Adventures With Cassiopaea

Chapter 33

Dr. Oleson, as a member of the Perseus Foundation, signed a confidentiality agreement that anything relating to any of our investigations that was discussed or shared in person, by phone, or email, that was designated "private," was PRIVATE. This was a clear necessity for a foundation that is set up to investigate backgrounds of other people and possible frauds on the internet, etc. Journalists cannot work without confidentiality. A confidential source has to be assured that they are dealing with a group that will hold the information private, even including their identity. This is a legal right of investigative journalism based on the necessity of being able to assure that information will be available even in cases when the informant has reason to fear the releasing of the information.

Now, keep in mind that Dr. Nellie Oleson is a professor of English at the University of Wisconsin, Platteville - and would certainly be expected to be very familiar with how journalists work. However, after being ejected from our egroup for disruptive and aggressive behavior to garner favor with Maynerd Most, Oleson forwarded to him numerous private emails that had been copied to her, from a confidential informant, as part of the beginning investigation into the Most matter. The informant had given his permission for her to read them, since she was a member of the Foundation with a confidentiality agreement on file. When they were forwarded to her, they were noted as "private."

However, not only did Dr. Nellie Oleson violate the confidentiality of a third party confidential informant, she violated her signed confidentiality agreement with the Perseus Foundation. She also betrayed over 200 other people in our egroup and research team.

As an instructor at an institution of higher learning in this country, who claims to be not only informed about such matters, but who is hired to teach them, to set an example, we find that her behavior was not only irresponsible, it was highly unethical and illegal. And I certainly would not want such an individual, (especially considering other aspects of her "story"), teaching one of my children. What is more, in the world in which she proposes to operate - the world of journalism - this act has put her beyond the pale of serious journalists and writers. In short, she has shown that she cannot be trusted in a field where trust is paramount. Without journalistic confidentiality, no truth would ever be known.

And she did this to "defend" Maynerd Most. And we see a real live example of how people will even do things that are illegal under such an influence. If nothing else, the fact that this woman, with so much to lose, would commit so unethical, irresponsible, and morally reprehensible a series of actions proves the point of the power of the psychopath to confuse and influence.

And this brings us to another aspect of the psychopath: The obsessive need to force their delusions on others and to force association. Mr. Most literally is consumed with the fact that we have refused to associate with him. He spends days and nights obsessing about us, our website, and every single thing we do or say. I've never seen anything like it! It's like he has no life at all except the life he draws from his followers in their endless feeding frenzy on each other's opinions of Cassiopaea, about which they know almost nothing! Most and Dr. Nellie Oleson will produce endless pages of text about their analysis of me, or what we say or do, using either my own writings or Tom French's article to diagnose my psychosis, or megalomania, or whatever is the personality glitch du jour. He intimates that he has had long and friendly talks with Tom, and suggests that they are "hermanos," and they "both know" how dangerous I am. What he never mentions is the remark about Frank - and what may have been behind it - Tom made in his article: "He was very excited, and when F*** got excited, he could be a little pushy. Laura did not mind. She adored F***; besides, the unwritten contract of their relationship allowed great leeway for pushiness."

And it was certainly that way. Pushy. GREAT LEEWAY for pushiness, by the way. Noted in print by Tom French who could not fail to note it, and who also could not fail to note that I was most definitely tolerating a LOT from Frank. I truly adored Frank and that was and is the ONLY reason he continued with the group for as long as he did. This factor has also been noted by the six other active members of the group, some of whose remarks have been made public, others are reserved for legal and/or privacy reasons.

But this comment is ignored by Maynerd Most, all the while he "uses" Tom based on a phone call during which conversation he attempted to convince Tom that I am a raving megalomaniac trying to start a cult because we simply do not want to associate with him. Most tried to elicit from Tom French a "new opinion" of me, AFTER filling him in with the sordid details of my life according to Maynerd the "expert." I guess he thinks Tom was born yesterday.

As it happens, Tom usually calls me on my birthday, as he has for the past 7 years. We had a most interesting discussion this last birthday, you may be sure.

So, on the one hand, we have six respectable people, none of whom has ever even "fudged" their credentials [I admit that I have none freely. Well, that's not entirely true. I have certification in hypnosis; until I quit in 1996, I was listed in the directories of The American Counselors Society and The National Society of Clinical Hypnotherapists, neither of which is any kind of major endorsement. I also am an ordained minister, but I usually don't tell anybody because I don't do anything with it, and it's so easy to be ordained it doesn't count for anything in my opinion. In fact, it was only because my Reiki master said that in some states doing Reiki is only legal if you do it under the aegis of religious practice that I even bothered with it.] offering information that is direct and factual - along with supporting evidence - about a situation, and the individuals involved.

On the other hand, we have a proven liar and manipulator declaring that everything we say and do is directed at some sinister, nefarious purpose. He has nothing on which to base his statements other than just his say-so. So what we see is a very strange phenomenon that is quite similar to the situation surrounding Ira Einhorn. [What's more, Mr. Most has even likened himself to Ira Einhorn in his long fantastic autobiographical tale made up of moonshine and wishful thinking! He tells us so self-deprecatingly that Andrija Puharich liked him because he reminded him of Ira. My guess is that, just like his implied camaraderie with Tom French, Mr. Most just doing what he does best here again.] Not only is our "sin" the same as Holly's - she refused further association with Einhorn - many of the people around them believed HIM and not the evidence. People didn't just refuse to look at or consider the facts, they were quite simply unable to believe them. For Barbara Bronfman, it wasn't until years later - and after she had given many, many thousands of dollars to support Ira in exile - that she suddenly was able to "see" him, and recoiled in horror at how she had been used and manipulated and deceived. So it seems that there is some possibility that some victims DO eventually wake up. But many don't. And I would like to know why?

