming a person of interest.
Insect. He is a loathesome creature, unworthy of his mother, father,
brother, children. Let us bury him before his long-awaited death, and
when I get his frozen head I will gladly kick it though the gutter, as
it richly deserves.
Tom Klemesrud
> On Jan 6, 11:39 pm, Tom Klemesrud <tomk...@netscape.del.net> wrote:
>
>>Hartley Patterson wrote:
>>
>>>he...@nowhere.com:
>>
>>>>Having previously defended Henson vociferously, I feel that I'm obligated to
>>>>step forward with this if aware of it, even if it makes a fool of me. Either I
>>>>am a fool for having defended Henson, or I am a fool for airing this now.
>>
>>>This was bound to turn up here eventually, so better a calm statement than
>>>flaming from the start. Thank you, and no I don't think you are a fool in
>>>either case. The Keith Henson who was persecuted by the cult and that most
>>>of us defended still exists.
>>
>>>As those who read the article will see, the author indicates that she is
>>>well aware of the true nature of the cult. If that is the case and the
>>>parties involved do not want the cult meddling further in their private
>>>lives, then I rather think that applies to us as well.
>>
>>Well it doesn't ring true to me. Molesting four girls from 1974 to
>>1981... and the police never got involved?
>
>
> These things happen in the real world. We had a high profile case in
> my province:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Cloutier
>
> She decided to go public with this *25 years later*. This went to
> court, he pleaded guilty, and went to jail.
Sure these things happen in the real world, but usually the police get a
whiff of it. In this allegation there are at least four girls involved
and not so much as a word from them. That doesn't happen in the real world.
It's like my case with BloodyButt. My friend at the IRS criminal
investigation division said "the reason why we believe you rather than
her is she didn't go to the police to complain, she went to the Church
of Scientology."
>
Gerry Armstrong
Yes, now that you've essentially admitted that you're the entity
"Cerridwen" who for years has supported the Scientology cult's attacks
on its victims and targets, it's time that Patricia Greenway be
acknowledged for her participation.
>
>Patty
>
>
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
barbz
"Dave Touretzky" <d...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote in message
news:4781826f$1...@news2.lightlink.com...
Because of the terms of his probation, Keith cannot address this at the
present time.
Dave Touretzky
barbz <xenu...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> Because of the terms of his probation, Keith cannot address this at the
> present time.
Are you guessing, or have you read the court papers?
I can't imagine what sort of probation terms would preclude Keith from
issuing a statement on this matter should he wish to.
-- Dave
barbz
I asked him. That's what he told me.
Tom Klemesrud
I don't understand Dave, why should Keith issue any kind of a statement
now when according to Rob Clark that website has been there for a few years?
Zinj
I'd say it's easily imaginable. Beyond the given proscription of doing
or saying anything that irritate *any* Scientologist, there is probably
a much more direct proscription against any expression of any thought on
the internet, whether directly or through 'people working in concert'.
Zinj
says...
The website was changed to include the current statement last month.
AntiHatredAn...@gmail.com
> "Dave Touretzky" <d...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote in message
>
> news:4781826f$1...@news2.lightlink.com...> In article
>
>
>
>
> > R. Hill <rh...@xenu-directory.net> wrote:
>
> > > I have a page on Keith Henson. I won't remove it, although I will
> > > modified soon to provide a link to Val Henson's statements.
>
> > I think that's appropriate.
>
> > > If Keith Henson is guilty of what he is accused here, he needs to be
> > > held properly accountable in the *court of law*, convicted, and
> > > punished accordingly.
>
> > The statute of limitations would prohibit that. Althought there are
> > exceptions in the case of only recently-recovered memories of
> > childhood abuse, that doesn't appear to be the claim here, and even
> > those exceptions have time limits.
>
> > > But as of now, I can't decide all by myself if Keith Henson is
> > > guilty of what he is accused in these pages: I am not a judge who is
> > > exposed to all evidences in a *court of law*. Only a judge (or jury)
> > > is in position to decide whether he is guilty or not, *not me*.
>
> > Certainly we would want to hear Keith's take on this situation.
>
> > -- Dave
>
> Because of the terms of his probation, Keith cannot address this at the
> present time.
Let's not forget, Barbz is the official speaker for Keith Henson and
for other pedophiles. She also is his mail box.
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/barbara-graham/
Rev Dennis L Erlich
Out_Of_The_Dark
> As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author ofwww.operatingthetan.comI find it incumbent on me to air this. The
> contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
>
> This is the website of Val Henson, Keith Henson's daughter.
>
> It includes accusations I have never found particularly credible, as none of
> the people who were the subjects or sources of the accusations had
> anything to say about them. Carolyn Meinel, Henson's ex-wife, had
> seemed to deny them.
>
> These are the "child molester" accusations Scientology has been using for
> years. I never found these believable or well referenced enough even to
> address on operatingthetan, except insofar as Scientology had, in fact,
> made such accusations.
>
> Now, however, Henson's daughter has posted on the subject, making
> allegations with a much higher degree of particularity. She has also included
> what at least purports to be a statement by Gale Grant.
>
> I have verified to my satisfaction that this actually is Val Henson. It is, as
> far as I can ascertain, actually her website at a university with which she is
> actually associated. Internet Archive verifies that the website has existed for
> years. In the most recent copy of the page, June 2007, the accusations against
> Henson are not present, which is consistent with the stated date of December
> 2007 on the webpage itself.
>
> I can't verify that the claimed statement of Gale Grant (formerly Gale Henson)
> is actually genuine. However, it would seem to be a particularly audacious lie
> to manufacture such a document, with Gale Grant an existing person, able to
> contradict it should she choose.
>
> I reach no conclusions about these accusations. I do feel, however, that they
> demand a response, unlike previous, vaporous allegations.
>
> step forward with this if aware of it, even if it makes a fool of me. Either I
> am a fool for having defended Henson, or I am a fool for airing this now.
>
> editorial control of the site at present, and my only current connection with it
> is I am the domain registrant. However, if I feel these allegations are
> credible, or even unresolved, I will be obligated to transfer it to someone
> else.
>
> I am not happy with this. I hope I have committed the smaller harm of
> relaying false accusations, than of having been completely wrong about
> Keith Henson all these years.<
Henri, how did you come across this? Has anyone contacted John Dorsay
to get a comment from Keith and Arel?
Magoo
<<<Sigh>>> this has been one Hell of a day!
I'll leave it to Keith to take this one over.
I don't think people speculating, or even discussing something
like this will help anyone. His daughter has said what she's said.
It's really over to Keith, now.
There's only 1 of 2 ways this can go:
1) She's telling the truth, which having been molested, I don't
see why anyone would make something like this up. Even knowing how sick C
of S/OSA is--trying to twist people into believing such things-that *could*
have happened, but she makes it quite clear that wasn't the case.
or
2) She's fabricated all of this--and Keith can come and clear that up.
I just read more of her description of this: No one in their right mind
would write something like this. Either she's mentally insane, which I
*highly* doubt, or Keith---you've got some 'splain to do.
Like I said, it's certainly been a day.....My sympathies to the
victims....and either way, SHAME ON YOU OSA for working these
girls over, as if you have *any* real care for them, or Keith, or Arel,
or ANYONE. ALL you want is "Dirt". Why? So people won't read the critics,
and won't find out YOUR dirty truths, too.
Gawd----thank goodness it's raining.
Tory/Magoo~~~
www.xenu.net
www.xenutv.com
www.lermanet.com/cos/toryonosa.htm
www.torymagoo.org
Burbank, CA
(818) 588-3044
(Not in hiding, like the OSA ops on ARS are)
barbz
"Out_Of_The_Dark" <xscilen...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1d846ab4-85b7-43ae...@v29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
The URL was sent out by an anonymous individual. I saved the message in
case. Headers and all, don't you know. As I said in another post, I asked
Keith and he does not wish to respond because of his probation. Haven't
talked to Arel.
