September 18, 2011

The Cult of Kalua: A Hypothesis

In view of the latest example of denial of due process at SBFII  (see links below for the unfortunate details) I wondered what turns ordinary people into bullies and abusers of the elderly, which brought me to the topic of cults.

Here are two definitions.  The first is from Merriam Webster: (The first 4 definitions relate specifically to religious cults, which are not exactly applicable, although some might argue differently). Here is their definition:
"#5: a. a great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book) especially: such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad)
    b. the object of such devotion
    c. a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion."

And the second, on Wikipedia:
"The word cult pejoratively refers to a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre." OED, (Oxford English Dictionary)citing American Journal of Sociology 85 (1980), p. 1"Cults[...], like other deviant social movements, tend to recruit people with a grievance, people who suffer from a(sic) some variety of deprivation."


Now the object of devotion at SBFII is not the celebrity to whom the site is devoted, but rather to the administrators, particularly the one known as Kalua.  Why do I say that?  Because Kalua, not the celebrity, is the one who gives the site the characteristics of a cult.

Dr. Michael Langone, PhD. is an American counseling psychologist who specializes in research about "cultic groups" and alleged psychological manipulation. He is executive director of the International Cultic Studies Association, and editor of the journal Cultic Studies Review.

He states, "Concerted efforts at influence and control lie at the core of cultic groups, programs, and relationships. Many members, former members, and supporters of cults are not fully aware of the extent to which members may have been manipulated, exploited, even abused. The following list of social-structural, social-psychological, and interpersonal behavioral patterns commonly found in cultic environments may be helpful in assessing a particular group or relationship.

1. The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
2. Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
3. The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).
4. The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
5. The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).
6. The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).
7. The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion."

Dr. Langone gives some additional characteristics, but they are directed at cults which have common living quarters or a primarily religious focus, not the case at SBFII.

But why should the current beliefs or practices at SBFII, particularly in its relationship with Kalua, be considered "abnormal or bizarre"?

Kalua planned on being the Director of the Board, but only on his/her own terms.  When the owner of the site incorporated the non-profit SBFII, she wanted legitimate identification of his/her identity, so that she knew who she was selling the site to.  In view of the numerous internet scams going on, this was only prudent. Kalua, however, has always hidden his/her true identity, and resigned rather than reveal who he/she really was for this business transaction. This precipitated a revolt by the members of the remaining staff, who abandoned their responsibilities, sabotaged the site's computer software, and initiated a campaign of public libel and harassment against the elderly owner, her technical assistant and other members of the fan community.

All this has been documented and proven earlier in the blogs below. How did the membership, the staff and later the Board respond to Kalua's (supposedly a Chilean national) refusal to verify his/her real identity in order to direct a legal American non-profit corporation?  He/she was praised and considered to be unjustly persecuted.  The first order of business of the new Board of Directors was to beg for him/her to return as staff administrator, and later they gave him/her an apology for his/her "mistreatment".  Note that the entire Board was made fully aware that Kalua regularly claimed that he/she was in danger of being murdered if discovered. The Board willfully chose to ignore or address that issue at all. The provider of that information was libeled instead.

Stop and think for a moment.  SBFII claims a membership of 55,000.  Think of another organization that size--the Red Cross or the YMCA, for example.  Can you imagine them accepting as Director someone who refused to provide identifying information that could be verified, such as a real address or a current place of business?  Or on a more personal level--if your teenage daughter was corresponding with someone who identified himself as a teenage boy, but refused to provide any information about himself that could be verified, would you let her go off and meet him alone in another city?  If you would, I have a few sad stories to tell you about the results of that naive behavior.

I can give examples of the 7 characteristics listed above in relationship to Kalua, but this is already an awfully long post, and the blogs below can give you more information about a specific example of Kalua, who claims to be in his/her thirties, again bullying a senior woman.  Read them and weep.  Or swear.

Of course, this is only a hypothesis, isn't it?  I welcome any comments for or against it, especially if they are related to the 7 items Dr. Langone proposed as characteristics of a cult.

As always, I stand ready to provide documentation of all I say in court. As has been stated on this blog multiple times, I welcome any and all legal inquiries.



http://newsforsusanboylefans.blogspot.com/

http://thesusanboylereview.blogspot.com/

23 comments:

  1. I know that until recently Kalua insisted that he was at risk of assassination if his photograph appeared on the web, yet he now uses what appears to be a personal photograph as his avatar on twitter. Has anyone asked what suddenly changed to enable him to do this? Either his life is at risk or it is not. Which is it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you Dyebat for this blog entry. I think it is great that we are looking at Kalua and his manipulations. A lot of people have been hurt by the way they were treated by Kalua and Pickled Tink. They don't even follow their own rules and they have a set of rules for those they favour and and another set for those who are just simply members. They have driven anyone who has a mind of his/her own away.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very good overview of the cult mystique that is at work at SBFII. Chameleons, these strange folk who claim to be one thing and yet turn out to be someone entirely different! They can't reveal themselves or even have photographs taken that might appear publicly,---and yet they can tweet while aboard ship during military duty and post pictures of themselves on Twitter, even promising now to appear in person at the opening of Susan's musical in March. Whatever happened to Pinochet's assassins, we have to wonder?? A deranged spy novelist wouldn't be able to come up with such bizarre subject matter as this!

