Was Karen De La Carriere a Prostitute? We Need to Talk About This, Too.

Karen De La Carriere a prostitute?

I’ve been waiting for her to file a defamation of character/libel lawsuit on the Church of Scientology for over a year now.

It appears here: http://www.leahreminiaftermath.com/articles/karen-de-la-carriere-white-paper.html

This is the most shocking thing I think I’ve ever seen about someone high up in the Church of Scientology – A Class 12 auditor, and the “Queen of Scientology”. How could Karen De La Carriere have been a prostitute, married to the President of the Church of Scientology Heber Jentsch, and be posted as an Executive at the Office of Special Affairs International for 5.5 years?

Karen De La Carriere Cheesecake Photo

Is this cheesecake? Or did Karen lose a contact lense?

I had friends freaking out and calling me about this when it first was placed on the internet, and I didn’t even want to watch it. I finally did and I can not believe that a lawsuit has not been filed on this.

It boggles my mind.

Was this pc folder information, or was it similar to the kind of information that Karen wanted to use against Ron Miscavige, Sr as a rapist when he was still a Scientologist: Were her admissions made outside of session to ethics officers, etc? Or was this all made up?

How did she ever get cleared for employment at the Int Base if this is true? A woman who is a friend of mine could not even become a Mission Holder because they said she had a history of prostitution.

So how in the hell did this work, exactly?

Was this part of her work with the Defense Department where she told me on the phone in 2010 that she ran intelligence operations on defense contractors?

I know I’m not supposed to bring these things up. I know that it’s an “enemy action” to do so. But is this why Karen doesn’t appear in any of the movies such as ‘Going Clear’ and ‘My Scientology Movie’, which she was so heavily involved in behind the scenes?

Karen De La Carriere My Scientology Movie

Karen De La Carriere on the set of Louis Theroux’s “My Scientology Movie”

Did they vett her? And if they vetted her, why didn’t Marty Rathbun, Mike Rinder and David Miscavige vett her when they all worked together running things from the Ecclesiastical Porch of Infinity at the Church of Scientology International?

Personally, this would not necessarily be a reason that I would “vett” anyone. But David Miscavige always sets himself up to be so “ethical” (that’s Scientology-ethical) and above such things as this. What does it say about him?

Has David Miscavige and the whole of the international management of Scientology been a huge bunch of moralistic hypocrites for the last 30 years?

So let’s not berate me for “forwarding the enemy line” here. That is Scientology policy which is part of their information control system and which works against critical thinking and informed decision making. I just want anyone in the know to please tell me how all this worked – and if it is true.

And if it’s not true, if Karen De La Carriere was never a prostitute, why was there no lawsuit?

, ,

9 Responses to Was Karen De La Carriere a Prostitute? We Need to Talk About This, Too.

  1. Miss Tia December 10, 2017 at 12:34 pm #

    I’m not gonna watch the video, but I will say a couple things, if I may.

    IF she was a prostitute, so what? There should be zero shame in that. And I stress the IF.

    People will not, at times, file suits even when a wrong is being committed against them. I absolutely do not know why Karen hasn’t filed and I am NOT trying to assume anything about her, I am speaking generally here. It’s easy to SAY ‘so and so should file a suit because they have a slam dunk case’….BUT there are other factors to consider:

    Cost: financial, emotional, and mental. Scientology has deep pockets and will draw out lawsuits for a long time in an attempt to bankrupt the other party. Lawsuits are stressful, whether you’re in the right or not, and this can affect your emotional and mental, also physical, health.

    Defamation/Slander definitions: States have different definitions. If someone is saying something that is not true, then it has to meet certain requirements, usually, has the individual lost income? Lost standing in their community? They also have to be able to PROVE that. Such as, I was fired from my job and it says on my termination form it was because of them reading this; or I lost a contract with a business because they saw this and here is their email to me saying so. I was on the neighborhood block watch but after this came out they informed me, via included letter, they thought it best I resign after this hit the press. Etc.

    Personal life on display: Once you file a suit claiming something that was said/written/etc affected you, you are opening yourself up to having your personal life on display. Lawsuits are public record. The defense can ask questions in interrogatories related to your claims. For instance, you claimed they falsely portrayed you as a prostitute. They could ask you about your sex life. That would be part of the suit and it’d be public.

    Sometimes it’s just best to try to ignore those things and move forward with your life. I know that might sound defeatist, but it’s realistic. I’ve had attorneys explain to me actionable things for lawsuits before and even if it IS actionable, you have to weigh all the costs.

    Personally, I don’t think we need to talk about if Karen was a prostitute. It’s just feeding their propaganda machine.

    • Alanzo December 10, 2017 at 12:50 pm #

      I agree – “so what?”.