Samiro...@lycos.com
> In article <xcggj.53167$Rf5.43...@newsfe13.phx>,
>
> barbz <xenub...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > Because of the terms of his probation, Keith cannot address this at the
> > present time.
>
> Are you guessing, or have you read the court papers?
>
> I can't imagine what sort of probation terms would preclude Keith from
> issuing a statement on this matter should he wish to.
>
> -- Dave
He wouldn't speak the truth anyway.
Samiro...@lycos.com
> "Out_Of_The_Dark" <xscilentolog...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1d846ab4-85b7-43ae...@v29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 6, 5:29 pm, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:> As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author
>
> > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their accuracy
> > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
================================================================================
"Consider how effective he's been at recruiting hordes of supporters
-- he's a
genius at playing the victim and telling convincing lies and has no
compassion
for his victims." - Carolyn Meinel, according to an email to her
daughter which
was originally posted at http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/carolyn_email.txt
================================================================================
Delivered-To: val.henson@[redacted]
Received: by 10.65.230.12 with SMTP id h12cs38775qbr;
Wed, 7 Feb 2007 11:21:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.35.100.6 with SMTP id c6mr16629012pym.1170876084728;
Wed, 07 Feb 2007 11:21:24 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <carolyn.meinel@[redacted]>
Received: from [redacted] ([redacted] [ 209.40.128.32])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 15si5307845nzo.
2007.02.07.11.21.24;
Wed, 07 Feb 2007 11:21:24 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral ( google.com: 209.40.128.32 is neither permitted
nor denied by best guess record for domain of
carolyn.meinel@[redacted])
Message-Id: < 7.0.1.0.2.200702...@techbroker.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:19:42 -0700
To: "Valerie Henson" <val.henson @[redacted]>
From: Carolyn Meinel <carolyn.meinel@[redacted]>
Subject: I did NOT make those comments, not ever!
In-Reply-To: <
70b6f0bf0702070152l4e6...@mail.gmail.co
m>
References:
<70b6f0bf0702070152l4e6...@mail.gmail.com >
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Out_Of_The_Dark
> "Out_Of_The_Dark" <xscilentolog...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> to get a comment from Keith and Arel?
>
> The URL was sent out by an anonymous individual. I saved the message in
> case. Headers and all, don't you know. As I said in another post, I asked
> Keith and he does not wish to respond because of his probation. Haven't
> talked to Arel. <
Thanks Barb, I didn't see that. I have since emailed John Dorsay to
get a comment out of Arel or Keith. I doubt his probation would be
effected by communicating a general reply. Keith needs to ask his
lawyer. It's really important that he respond to this.
So you got an email with the url or did Henri and others get it too?
Or was it just posted?
I just a tad suspicious over the timing and the fact that the
operating thenan site is down and that it was Henri of all people to
post about this. Henri is not on my friends list this week, an
especially revealing week if you can manage to follow all the posts
about Erlich, Lulu Belle, Patty P Emma Tom Klemsrud, Arnie and the
Greedway Gang. I don't recall him being tighter than John Dorsay, who
I would have expected as the announcer if there was only one person
getting the anon email about this.
The accusations are very serious and very disturbing and it's hard to
reply fairly without knowing Arel and Keith's side of things.
Out_Of_The_Dark
> R. Hill wrote:
>
> > These things happen in the real world. We had a high profile case in
> > my province:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Cloutier
>
> > She decided to go public with this *25 years later*. This went to
> > court, he pleaded guilty, and went to jail.
>
> Sure these things happen in the real world, but usually the police get a
> whiff of it. And this allegation there are at least four girls involved
> and now I'm so word. That doesn't happen in the real world.
>
> It's like my case with BloodyButt. My friend at the IRS criminal
> investigation division said "the reason why we believe you rather than
> her is she didn't go to the police to complain, she went to the Church
> of Scientology." < <
Tom, when it comes to incentuous child molestation accusations, it's a
whole other story. You cannot compare what happened to you and this
report by Val & Gale Henson. Sometimes the facts don't come out unbtil
years and years later.
Witness the many many cases against the Catholic church that were
deemed accurate so many years later after people started opening up
about what happened when they were kids. It's very traumatic for
children. Confusing and traumatic. And parents usually cover these
things up rather than have child protective services in their life.
We need to hear from Keith or Arel at least some kind of comment. That
is the fair thing to do but I am inclined to believe it because these
girls have nothing to gain except the right to finally speak up.
Mary
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
The biggest problem of fighting lies, is there are an infinite
number of them...and there is only one truth...
This website that says ugly things about Keith Henson who can not
respond due to court order. Ive seen this many times by scientology.
They did this to Bob too..during the bob sold out campaign.. he could
not respond... But Keith mentioned his travails with a stepdaughter or
something from a prior marrage, who did not like him and perhaps
blamed him for arel's divorce? and did mention it to me, that
scientology had tried to slime him with it once before and that the
incident had been investigated....and the allegations were without
merit. Im recalling a mention from 6 years ago perhaps...so pardon any
errors of detail, but the substance is the same, keith did mention
this years ago to me as something that had been addressed by
authorities and was groundless.
They want us to waste all our time dancing with Dennis and
patti and Henri's rubbish, so we wont look sentient as the whole world
starts googling scientology due to Morton's release of his new book
Jan 15th...and not have time to post to thousands blogs on the
subject...
moontaco
> "henri" <he...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:tck2o357i6ji6puvj...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author of
> > contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their
> > accuracy
> > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
Have you seen Barb's post about this? She said that Keith won't
respond because of his probation.
> I just read more of her description of this: No one in their right mind
> would write something like this. Either she's mentally insane, which I
> *highly* doubt, or Keith---you've got some 'splain to do.
Well, there is a third possibility: false memory syndrome. (Just
throwing it out there....)
From reading Val's and Gale's accounts, it seems like there are either
some holes or some inconsistencies (or maybe both). The references to
"some" of the sisters being molested are confusing. I wrote about it
earlier in this topic (http://groups.google.com/group/
alt.religion.scientology/msg/99811db1536e8bb2).
peters...@gmail.com
> "henri" <he...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:tck2o357i6ji6puvj...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author of
> > contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their
> > accuracy
> > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
There is also the possibility that Keith's daughter(s) have false
recollected memories.
It is well known that in many cases a girl, having psychological
troubles, are subjected to some kind of regression therapy. During
these sessions of therapy they are lead to believe they were sexually
abused and that that is the cause of their troubles. Many fathers were
thus falsely accused, some even convicted! In other cases it was
clear, with evidence and all, that the accusations were false, as were
the so called "recollected memories."
These therapies are also part of the CULT's mind control techniques.
Beth
> On 7 jan, 07:50, "Magoo" <mago...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "henri" <he...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:tck2o357i6ji6puvj...@4ax.com...
>
> > > As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author of
> > > contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> > > and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their
> > > accuracy
> > > and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
> > Burbank, CA
> > (818) 588-3044
> > (Not in hiding, like the OSA ops on ARS are)
>
> There is also the possibility that Keith's daughter(s) have false
> recollected memories.
> It is well known that in many cases a girl, having psychological
> troubles, are subjected to some kind of regression therapy. During
> these sessions of therapy they are lead to believe they were sexually
> abused and that that is the cause of their troubles. Many fathers were
> thus falsely accused, some even convicted! In other cases it was
> clear, with evidence and all, that the accusations were false, as were
> the so called "recollected memories."
> These therapies are also part of the CULT's mind control techniques.