Over and over again I think about those remarks of Leon Festinger about Cognitive Dissonance:

Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.

But essentially, what we are talking about here is not anything like religious belief, or belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, or are we? What is it about the psychopath that makes them able to induce belief so strongly that people will even undertake to do illegal things for them, to lie for them, steal for them, join them in libel and cruel and hurtful activities against others? Is it a psychological weakness that drives people to prefer lies over truth? Or is it some power in the psychopath? Is there something going on at levels we do not perceive?

In the previous chapter we presented some of the ideas of psychology as to why such a phenomenon manifests most of which relate in some way to the idea that people will go along with and support a psychopath, in the face of evidence that they have and ARE being conned, because their own ego structure depends on being right, and to admit an error of judgment would destroy their carefully constructed image of themselves.

I don't think that's necessarily the best explanation. I think that it has more to do with Hare's remark that most people are gullible with an unshakable belief in the inherent goodness of man, and that is what makes them vulnerable. Because they don't lie, they cannot conceive of the level to which a psychopath will go to lie, and to create support for his lies. They have feelings and would never do such things themselves, and cannot conceive of a creature that does not have feelings. They just don't get it that the psychopath is not a real human being.

But it HAS to go deeper than that because not only do such people continue to support the psychopath, they become quite active in doing so. Even criminally so. This brings us to that remark of a victim of psychopathy we previously quoted:

"The essential feature of Psychopaths is a Pervasive, Obssesive- Compulsive desire to force their delusions on others. Psychopaths completely disregard and violate the Rights of others, particularly the Freedom of Association which includes the right not to associate."

And the person must always, always keep in mind that "forcing" a delusion in the context of the psychopath may have nothing at all to do with what we consider to be force. For the psychopath, the issue is to get the person to believe a lie by using his cleverness, his inborn ability to "sniff out" weaknesses and play on them to gradually turn his victim around just like a masterful horseman. This brings us to the crux of the matter: Psychopaths view any social exchange as a "feeding opportunity," a contest or a test of wills in which there can be only one winner. And it is here that we have found a clue.

Not all victims of psychopaths suffer as Holly Maddux did. Not all "secondary" victims suffer as Holly's family has. But as long as any of them continue to operate unrecognized, there is going to be suffering. If not you, then maybe someone you love. On what would have been Holly Maddux's 50^th birthday, her sister wrote:

"It has been a very long and painful 20 years since Holly's disappearance and death, an emotional place that is not frequently visited despite the multitude of ways that my life was forever changed with Ira's simple, selfish act. My siblings, their families, and I miss Holly. Even though they can hear stories about her, Holly's nephews and nieces will never get to know her as this absolutely wonderful and caring person. I hope no one else has to explain to children how and why someone much loved in the family is dead- trust me, it's not easy and it forces young ones to face fear more intimately than they would ever dream of, and so early in their lives.

"I am now much older than Holly ever was, and I have no older sister to compare notes on life and growing up with, like we had just started to do when she was killed. My own philosophy on life, something to do with the grace of God and the beauty of life and the peace that comes with all of that is continuously challenged when I hear of a similar situation - don't think for a minute that the OJ Simpson trial was easy to be around! Bottom line, someone is killed and their beautiful life is a memory that it is now up to you - and the hundreds of others whose lives that one special person touched - to remember. Something is just not fair here."

Holly Maddux had made a decision to no longer associate with Ira Einhorn. She said "No thanks, I don't want to hang out with you anymore." And Ira furiously and repeatedly bashed away at her head - the seat of the idea of refusal. She refused his delusion, and he completely disregarded and violated her right to choose who she would or would not associate with.

But such behavior does not just appear out of nowhere. If Ira was guilty of this, unless he just had a sudden fit of temporary madness, there MUST have been signs. How come nobody noticed? And if there were signs, how come they were not remembered at this crucial moment when Holly's body was found in Ira's closet? What was the power Ira had over the minds of other people? How did it manifest? Again and again we come to that question: what is it about seemingly intelligent and articulate people that makes them subject to the delusions of the psychopath? Is it something in the person being duped, or is it some power the psychopath has that other people don't?

We are going to look at that question. We want to know why:

"Psychopaths like myself emerge when societies are about to change." [Ira Einhorn]

Continue to Chapter 35

The owners and publishers of these pages wish to state that the material presented here is the product of our research and experimentation in Superluminal Communication. We invite the reader to share in our seeking of Truth by reading with an Open, but skeptical mind. We do not encourage "devotee-ism" nor "True Belief." We DO encourage the seeking of Knowledge and Awareness in all fields of endeavor as the best way to be able to discern lies from truth. The one thing we can tell the reader is this: we work very hard, many hours a day, and have done so for many years, to discover the "bottom line" of our existence on Earth. It is our vocation, our quest, our job. We constantly seek to validate and/or refine what we understand to be either possible or probable or both. We do this in the sincere hope that all of mankind will benefit, if not now, then at some point in one of our probable futures.

Contact Webmaster at cassiopaea.com
Copyright © 1997-2009 Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. All rights reserved. "Cassiopaea, Cassiopaean, Cassiopaeans," is a registered trademark of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk.
Letters addressed to Cassiopaea, Quantum Future School, Ark or Laura, become the property of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Republication and re-dissemination of the contents of this screen or any portion of this website in any manner is expressly prohibited without prior written consent.

You are visitor number [an error occurred while processing this directive] .