      But we can only talk about one side of the propaganda machine and not both?

      Because Tony Ortega and Karen De La Carriere and Mike Rinder and all the rest of the Anti-Scientologists are running propaganda machines, too. And I believe that all the lies – on both sides – are harming Exes after Scientology.

      So when the Church doesn’t file lawsuits against Leah Remini and her show, does that mean everything Leah and Mike allege are true – as they repeatedly claim – or does it just mean that the Church does not want to get into depositions about all kinds of other things – just like could be the case with Karen here, too?

      See how both sides mis-use the truth in their propaganda?

      Why should we swallow, or even put up with, this kind of propaganda from either side?

      This is increasingly where I’m at lately: Both Scientology and Anti-Scientology are bereft of the truth. And I will no longer tolerate it.

      • marildi December 10, 2017 at 1:19 pm #

        “So when the Church doesn’t file lawsuits against Leah Remini and her show, does that mean everything Leah and Mike allege are true – as they repeatedly claim – or does it just mean that the Church does not want to get into depositions about all kinds of other things…”

        Isn’t it pretty clear that Miscavige would be depositioned – and that he is going to avoid that at all costs?

      • Virginia December 10, 2017 at 1:20 pm #

        The Church video drops out decades of time between events, not to mention doesn’t actually give any dates for all the supposed prostitution.

        The kept woman time period would have been in the mid to late 1960’s, judging from the name of the London Club, which was before her time in Scientology.

        The Church then says that she was expelled “for” prostitution so what are they trying to say here? She ran a prostitution ring while in the Sea Org? That’s just ludicrous.

        They mash that statement up against a number of pictures of Karen, a number of which can still be found right now on her own website in the photo gallery section here: http://karendelac.com/.

        So how is that an “expose”?

        They then juxtapose those kind of pcs up against ads which the Church portrays as Karen soliciting “johns” I guess. At least one of these whatever they are, ads, I personally saw on I think it was her old myspace page 7 or 8 years ago).

        Given that at least one of these seems to be real, perhaps there is another reason that Karen was running such ads?

        Considering your other post here about her years as a Defense Department operative, Alanzo, it’s not out of the range of possibility that perhaps these activities went together in some way. Using women in such ways is an old, old, OLD methodology of intelligence ops.

        Anyway, the church video is every bit as bad and as smarmy as what we see sometimes in anti-scientology media these days – tabloid reporting.

        It’s SO bad, I have difficulty believing that its not intentional as in its not REALLY exposing anything about Karen.

        Where’s their “she ran this and that op” exposes? If they really wanted to damage her so-called reputation, they’d start truly opening up their files.

        Why don’t they?

        Unless…never mind. Let’s not go there. I’m not even awake enough for that yet.

        • Alanzo December 10, 2017 at 1:27 pm #

          “Where’s their “she ran this and that op” exposes? If they really wanted to damage her so-called reputation, they’d start truly opening up their files.”

          Exactly. The Church is as quiet about the OSA ops Karen ran on critics at OSA Int, as they are about the OSA Ops that Mike Rinder ran on critics, too. And both Karen and Mike themselves are deathly quiet about the Ops they ran on critics when they worked together at OSA Int.

          When it comes to their long history of fair game operations against critics of the Church of scientology – both sides are quiet.

          Why?

          Again, we really need to talk about these things. There are FAR too many secrets still being held by the people running anti-Scientology propaganda who are – astoundingly – the same people who ran Scientology propaganda for so many years.

      • Miss Tia December 10, 2017 at 2:07 pm #

        This post doesn’t, at least to me, come across as trying to convey what you are expressing in this reply. That basically you believe all the lies are harming exes after Scientology. Instead, you’re questioning the veracity of their information and where it might have come from. Plus, if it’s true, why she hasn’t sued.

        If you wanted to write about it in a manner comparing/contrasting how both sides lie, where is truth in some statements, etc that’s one thing. This, to me anyway, didn’t read like that and your reply to me is like a whole ‘new’ post.

        Both sides of the propaganda machine should be talked about, I agree. The lies are harmful to not only exes, but even to Scientology watchers who get involved on the basis of lies. No one should tolerate it.

        • Alanzo December 10, 2017 at 2:18 pm #

          Yes. It’s the overall point behind a lot of the posts I’ve been writing lately.

      • Gib December 10, 2017 at 10:40 pm #

        the truth, no clears or ot’s

        • Alanzo December 10, 2017 at 11:33 pm #

          But is this really the truth?

          I mean in the grand scheme of things?

          I’m sure youve heard of the incontrovertable proof of the harmonics of clear, right?

          And the FACT that in order to go OT, you have to be OT?

          What about that Gib????

          I’m Appalled at your lack of theta perceptics.

Clicky