Ha--I just said that to Tory, right as you were posting! I'm glad you
gave more details about it. :)
Beth
Magoo
"moontaco" <moont...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:de9d703a-99fa-4f7e...@m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
That makes sense, yes.
> I just read more of her description of this: No one in their right mind
> would write something like this. Either she's mentally insane, which I
> *highly* doubt, or Keith---you've got some 'splain to do.
Well, there is a third possibility: false memory syndrome. (Just
throwing it out there....)
It *is* one more possibility---which I think comes under #2---
However, I think women are way too often flicked off as "false memory
syndrom" which yeah, when kids are 4 and people have been grilling them
about sex, I can see it. I cannot with this kind of description she gives.
That's pretty specific.
From reading Val's and Gale's accounts, it seems like there are either
some holes or some inconsistencies (or maybe both). The references to
"some" of the sisters being molested are confusing. I wrote about it
earlier in this topic (http://groups.google.com/group/
alt.religion.scientology/msg/99811db1536e8bb2).
Well---the bottom line is this: It really isn't our business, is it?
Keith is who he is. He's done what he's done, whether this is true, or
false---we won't know. His daughter has her
rights to say what she wants, and then it's time to move on---as he cannot
say anything, so what else is there to do?
It seems to me as I said, it's better not hashed out here. As you can see,
OSA Has already majorly picked this up to use against Keith--whether true or
totally false, to them, it's "FACT"...they could care less about the
"truth"---all they want is *any* dirt.
As Hubbard said: "If you can't find dirt, make it up".
And let me please remind the OSA floormats here: SOME OF YOU---certainly
some of the TOP Executives of Scientology have done some SERIOUS OVERTS (bad
deeds), so spare me the "Look how bad he is". Check out your own bed
first----it hasn't been cleaned,
fully, in 60 years+
Best,
Tory/Magoo~~
Magoo
"Beth" <moont...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e175ba79-4c9a-45e0...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Beth
Well, I hope you're both right, I really do. Bottom line, those involved
know who told the truth, and that's really all that matters, at this point.
As I've said, I don't consider it my business, and I've said all I want to
say about this. I wish the entire family well, and no matter what---- I hope
Scientology gets NAILED inside and out this year for the abuses they
continue to demonstrate, daily.
Tory/Magoo~~
Jens Tingleff
> In article <Ocegj.15710$DR7....@newsfe07.phx>, xenu...@netscape.net
> says...
>
> <snip>
>
>> The timing is odd. Keith is done with the cult crap and gets out of jail,
>> then this appears. I'm just sayin'
>
> Well, good thing that Rob 'aired' it and, just to be safe, vaporized
> operatingthetan.org :)
>
> Zinj
Perhaps, but http://www.operatingthetan.com seems to be running OK.
Best regards
Jens
--
Key ID 0x09723C12, jens...@tingleff.org
Analogue filtering / 5GHz RLAN / Mandriva Linux / odds and ends
http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/ +44 1223 829 985
"Go! And never darken my towels again!" Rufus T. Firefly 'Duck Soup'
Hartley Patterson
> I don't believe it. It's amazing that Robert Clarke would bring this up
> now stands as he says, it's been all over the Internet for years.
The webpage he pointed out dates from December 2007. The associated blog
is dated December 26th 2007. They are in themselves news which would have
reached ARS in some form anyway.
Don't shoot the messenger.
--
Hartley Patterson
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk
http://news-from-bree.blogspot.com
BigBeard
"Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!"
<ale...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:e5457b5f-60c4-414d...@l32g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
I recall this too Arnie. I believe the Cof$ bots first started
spewing about this during the NOTS34 trial. If I recall, and this
was a while back, the investigation found the "ex" had been
coaching at least one of the girls on what to say and how to
phrase responses to questions.
Someone with some time on their hands should be able to find
Keith's post about this, back when he could talk about such
things, in the archives somewhere.
BigBeard
Katana ko chi, SPsoo
<snip>
banchukita
This just smells. The way the website is written is pure Scientology.
Deconstruct some of the sentence structure. It stinks. I can give
examples if necessary, but anyone should be able to identify the
charged and framed language.
Then step back and examine the concept. This one girl doesn't want to
deal with ANY of her parents or steps and still feels stalked. She
needs some help, and I truly hope she gets it.
That sisters would 'police' a young half-sister for years rather than
go to the authorities is ludicrous. That's really tearjerking, but
is it true? Where is Amber Henson's supporting statement? Are they
trying to say the only reason Keith didn't molest Amber too is because
Gale was asking her about it? That is even more ridiculous, for a
'serial child molester.'
All this is KSW. Divert attention from the collapsing heap o'
Hubbard's lies and toss it onto manufactured "evidence" about the
irrelevant lives of critics. I remember when Scn, Inc. was trying to
smear Keith a long time ago with accusations. None of this has to do
with what Scn, Inc. did to Keith Henson, a guy who was never a member,
who was outraged that Scn, Inc. would kill two young women through
carelessness in a short period of time.
ALL THIS is come because Keith cared enough to hold up a sign about
it.
-maggie, human being
That tells me a lot more about Scn, Inc. than it does about Keith.
-maggie, human being
Rev Dennis L Erlich
> They want us to waste all our time dancing with Dennis and
>patti and Henri's rubbish, so we wont look sentient ...
Hehehe. Yes, we've been planning this multi-fronted distraction in
sekrit meetings of the (wdne) gang that never was. It's taken
extensive coordination to distract the newsgroup and make it so you
don't "look sentient."
Of course your incoherent, hallucinatory postings accomplish the same
thing without *any* help from us.
D
----------------
"But you see that line there
moving through the station?
I told you, I told you, told you,
I was one of those" - L Cohen
barb
> Zinj wrote:
>
>> In article <Ocegj.15710$DR7....@newsfe07.phx>, xenu...@netscape.net
>> says...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> The timing is odd. Keith is done with the cult crap and gets out of jail,
>>> then this appears. I'm just sayin'
>> Well, good thing that Rob 'aired' it and, just to be safe, vaporized
>> operatingthetan.org :)
>>
>> Zinj
>
> Perhaps, but http://www.operatingthetan.com seems to be running OK.
>
> Best regards
>
> Jens
It's up now. Server problems, I think.
--
barb
Chaplain, ARSCCwdne
buy my book!
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=1198812
read my page! (thanks, R. Hill!)
http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/graham1.html
visit my store!
http://www.cafepress.com/birdville
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>There is also the possibility that Keith's daughter(s) have false
>recollected memories.
>It is well known that in many cases a girl, having psychological
>troubles, are subjected to some kind of regression therapy. During
>these sessions of therapy they are lead to believe they were sexually
>abused and that that is the cause of their troubles. Many fathers were
>thus falsely accused, some even convicted! In other cases it was
>clear, with evidence and all, that the accusations were false, as were
>the so called "recollected memories."
>These therapies are also part of the CULT's mind control techniques.
False memory syndrome can and has caused these kind of accusations
from kids, years after the alleged abuse was claimed to have occurred.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory
http://www.fmsfonline.org/
But in all fairness to the children, the allegations cannot be
discounted out of hand.
D
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
Hi BB
Yes, god Im so glad someone else recalls this
and I woke this morning thinking, no it wasnt 6 years ago
it was more like TEN
FACT is: If any of this rubbish was admissible in any of his
cases with scientology , you know damn will Moxon would have tried to
grease that pole and slide it in..
and what do they have left? henri?
Spit
barb
Spit?
What are you, a llama? Llerma?