    And yet, as dyebat has pointed out,---these are the people who are believed and respected all the while the truth-tellers are reviled. Some strange mind-set is in place here, certainly,---yet how did it start?? In essence, I'm convinced it's all about 1)control and 2)access to Susan. Some will do anything at all to acquire and maintain those two things. If you're willing to relinquish your integrity and a large portion of good, common sense,---you're eligible to join the cult. Fortunately, for most of us, that price is too high.

    ReplyDelete
  4. In reflecting upon the choice of user name that was chosen by this individual, I am intrigued by these two definitions (courtesy of Wikipedia):

    "Kālua is a traditional Hawaiian cooking method that utilizes an imu, a type of underground oven. The word kālua, which literally means "to cook in an underground oven""

    "Kahlúa is a Mexican coffee-flavored rum-based liqueur. "

    So from this are we to guess that this individual who has chosen the user name of "Kalua" is really not from Chile at all but is perhaps of Mexican heritage? And/or that he or she is interested in "cooking in an underground oven?" Cooking WHAT? The latter sounds rather sinister to me..... In either situation the choice of user name, coupled with this individual's fierce protectiveness of his/her identity does lead to concern about his or her real motives.

    Whatever the true identity of this person is it is certainly quite apparent that he or she is truly not interested in the well-being of Susan Boyle and her fans at all but rather in exploiting them for his/her own purposes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I challenge Kalua to post on SBFII the e-mail that was sent to WAMckinley regarding not being eligible to present her case to the Appeals Committee. This should include a copy of the By-Laws, for easy reference, and the opportunity for all members at SBFII to post opinions and reactions without threat of banishment, warnings, or threat of pre-moderation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Another excellently thought out and well-reasoned blog by Dyebat who the Admins at SBII accused of having lost her reason. Yet another ploy to discredit her to hide their own malpractices.

    Dyebat, you certainly touch some very pertinent points in this blog and have, once again, shown the Admin at SBII up for what they are: manipulating, ego-centred bullies.

    Sadly, virtually anyone with a voice and an opinion differing from theirs has been silenced and/or banned. And this all in the name of this exquisite singer, Susan Boyle. It is a travesty.

    Thank you!

    Janaki

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why would they tell WAM she could appeal...then later tell her she could not?

    Roberto

    ReplyDelete
  8. To Roberto:
    Quite possibly because they had no case and no way of proving the bogus charges they had against me. That would be my guess, anyhow,------aside from just sheer arrogance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am beyond disgusted at the treatment that WAM has received from SBF. To fabricate a reason to deny her an appeal just before the 3 month long wait to hear it is beyond the pale. Is there no decency among those in the position of making decisions there? Thank you, Dyebat, for stating the history of how honorable people were treated so shabbily. I have stated once before on the forum that being a fan of Susan Boyle does not trump my sense of what is right and wrong, what is just and fair.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Roberto--To answer your question, please read Knudt's latest blog entry. It tells the whole story. This is the link: http://newsforsusanboylefans.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  11. Roberto, they would tell WAM that she could appeal and then that she could not appeal because keeping their word means nothing to them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. kalua and his wife are joining fans at the Susan Boyle Musical next March, hardly trying to hide his identification, hmmm. Have tried three times to make this post.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Kalua and his wife are joining fans at the Susan Boyle Musical in March, hardly trying to hide his identification. UKSFA

    Posted twice to give my name.

    ReplyDelete
  14. UKSFA, thank you for posting your name. What trouble were you having trying to comment? I saw 2 - not 3, just fyi.

    Whether or not Kalua shows up at a future event does not change the fact that he adamantly refused to speak with me via telephone and refused to provide any identifying information to Dyebat for her to file the corporation papers. I know several people claimed later that they had spoken to him or knew him and/or his address, but that is revisionist history. The deal made with Dyebat by Kalua was that he was to provide that info to her. He did collect that data from others that were to serve on the board. At the same time, he (along with many staff) were insisting that Kalua had to be protected as he was in danger of being assassinated.