--
barb "no spitting on the carpet, please."
l.l.lipshitz
<info...@informer.org> wrote in <svf4o39plj08v7vgb...@4ax.com>:
but i don't think false memory syndrome can be
applied to carolyn meinel, who says:
'If you should decide to encourage Gale or
[redacted] to finally take action to put Keith in
prison for what he did to them, I can help by
hunting up contact information of the two counselors
who heard Keith's confession -- Dr. Don Eckerstorm
and Cindy Noshay. Presumably some public records
also remain. I can even testify to Keith's
confession to me. I wrote down summaries of what he
told me at the time and kept them.'
-elle
--------=[ l.l.lipshitz * elkube(at)lycos(dot)com ]=--------
Red Mage Moogle
is that quite rly?
I smell a clam here.
--
RMM, servant of Xenu
zidane_tribal_64(at)hotmail(dot)com
http://www.myspace.com/redmagezidane
aol im: RedMageZidane
talk to me sometime!
Now stand aside, worthy adversary!
Red Mage Moogle
> On Jan 6, 8:34 pm, "barbz" <xenub...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> "Dave Touretzky" <d...@cs.cmu.edu> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4781826f$1...@news2.lightlink.com...> In article
>>
>> <0936522e-24f0-4aca-ac14-7ec7ee939...@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>
>>
>>> R. Hill <rh...@xenu-directory.net> wrote:
>>>> I have a page on Keith Henson. I won't remove it, although I will
>>>> modified soon to provide a link to Val Henson's statements.
>>> I think that's appropriate.
>>>> If Keith Henson is guilty of what he is accused here, he needs to be
>>>> held properly accountable in the *court of law*, convicted, and
>>>> punished accordingly.
>>> The statute of limitations would prohibit that. Althought there are
>>> exceptions in the case of only recently-recovered memories of
>>> childhood abuse, that doesn't appear to be the claim here, and even
>>> those exceptions have time limits.
>>>> But as of now, I can't decide all by myself if Keith Henson is
>>>> guilty of what he is accused in these pages: I am not a judge who is
>>>> exposed to all evidences in a *court of law*. Only a judge (or jury)
>>>> is in position to decide whether he is guilty or not, *not me*.
>>> Certainly we would want to hear Keith's take on this situation.
>>> -- Dave
>> Because of the terms of his probation, Keith cannot address this at the
>> present time.
>
> for other pedophiles. She also is his mail box.
>
> http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/barbara-graham/
Why hello there, bag lady!
John
"banchukita" <banch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:34420b66-a37f-43fb...@x69g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
snip
> This just smells. The way the website is written is pure Scientology.
It makes me wonder if Henson is used extensively as a source in the new
Cruise biography.
Zinj
says...
Keith is on the Scientology shit-list like few others. Gerry,
certainly; Minton; some others. I don't think it's a rational thing,
it's just that so much effort has been invested to 'ruin utterly' and,
bad as things are, it's just not enough. Nothing less than decades long
prison, insanity or death would be enough.
There are other 'enemies' who are on the shit-list, but, it never seems
as 'personal'. People like Andreas, Dave T etc. People who they'd
*love* to ruin, but, aren't bug-shit-crazy obsessed.
I don't know what the story behind this latest Keith-slur is, but, if it
were an 'op' or even Scientology promoted, the point would be to get
Keith to 'react' enough to violate his parole.
Zinj
--
You Can Lead a Clam to Reason; but You Can't Make Him Think
Skipper
<zinj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Pavlov's dogs only know Pavlov's techniques.
Magoo
"Zinj" <zinj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.21ec7b9eb...@news-server.woh.rr.com...
Exactly---which is why I said I don't think it's a great idea for
the critics to keep debating/discussing this. Keith cannot speak
about this; Once I realized that, I said I didn't think any of us should
continue to debate it.
Enough has been said about this---and Keith and Arel need to
stay way afar from the Net and anything that might hook him
into some violations, which will be Scientology's goal. Religion? MY ASS.
Scientology is about religion as the KKK is about freedom: Granted, both are
covered by their titles---do either really practice that? Hell no, in fact,
each one is really the opposite.
Tory/Magoo~~
Ted Mayett
wrote:
> Can anyone
>provide proof positive of "Henri's" identity?
>
Have you tried the IP address?
--
Ted Mayett
Critical information regarding Scientology:
http://www.solitarytrees.net
Pts 2
correction is that Keith is not out on "parole" ...it's "probation!"
There's quite a big difference.
Heck, ask Britney Spears' lawyers and PR handlers for that distinction.
:))
Tom
---------------------------
www.thebridgemovie.net
Hartley Patterson
> Exactly---which is why I said I don't think it's a great idea for
> the critics to keep debating/discussing this. Keith cannot speak
> about this; Once I realized that, I said I didn't think any of us should
> continue to debate it.
Yes. ALL the allegations refer to a time before any contact between Keith
Henson and Scientology and the two are only connected in the twisted
mythology of an evil cult.
R. Hill
wrote:
> mago...@charter.net:
I see your point. With your comment, and the comments of various other
posters, I am now leaning toward not linking to Val Henson's page.
What made me think it would be a good idea to link to her page at
first was that I feel a duty of disclosure for people reading the
page. But as you say, this refer to a period way before Keith Henson's
dealings with Scientology. I'm still struggling as to whether I should
link to it or not, but now I am leaning toward not. If there was a
statement from Keith, I would probably lean toward disclosing the
situation on the page, but as of now, we only have one side of the
story.
Ray.
John Dorsay
We may not even have one side to the story.
The allegations attributed by Val Henson to her sister Gale Henson
may or may not be authentic. Only Val and Gale know. As far as the
allegations themselves are concerned, they may or may not be
substantially true. You don't know, I don't know, and Val Henson
doesn't know. Only two people know whether or not the allegations
attributed to Gale are substantially true, Gale and Keith.
The problem with not linking to Val's site is you may have a role in
concealing child sexual abuse, something truly terrible. The
problem with linking to it is the possibility you are supporting a
smear campaign of someone who, unless he is willing to risk going to
jail simply for defending his reputation, cannot speak in his own
defense. Probably not as terrible as concealing child sexual abuse,
but hardly something most people would want to be party to.
As Tory said elsewhere in this thread, the allegations are either
true or not, regardless of the opinions any of us hold. Obviously
this is correct.
For this and other reasons, she and several other thoughtful people
have suggested debate/discussion of the issue is not a good idea.
On this point, I respectfully disagree. As Warrior's sig reminds
us, sunshine disinfects.
People will either form opinions independently of discussion, or a
lingering (and in my *opinion* undeserved) cloud will hover over
Keith's head. This will happen whether or not the subject is
discussed, so I say discuss it and form the most reasoned opinion
you can.
Before forming my opinion, I did some quick research on Val and her
mother in order to assess their credibility. Of course, Val's and
Carolyn's credibility have no more bearing on the merits of the
allegations than my opinion, and I recognize that. But I did not
want to discount the allegations simply on the basis of my
relationship with Keith.
Val's mother, Carolyn Meinel, has a web presence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolyn_Meinel links to
http://attrition.org/errata/charlatan/shame/
"Ms. Meinel is a fraud and charlatan in the computer security
industry as we write this.
"Her four year history of libel and slander has been waged against
not only members of this system, but dozens of industry
professionals. Rather than make a living through legitimate work,
she is only able to brainwash young children with tales of other
people's deeds, error filled guides to 'hacking', error filled book,
and other continued unprofessional behavior.
"Regarding her actions toward me (jericho), she has progressively
degraded from random insults to textbook definition stalking. In the
last three years, she has tried to get me fired from numerous jobs,
busted for crimes I had no knowledge of, had my systems shut down,
harassed admins of my ISPs, discredit me with anyone who will listen
(especially media outlets), and more. In mid 1999, she went so far
as to come to Phoenix Arizona to harass my ISP, attempt to find me
at my business address as well as possibly try to find me and/or
follow me. She has tried to solicit help from people that work for
previous employers to obtain confidential records regarding my
employment, attempted to contact at least one boss while I was
employed by him, tracked down at least one ex-roomate, and more.
Yet, she continually says that I am obsessed with her."
There are other links from that page such as
http://attrition.org/errata/charlatan/shame/www/letter1.html and
http://attrition.org/slander/www/why.html
http://attrition.org/shame/quote.html is particularly pertinent.
"She [Carolyn] even tries to manipulates her children. Bizarre."
- Anon
"My mother accused me of being (a) amoral, (b) attempting to
manipulate her, (c) being in league with criminals, (d) making her
look desperate, (e) in danger of being sucked into the criminal
underworld by (presumably more intelligent than I am) unnamed
parties. Needless to say, we are not speaking."
- Val (her daughter)
"Anyway, thanks for proving that you are vastly more reasonable than
Carolyn. :) See ya around."
- Val (directed towards Jericho)
The form, rather than the content, of Val's own web pages does
nothing to increase my confidence in her [Val's] objectivity and
accuracy.
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/parents.html
"I do not speak to my parents"
"I do not speak to or associate in any manner with my parents or any
of their spouses, past or present:
"* Keith Henson
"* Carolyn Meinel
"* Arel Lucas
"* John Bosma
"* Mike Bertin"
http://valhenson.livejournal.com/5133.html
"Naturally, I can't look on Keith's smug face without feeling
homicidal rage, so I really have only two choices: (1) Change my
career so our professional circles have no overlap, (2) Utterly ruin
his reputation so that he is too embarrassed to appear in public.
I'm going for (2)."
http://valhenson.livejournal.com/5023.html
While this page has nothing to do with Keith, it provides insights
into Val's recent state of mind.
----
Again, I recognize that none of this affects whether or not the
allegations attributed to Gale are both genuine and true. But the
context raises, for me anyway, substantial doubt.
For a number of other reasons I am skeptical of claims that Keith
committed sexual abuse, but I want to touch on one or two other
issues as well, and these days I don't really have time to read ars,
much less post long articles.
----
<rant>
Rob's posting of the original article in this thread and the
downtime of operatingthetan.com were in NO WAY RELATED to anything
else going on in ars. The suggestions that either might have been
the case were worthy of buttersquash at its worst.
First of all, the server space used for operatingthetan.com is
donated. Rob has no more control over its uptime and downtime than
anyone here has over (for example) Google's.
Secondly, Rob wasn't trying to distract anyone from anything. I
won't speak for him. But his reasons for posting in the first place
and his thoughts (as expressed in email) about his own
responsibilities to both Keith and operatingthetan.com satisfy me
that he is every inch a decent human being (vocabulary
notwithstanding).
Disclaimers:
1. This does not imply I share Rob's views about many of the people
he has targetted with his vitriol from time to time. In most cases,
I don't. But in ars we don't need to agree about everyone or
everything, or indeed about anyone or anything.
2. At the time of our email exchange, neither Rob nor I had formed
opinions about the merits of Gale's allegations. My opinions about
the allegations were formed independently of any comments from any
ars participant in this thread or any other communication about
Val's page. I want to be clear that I don't know Rob's opinion
about the merits of the allegations, or if he has even formed one.
</rant>
----
I have not contacted Keith nor Arel about any of this, nor do I
intend to. I don't think doing so serves any useful purpose. We
already know that Keith has refused comment because of his probation.
While Arel could comment, what could she possibly say? If the
allegations are true, she has been covering them up very skillfully
for 20 years. Why would she change if that was the case?
On the other hand, if the allegations are baseless, violating the
presumption of innocence by even asking for an explanation only
compounds the harm as far as I am concerned.
----
In case anyone still reading is interested, operatingthetan.com will
not link to Val's page unless Keith or Arel specifically requests
this. The server space and bandwidth were expressly donated to
*support* Keith, and linking to the page does not clearly do so.
But I may put up a page on my own server space where I link to the
Canadian court cases. Time, or lack thereof, is the main barrier there.
John
Magoo
"R. Hill" <rh...@xenu-directory.net> wrote in message
news:f861abef-2f93-4186...@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
It is a bit of an odd scene, as Keith cannot make any statement.
I'm a firm believer in giving people all the facts, let them decide.
If I had a page on Keith, first I would verify, for sure, that was
Henri, the critic, who made the original post. (I say that because it says
from he...@nowhere.com Is that his e-mail address? Seems a bit vague to me).
And henri---feel free to step up to the PLATE, any day.
Is your page about Keith the wonder man, or Keith the Scientology critic? If
it's personal at all, then I'd say yes, add the daughter's comments, as that
does add to the picture, and mention Keith CANNOT comment, due to his
probation. That way when they find it on Google, you will have told them
first, vs. Scientology's Spin, which they've already begun.
If it's just about Keith the Scientology critic---well, then it's up to you,
but keep in mind Keith cannot make any statements at this time, and we know
Scientology would LOVE to rope him into *that*.
It is a mess, no question. I feel for the family---all of them.
My very best,
Tory/Magoo~~~
Magoo
Feisty
The first thought when reading this post was Keith's court order.
Hope Keith is doing well.
Disinformation or half truths mixed intentionally with the silliest
fabrication has the way of making "explain" or talk. And making those
uneducated about his exposure of judicial corruption think differently.
Not to mention how they glee sadistically in bringing out and asking for
comment on the vulnerability of this situatuation, $cientology shows its
creepy and unconfidential practice of how they treat families to thrive on
such activity.
The cult encourages their own brand of cult abuse as taught inhouse, as a
teaching tool on ars - as you can see many recipients hit below the belt
daily on ars. We should belittle like this to drive any point home?
The consistency of bringing vulnerable situations as divide an conquer
strategies, especially to one single piece of information like this, would
need tons of invective persuasion to make the source seem anything but
correct.
The cult does this to members daily. It's practice in public humiliation in
the name of correctness distracts from judicial corrpution, felony,
government infililtration and death.
It is a best interest to bring the past invectives forward to see that it
repeats, as propaganda does. They need targets so continual conspiracy
needed to arouse such sentiments. The cult simply counts on the many curious
to exercise its own pecking order.
The source of where information comes from is always important. Such a
person would likely be disposable or vulnerable themself.
Like a war meme.
Maureen
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/oss/instructionalmemorandum.htm
Informers should be made available to known hostile agents and false or
misleading information furnished. These informers may be either unwitting
individuals or agents engaged in deliberately planned campaign.
Through proper go-betweens constant effort should be mae to bribe known
hostile agents or to seduce them by any means whatever. These may consist of
threats to themselves, or their families, promises of greater renumeration
and by actual bodily information or death.
>
> John
Out_Of_The_Dark
>
> It is a mess, no question. I feel for the family---all of them.
>
> My very best,
>
> Tory/Magoo~~~ <
I agree, Tory.
R. Hill
> R. Hill wrote:
<snip>
> In case anyone still reading is interested, operatingthetan.com will
> not link to Val's page unless Keith or Arel specifically requests
> this. The server space and bandwidth were expressly donated to
> *support* Keith, and linking to the page does not clearly do so.
> But I may put up a page on my own server space where I link to the
> Canadian court cases. Time, or lack thereof, is the main barrier there.
>
> John
Thanks for your insights. I will reconsider linking or not whenever a
statement from Keith Henson comes out, or whenever there is a change
in the situation. It wouldn't be fair to link to Val Henson's page
without all sides of the story available. Just to be clear also, ***I
am not asking Keith Henson to make a statement***, I'm just saying
that whenever there will be a statement, I will reconsider. I will not
presume that Val Henson allegations are false, or true (although I
feel that willingly making this up would be really sick beyond what I
can comprehend), there is nothing more to add, I agree with Tory on
this.