    ReplyDelete
  15. UKSFA, we had a long telephone conversation last year in which we discussed, at length, your direct communication with the the cyber-stalker troll (who dyebat prefers to refer to as the 'dementor'.) I did my best to warn you about him and the danger that existed in believing his lies. He gave you false names and false information and even after you were made aware of that by Tink and me, you chose to maintain contact with him; this other 'man of mystery' who communicated with several forum and staff members as several different people.

    There is no mystery about me. Google my name and you will see most of all there is to know about me - and yet you chose to believe the cyber-troll's lies over my word, and so did the staff at SBFII.

    Forgive me if I have reason to doubt ANYONE who refuses to talk by telephone or otherwise prove that they are who they purport to be. When people refuse to talk on the telephone I begin to wonder if maybe their accents do not match their 'profile'....unless anyone can come up with a better reason?

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am sorry citroenlady that you saw fit to mention our private phone call on a public blog but as you have I want to make it very clear that at the time of our phone call I was not in contact with anyone and I am able to make make my own mind up about who I do and do not trust. To be honest I am getting bored with the whole subject, all I wantd to do is celebrate Susan Boyle and her forthcoming album. Back to listening to Susan. UKSFA

    ReplyDelete
  17. Citroenlady, you are not the only one to find it suspicious that Kalua, an administrator of SBFII, refused to give identifying information. How does his claim that he "had to be protected as he was in danger of being assassinated" square with him and his wife planning to attend the musical in March? Something does not add up.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Do you imagine UKSFA was embarrassed to be "outed" concerning having a phone conversation with "the enemy?" The folks back home at SBFII might not look too favorably upon that, maybe. Why else would she mention it as if it were a breach of confidence?? When you're losing the argument, I suppose the safest thing to do is scurry back to the safety of the home roost.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The Admins and some Staff covered up and lied about their own involvement with the cyberstalker, covering up for him and minimizing him as a mere 'troll'. Hardly surprising that the Board and many members were influenced by that irresponsible attitude. The focus should be on those in authority that should have protected members from the cyberstalker. They knew and they should have and could have stopped him. UKSFA posted a valid question/comment and I replied. She is not responsible for the cyberstalker coverup. In fact, she did resolve one issue created by the cyberstalker by talking it out with CL. And was more help than she may ever know for my own investigation. The anger/frustration that many have on both sides is unresolved, and there is justification. I just wish the focus could stay on those in charge and their actions.

    ReplyDelete
  20. SBFII has yet to write a conflict of interest policy, something that should have been done at the time of its incorporation as a non-profit. Sony should have absolutely no influence or have any connection in ANY WAY with SBFII. It appears that that boundary has already been crossed.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Marie Jean, Suddenly all that went before has conveniently been 'forgotten'. It has been swept under the rug along with a lot of other uncomfortable truths at SBFII. "IT DIDN'T HAPPEN"!

    Pickled Tink (who, if you remember was unable to have her photograph published as 'it would place her life in danger' later amended to the more plausible 'for professional reasons') now has her photograph as her avatar on Facebook after a year and a half of secrecy, as does Kalua. I see no problem if private individuals want to maintain privacy, but officers of non-profit organizations must be totally transparent.

    Could it be that it eventually became obvious how ludicrous these 'intrigues' appeared to those of us still capable of independent thought?

    I found it enlightening, recently, when PT posted that SBFII had taken legal advice from 'two sources', one of which was lawyers for Sony(!) and the other an apparently disbarred lawyer who is the husband of one of the Board members.

    Why are Sony lawyers giving advice to a supposedly INDEPENDENT non-profit organization?
    Corporate influence rears its ugly head again....

    However, despite all that, PT is a 'real' person. I have spoken to her via Skype.

    Kalua could actually be anybody. His 'Latin charm' may have served him well enough with certain SBFII members, but would not gain him much ground in any formal non-profit investigation, such as non-profit organizations are subject to at any time.

    In the non-profit world, transparency is everything.

    Maybe the Sony lawyers advised that Tink and Kalua take action to appear as 'real' people. Who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thankyou Chris. However,yes I did have a conversation with Citroenlady, at her request, but I never agreed that I had been in contact with a troll, she assumed and told me about the troll and said that I should be careful and not to be taken in, that is really all there is to it. I most certainly am not embarrassed or feel outed, I was just surprised that Citreonlady mentioned it that is all. I then made up my own mind who to believe. I really wish we could move on but I don't think we will ever resolve this, such a shame. I would love to see everyone who left back at SBFII and united we continue to follow Susan and her career. UKSFA

    ReplyDelete
  23. We should all want to meet Kalua. He could tell us where the fountain of youth is since he was 37 two years ago, and he is STILL 37!

    ReplyDelete