Ray.
John Dorsay
> Thanks for your insights. I will reconsider linking or not whenever a
> statement from Keith Henson comes out, or whenever there is a change
I doubt we will ever know for sure one way or another. Unless Arel
and/or Keith confirm the allegations, or Val and/or Gale retract the
allegations, we are left to wonder who, if anybody, is telling the
truth.
> in the situation. It wouldn't be fair to link to Val Henson's page
> without all sides of the story available. Just to be clear also, ***I
I agree. If I web anything it will include commentary expressing my
doubts about the allegations. The downside of that, of course, is
my opinion might be wrong.
> am not asking Keith Henson to make a statement***, I'm just saying
Keith isn't the only one accused of anything related to child sexual
abuse, of course. Carolyn's second husband is also accused of
undescribed but unsavory activity. Carolyn herself is accused of
protecting her second husband from any consequences for whatever he
might have done, and Arel is accused of blaming the victims for
child sexual abuse and then covering it up.
It is actually this last accusation that swayed me. I reserved
judgment about Keith, despite my feelings of loyalty to a friend. I
was raised Catholic. I am all too aware that respected and popular
men who would never be expected to engage in such activities have
done so countless times. But I just can't believe that Arel would
not only blame the victims, but then cover it up for decades.
> that whenever there will be a statement, I will reconsider. I will not
> presume that Val Henson allegations are false, or true (although I
> feel that willingly making this up would be really sick beyond what I
> can comprehend),
There is also the possibility that these are false memories. The
only other alternative is that Arel behaved as alleged.
In the absence of any avenue of proof, our only recourses are to
defer judgment, or pass judgment based on our assessment of the
credibility of the evidence. Perhaps I am more strongly inclined to
the latter because Keith and Arel are my friends.
there is nothing more to add, I agree with Tory on
> this.
I guess I still disagree.
John
BarbaraSc...@excite.com
> R. Hill wrote:
Keith Henson forged me on Usenet and defamed my state of mind and
activities on Usenet and Wikpedia.
He called the cops to harass me despite I didn't do anything wrong.
(They did not come to me but he tried to make them.)
He stalked another Scientologist in Hawaii and published personal data
and his pic on the Internet/
I believe his daughter any word she wrote about the scum bag.
Val is a young person. If that would not bother her, she would do
something else with her life than webbing this information. She would
be a happy, young woman with a family and would love and respect her
father.
I know of families where the mother after a does not think highly of
the father. But the child or young adult nevertheless loves her
father, which Valerie would have done too.
Do you know what kind of courage that girl has telling the world that
her biological father is a incestuous pedophile? And she did it that
her other sister and nobody will come to harm. She didn't do it for
any other reason.
That girl is the hero in that family not Henson. He scarred her for
life, the perverted monster.
You go, Valerie! You are one tough cookie. What you did, deserves a
lot of respect. I wish you all the best for your future life and any
happiness that you can get.
--
Barbara Schwarz
ABOUT THE AHBL AND THE VERY TWISTED BRIAN J. BRUNS :
http://criminal-brian-j-bruns.blogspot.com/
Abusive transsexual BRIAN J, BRUNS aka BURNS aka "Bri", "Brielle" or
"Brielle-Jillian", born on
06/24/81, a "registered sex slave: and owner/webmaster of the abusive
AHBL ("Abusive Host Blocking
List") website and the SOSDG ("Summit open source development group")
is a CONVICTED FELON. (Felon Indictment # I-1577-02,S-2423-02 and
SAPD. Police Report # 05071019). INMATE; BRUNS, BRIAN # 445064.
The AHBL SOSDG is allegedly "non-profit" but stops free speech,
blackmails ISPs and defames people.
Bruns lies that the ABHL is non-profit. He hosted the sex pages of his
master "Lady-Arielle" who offers one hour of her perversion for over
$300,-- profit on the SOSDG server!
Bruns actually HACKED the computers of his former employer Access
Highway (http://
accesshighway.com). Bruns was many months incarcerated and has a FBI
file. Realists think that Bri (also called "the cheese") never will
change but will go back to prison.
COMMACK MAN INDICTED FOR HACKING
http://www.co.suffolk.ny.us/da/press/2002/06_26_02.htm
Read also this: http://groups.google.com/group/rattle-users/browse_thread/thread/920c521a661d867a
Bruns retaliates and smears my name also in anonymous Blogspot that is
filled with factual lies about me for which he can be sued. It
wouldn't be the first defamation lawsuit brought against him.
MY OTHER STALKER IS TILMAN JOERG HAUSHERR FROM GERMANY, BERLIN,
EMPLOYED BY SIEMENS, WHICH HAS COZY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GERMAN
SECRET SERVICE OPC.
Click here for information on Tilman Hausherr:
http://tilmanjoerghausherrgermanharasser.blogspot.com/
Here are factual criminal records about Hausherr's friend, the
habitual offender, defamer and forger Korey Jerome Kruse from Olathe,
Kansas. I am very certain that Kruse defames himself in ridiculous
postings saying about himself that he is convicted Nazi spy, etc. to
DISTRACT from his REAL rotten activities and criminal past, which is
here:
http://stalkerkoreykruse.wordpress.com/
http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-156307.html
He also is suspect no. 1, stalking and defaming me on Wikipedia under
ID Anynobody.
Feisty
"henri" <he...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:tck2o357i6ji6puvj...@4ax.com...
> As a long term defender of Keith Henson, and the original author of
> contents of the website I am about to reference are absolutely defamatory
> and libelous if not true. I have no basis by which to judge their
accuracy
> and am going to keep my opinion to myself.
>
> http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/parents.html links to this page
> http://infohost.nmt.edu/~val/keith.html
>
> This is the website of Val Henson, Keith Henson's daughter.
The websites are no longer working.
Maybe the pedo clam went to work at myspace to harass high school kids. As
always, they get reported to law enforcement.
Maureen
barb
http://www.valhenson.org/keith.html
New URL.
--
barb
barb
> In article <m5zgj.346$aL3...@newsfe06.lga>,
> "Magoo" <mag...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> snip
>
>
>> Exactly---which is why I said I don't think it's a great idea for
>> the critics to keep debating/discussing this. Keith cannot speak
>> about this; Once I realized that, I said I didn't think any of us should
>> continue to debate it.
>> Enough has been said about this---and Keith and Arel need to
>> stay way afar from the Net and anything that might hook him
>> into some violations, which will be Scientology's goal. Religion? MY ASS.
>> Scientology is about religion as the KKK is about freedom: Granted, both are
>> covered by their titles---do either really practice that? Hell no, in fact,
>> each one is really the opposite.
>>
>> Tory/Magoo~~
>
>
>
> If it is true, may he rot in hell.
>
> If it is true, a critic of scientology, the poster boy for a while in
> the critics camp, is a heinous defiler of innocents.
>
> Perhaps too we should not talk about the abuses of the church?
>
> Sorry, no.
>
> Here tory is a case where fair game is justified, if the accusations are
> to be believed.
>
> If the accusations are true, may keith meet his karma. Soon.
>
> Frankly I would believe his daughters, who have nothing to gain, and
> much to lose in this.
>
> On the side of what principle or moral outlook do you stand?
>
> alex
On the side of "insufficient data to process."
You seem awfully willing to assume the worst.
Others might take the other side.
But until more information is available, you should just STFU.
banchukita
> In article <m5zgj.346$aL3....@newsfe06.lga>, "Magoo" <mago...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> > Enough has been said about this---and Keith and Arel need to
> > stay way afar from the Net and anything that might hook him
> > into some violations,
>
>
>
>
> > Tory/Magoo~~
>
> The above comment discusts me.
>
> Protecting.......a child molester?
>
> alex
If you can get this disgusted about unproven allegations against
Keith,
when are you going to get equally disgusted about Tony Strawn, Gabriel
Williams, and the policy-driven "church" machine that covered up for
their real and documented sex crimes for which they went to jail?
jerald
First off, I hope Keith never replies to any of the question's
here. There is just no way he can and not have it twisted or
spinned. If Keith chooses to mail or talk to those he trusts thats
one thing. But to do it here would just get it twisted and cut to
where it will do him more harm than good.
Remember Keith has never been charged or even investigated over these
matters and shame on a lot of you for saying " if " .
I have been to the sites and read the stories. And a whole lot of it
just doesn't ring true to me.
You can't police the action's of a family molester from another
household. You can't question the remaining child from afar on a
steady basis without the shit hitting the fan somewhere down the
line. You just can't.
The terms she says Keith used are just not how a molester would talk
to his victim. As for her reason for coming forward. She didn't
want to have to face him at common events after he was released? He
was only in for a few months and she had to have known this would
happen long before he was found and jailed.
As for the timeing of all this, my question would be when does
Keith's probation end? When is he free to protest again?
jerald
barb
> In article <1Wthj.7490$OC1....@newsfe20.lga>,
>
> http://www.valhenson.org/keith.html
>
> and then downloading:
>
> http://www.valhenson.org/keith_molestation.doc
>
> a recount of "keith" teaching his daughter to masturbate while he also
> did.
>
> What gives it credibility to me is that the daughters have so little to
> gain from it and so much to lose.
>
> If I am wrong I will apologize to keith and you.
>
> But you telling me to shut the fuck up, when it seems some piece of shit
> has been playing with his 6 year old daughters clitoris and vagina while
> masturbating himself....well, no.
>
> Step back and get some perspective.
>
> alex
Oh please, you moron. Who the fuck needs masturbation lessons?
Outside of your dead fat ghod L. Ron Hubbard, that is...
barb
Yeah, Alex,
How bout that Tony Strawn and Gabriel Williams?
Huh?
Those are SOLID, man. Those things really happened. It ain't some airy
fairy accusation, this is nailed down by the courts of law!
I met the husband of William's victim. He is a delightful, intelligent
being, unlike yourself. You are trying to collect mercury in a sieve.
There is such a huge difference between being outraged, and in your
case, PRETENDING to be outraged over accusations that have no veracity.
Fucking word clear that, bitch! You fucking stupid ass brainwashed,
wannagetbackinthedoor LOSER.
jerald
>
> I say you have no compassion nor understanding if you diminish Valeries
> repulsion at having to face her molestor.
>
> Keith will never be free to protest again. He will always wear the
> chains of his betrayal of his daughters.
>
> No critic in their right mind would stand with him. What he had to say
> would always be colored with the stain of his pedophiliatic incest.
>
> alex- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have all the compassion in the world for those children who have
been abused Alex. Just not sure at all if this is the case here. How
does a abuser talk to a child? In terms the child understands and if
repeated won't give them away.
The statement reads like it was writen by more than one person. As
each one thought of something it was added and it just doesn't make a
lot of sence when read.
As for standing with Keith, as an adult who really did suffer as a
child I have no problem standing with Keith against scientology. He
has proven to be a great critic and has paid a high price for what he
stands for. It's going to take more than yet another web page
slamming him for me to change my mind. I have seen far to many of
those that were slam jobs.
jerald
Kim P
That alex is here making SURE this topic stays on the list makes it even
more obvious that this is an op - in an effort to force Keith to post
and therefore to violate his probation. These are indeed serious
allegations and not to be ignored lightly. However, having worked with
victims of child abuse these allegations made do not ring true - as you
said no one can police the home of an abuser from outside the home,nor
can the kind of questioning mention go unnoticed.
False allegations of child abuse have been used to destroy people before
and will again because child abuse is so abhorrent to most people.
This topic is scary and hard for most people to comprehend.
We need to stop reacting to alex and cos about this - the shriller they
get = the more detailed they get about the alleged abuse the worse they
look. Plastering these details on the web will not make it any truer
but flinging mud is easy. Keith is not completely destroyed and they
cannot accept this so they seek another way to continue their harassment
and attempts to ruin utterly as per policy.
Kim p
Zinj
al...@null.edu says...
<snip>
> I am disgusted by the actions of those two and obviously it reflects
> badly on my church that they were members.
> alex
What reflects badly on your 'Church' is that the 'Church' itself was
actively involved in the cover-up, not that the perps were 'members'.
What reflects even worse is that the cover-up was per 'Church' *policy*,
and, since 'policy' is Scientology dogma, per 'religious' mandate. Like
all Scientology crimes.
Zinj
--
You Can Lead a Clam to Reason; but You Can't Make Him Think
Eldon
Hey, if it worked with Werner Erhard, why not Keith Henson? Looks like
a replay from 1991 to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_and_Werner_Erhard
>
> Kim p
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>Perhaps you would care to explain for the audience exactly why the
>claims of Keith Henson's daughter have no veracity, besides your
>assertions.
No one has said they don't have veracity. Only that their veracity is
still in question here. That's the way things work on this newsgroup.
It "digests" information and in the end, out comes what?
Waste matter AND life energy. We call it TheTruth.
If it's just another turds-in-a-bottle story, I'm sure that will come
out eventually. But the excuse of being on parole and the takedown of
the site bugs. I could understand it if he said his lawyer suggested
that he not post to ars. But he was chatting on undernet often
enough.
Whatever the veracity of the allegations, the family is estranged and
that's very sad.
>Something better than OSA dirty tricks.
In case you don't know how they work, let me explain. Some cults have
been known to actually exploit people's weaknesses and ill feelings
toward each other. They get families to turn on each other like this.
Splitting families is a *specialty* of cults. And they know every
trick.
Again, I point out the factor which can play a real role in such
accusations: false memory syndrome.
http://www.stopbadtherapy.com/fms/intro.shtml
D
Tom Klemesrud
> al...@null.edu wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps you would care to explain for the audience exactly why the
>>claims of Keith Henson's daughter have no veracity, besides your
>>assertions.
>
>
> No one has said they don't have veracity. Only that their veracity is
> still in question here. That's the way things work on this newsgroup.
> It "digests" information and in the end, out comes what?
>
> Waste matter AND life energy. We call it TheTruth.
>
> If it's just another turds-in-a-bottle story, I'm sure that will come
> out eventually. But the excuse of being on parole and the takedown of
> the site bugs. I could understand it if he said his lawyer suggested
> that he not post to ars. But he was chatting on undernet often
> enough.
That's not it Reverend. Keith is not on parole, he's on probation. And
he has been told not to say anything on the Internet directed toward
Scientology.
Dennis you champion rational thinking right? If the true defense to all
this is that Scientology paid this women to put the webpage up, then he
would be violating his probation. That's easy enough to understand
isn't it Reverend? Or, are you just parroting the party line from last
nights IRC talking points?
[...]
<t1kk> it appears that barbz was able to get the university to yank the
val henson pages on henson
<t1kk> which is more than a bit hypocritical
<t1kk> since that's precisely what scientology routinely does to dave
and CMU
<_tar_> she DID???
<t1kk> val henson mirrored the page
<t1kk> http://www.valhenson.org/keith.html
<t1kk> and at bottom
<henri> val put it back up again on her domain and put in a redirect
<henri> . . .
<t1kk> January 7, 2008: Barb Chaplain complained to my univerity's
webmaster, who decreed the page not in compliance with their academic
mission. Moved to valhenson.org, hosted on Dreamhost.
<henri> as anyone could see she'd do
<henri> val henson writes fucking filesystems
<henri> mirroring shit is not exactly something that's going to be
beyond her capabilities
<_tar_> no
<efish> i don't agree with barb on this one, nope
<henri> it was a stupid thing to try, singularly useless
<_tar_> but its strange she did this
<henri> and re-victimizing an abuse victim if it's true
<efish> i gotta go
<efish> laters
<_tar_> why would she insert herself into that?
<_tar_> cya ef
* efish has quit IRC (Quit: ciao )
<henri> loyalty
<henri> loyalty
<jimbo> who is barb chaplain?
<henri> barb
<felinity> our barb... as in barbz
<jimbo> barb is barbara graham
<henri> she used a fake name too. . .beaugus
<felinity> and i did just miss E again by like 2 minutes eh? sigh
<henri> yep
<felinity> it's so ridiculous that it's borderline hysterically funny
<felinity> tar, barb has a soft spot for keith
<felinity> as she does for arnie.
<felinity> that's her.
<t1kk> soft spot or no, she lost her principles when she had the site
taken down
<felinity> .
<felinity> sorry that was a cat.
<felinity> i know that hkh had her ear the other night.. they've been
talking. And you know how hkh can be...
<t1kk> yeah, full of shit
<henri> yeah
<felinity> ok but also somewhat endearing in a 'look at poor me save me'
kind of way
<t1kk> valerie makes the same point i and others have been making, btw
<t1kk> Now that we've gone public, Keith Henson and some of his
supporters are claiming that the terms of Keith's parole, which
basically prevent him from harassing or talking about the Church of
Scientology, prevent him from directly addressing his daughters'
accusations of child molestation.
<t1kk> This is obviously ridiculous. The terms of the probation are
intended to keep Keith from harassing the Scientologists, not from
responding to his daughters. I doubt it would even be constitutional to
prevent someone from doing so.
<henri> yeah it's nonsense frankly
<felinity> according to barb it's exactly what hkh is saying
<felinity> so either he's misinformed or just paranoid beyond belief
<henri> that may pass muster in backchannels to a sucker but in the
broad daylight it's like a three day old mackerel
<t1kk> no, he's lying
<t1kk> he knows it's bullshit
<t1kk> anyone would know it was bullshit
<henri> not that that's proof of guilt of the monstrous accusation in
and of itself. . .but it's less than i'd expect
<henri> it's lame
<henri> and doesn't bode well for things to come
<_tar_> nope
<felinity> well it is curious that he won't show up here
<felinity> he's online now- i just did a chan list on -lies
<t1kk> he's not come here for awhile actually
<t1kk> before that page broke as news
<t1kk> but the page has been up
<t1kk> it's possible he's been aware of the page
<t1kk> and i would also guess that he would realize that we'd give him a
harder time over it than his sycophants would
l.l.lipshitz
<alex-7F1A64.0...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>:
[...]
| Sorry I dont see keith as a serious threat to the church.
and yet co$ has pursued, harassed, and attacked him
for YEARS. a serious expenditure of time/effort/$$ for
a nonserious threat....
[...]
-elle
--------=[ l.l.lipshitz * elkube(at)lycos(dot)com ]=--------
time flies like an arrow. fruit flies like a banana. -gm
m...@privacy.net
>That alex is here making SURE this topic stays on the list makes it even
>more obvious that this is an op - in an effort to force Keith to post
>and therefore to violate his probation. These are indeed serious
>allegations and not to be ignored lightly. However, having worked with
>victims of child abuse these allegations made do not ring true - as you
>said no one can police the home of an abuser from outside the home,nor
>can the kind of questioning mention go unnoticed.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's a
duck.
efish
Tom Klemesrud <tom...@netscape.del.net> wrote:
>
> Dennis you champion rational thinking right? If the true defense to all
> this is that Scientology paid this women to put the webpage up, then he
> would be violating his probation. That's easy enough to understand
> isn't it Reverend? Or, are you just parroting the party line from last
> nights IRC talking points?
>
> [...]
> <t1kk> it appears that barbz was able to get the university to yank the
> val henson pages on henson
> <t1kk> which is more than a bit hypocritical
> <t1kk> since that's precisely what scientology routinely does to dave
> and CMU
wow. that's pretty odious, that you posted an irc log. to prove what exactly??
everyone on this log (including myself) expressed reservations in every
direction. until more information is available, it is unwise to make grand
proclamations. that is all. and that many are uncomfortable with the page being
yanked.
geeeezus... sneaking around on irc to try get some scurrilous "info"... now that
is totally fucked. and in the end, you ended up with nothing.
so hey, what *did* you prove? i mean, beside the fact that you are a total
asshole.
regards
-ef
Zinj
@hotmail.com says...
<snip>
> geeeezus... sneaking around on irc to try get some scurrilous "info"... now that
> is totally fucked. and in the end, you ended up with nothing.
>
>
> so hey, what *did* you prove? i mean, beside the fact that you are a total
> asshole.
>
> regards
> -ef
Hmm... sneaking around on IRC to see if Keith is in another channel?
As for the rest; same old same old.
Tom Klemesrud
> In article <4787a41c$1...@news2.lightlink.com>,
> Tom Klemesrud <tom...@netscape.del.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Dennis you champion rational thinking right? If the true defense to all
>>this is that Scientology paid this women to put the webpage up, then he
>>would be violating his probation. That's easy enough to understand
>>isn't it Reverend? Or, are you just parroting the party line from last
>>nights IRC talking points?
>>
>>[...]
>><t1kk> it appears that barbz was able to get the university to yank the
>>val henson pages on henson
>><t1kk> which is more than a bit hypocritical
>><t1kk> since that's precisely what scientology routinely does to dave
>>and CMU
>
>
>
> wow. that's pretty odious, that you posted an irc log. to prove what exactly??
It shows that there's a group of people, namely the Buttersquash cabal
that sit on the back channel of IRC and collude concerning how to
handle critics, the content in this newsgroup, and participation in two
other message boards.
"<t1kk> Now that we've gone public, Keith Henson and some of his
supporters are claiming that the terms of Keith's parole, which
basically prevent him from harassing or talking about the Church of
Scientology, prevent him from directly addressing his daughters'
accusations of child molestation. "
It shows to me that this fellow tikk is some kind of a ringleader in
this cabal.
I not him saying "now that we've gone public", and actually it was
Robert Clark who started this thread. it indicates some sort of
collusion to smear Keith on this Buttersquash back channel.
It shows that the Reverend chimed in this morning parroting these
talking points suggested by Tikk suggesting that he is nothing more than
a sock puppet of this group.
I'm all fairly convinced that this Buttersquash group is a paid group
with the intent to smear all the legitimate critics, and shut down
valid criticism of the Scientology cult in this newsgroup, and all over
the Internet.
It's all too obvious. Especially after being told that this group has
regular meetings In Palm Beach, Florida.
>
> everyone on this log (including myself) expressed reservations in every
> direction. until more information is available, it is unwise to make grand
> proclamations. that is all. and that many are uncomfortable with the page being
> yanked.
This technical school for mining and technology in New Mexico was not
uncomfortable about yanking this smear page, especially since none of
that has been proven. They agreed thatthe smear page was not in keeping
with its charter.
>
> geeeezus... sneaking around on irc to try get some scurrilous "info"... now that
> is totally fucked. and in the end, you ended up with nothing.
Is there something more you care to reveal?
>
>
> so hey, what *did* you prove? i mean, beside the fact that you are a total
> asshole.
And the profanity from the Buttersquash just keeps on coming!
>
> regards
> -ef