Site hosted by Build your free website today!

rodomontade part 2


Before discussing the role of the Ethics Council in this matter, the following information has been available on the Aricalist : -

The Circumstances of the Allegation and the Denial. On 8th November 1998, Betsy Ross posted on the Aricalist that Carolina Ichazo O'Connor (Oscar Ichazo's daughter) alleged that her father had had sex with her. On 10th November Stephan Gorad posted on the Aricalist the following :

"The interchange that occurred here in our apartment between Carolina, Betsy, Paz [Huunees], Carolina's husband Michael, and myself was very intense. At times all of the women were crying (and the two men were kind of stunned). Carolina is carrying a lot of pain about her relationship with her father, and the emotion was infectious….I understand that a lot of you would like to believe that Carolina's statements were only meant to slander Oscar, or that they were only "recovered memories," and that they were in fact not true. This is not the case. I knew about this incest many, many years ago. Other people who were there at the time knew about it."

Subsequently Oscar Ichazo published a Denial : -

"Oscar's Comments to Roger Zim, Speaker of the Ethics Council November 11, 1998

"It is with great relief that the story from Carolina has been publicly exposed in order for the matter to be examined with the perspective necessary to clarify it properly. I had never heard of her story, which I understand has been circulating for years, until late this past Spring when, upon hearing it, I was deeply saddened by the fact that I had a daughter of this character. In order for Carolina's motivation to be understood a brief history of her life and association with me is important.

I left Bolivia when Carolina was an infant, having divorced her mother. I only saw her once after that and in 1969 I brought her to live in Arica, Chile in order that she could start her university studies. We never lived under the same roof - not even for one night. I bought a house for her and gave her a car. I only saw her during group gatherings.

Just before I left Chile for New York she married and I paid for the wedding, and she continued to receive money from me for the next three years. At that point I could no longer sustain her, her marriage fell apart, and she returned to Bolivia. In order to support herself, she could find no way better than to be involved in shadowy activities, where she met her present husband.

In 1983 Carolina, Michael, and Eric (my grandson) came to New York to visit. Sarah and I entertained them for a week and have photographs of us all together. At the same time she asked me for money which I didn't have. I told her then that inasmuch as she continued to support herself and her family with certain types of activities, she could not contact me under any circumstances. Since they continued their business, we never heard from them - no contact address, no Christmas cards, no birthday greetings - nothing.

In 1991, I received a letter from her, including photographs of the children, which I still have. She says in her letter, "Oscar Ichazo, the father God gave me. The only father I have on this planet. I call on your superior spirit and ask that if in any way I have offended you, hurt or failed you in any way, in this life, or previous ones, or in any other plane or circumstances, I ask your forgiveness." After this, she proceeds to ask me for $20,000 in order that she could establish a business of exporting Chilean products to Canada. Firstly, I didn't have the money, not then or now, and secondly, I wouldn't give her the money since I knew it was going to be invested in her business activities. I knew that any association with Carolina would put me in the position of an investor and promoter of her business.

In April 1998, a letter addressed to Sarah arrived with the signature typed, instead of signed, from Carolina repeating her accusations and saying that if Sarah doesn't contact her that she is going to tell everybody (this is plain extortion). In order to determine if the letter was a hoax, or not, the office wrote asking her to resend the letter she wrote and sign it in order for it to be passed on to Sarah as a legitimate letter. She never resent the letter, so we could only assume it was a hoax of the worst sort.

Now she comes, insisting in this scandal about her accusations, but I cannot become involved in them. I must leave it to the people who have lived with me in Chile, who know for a fact that I never had much contact with Carolina, who I saw periodically in School gatherings and never alone.

It is a terrible disadvantage to have people in the School who are such dedicated, gratuital enemies, who I find are like a fountain of disillusionment, because of their incessant malevolence and plain antagonism towards me when they have no grounds for their malicious gossip. If Carolina doesn't retract her accusations, I have no choice but to disinherit her legally, for someone of her character cannot be my daughter. It is such a shame that Carolina has to make her accusations at the point when my work is coming to fruition and it will produce an enormous revenue for the School, the promotion of the work, and a more comfortable lifestyle for Sarah, my family and me, especially my grandchildren."

AH's Comments On The Role Of The Ethics Council. First, I wish to make it absolutely clear that I express no view on the truthfulness or otherwise of the daughter's allegation or the father's denial. What I do want to comment on in this matter is the role of the Ethics Council.

The Ethics Council is governed by The Arica School Statutes Charter, section 2(5) of which states : "The Ethics Council, in the spirit of reconciliation, respecting confidentiality and due process, may make an inquiry into any matter affecting the School. (See Note 3)." Note 3 states: "Due process means taking the necessary time to process the matter to its highest clarification under the circumstances. In any matter coming before them, the Ethics Council is committed to a fair and open process with the individuals concerned."

In the light of the above commitment one would have thought the Ethics Council would have wished to remain impartial between the daughter and the father until the truth of the matter had been established. Instead, Roger Zim in his role of Speaker of the Ethics Council published the father's denial to the School, thereby giving it the Ethics Council seal of approval. This is a very odd sense of "due process".

If the Ethics Council had not been rushing to act as the father's press office, they might have realized that this matter does deserve an inquiry. First, from the account of Carolina's revelation as related by Stephan Gorad, it appears that all the people present found her a convincing witness. The women were described as "crying" and the men were described as "stunned". Secondly, Stephan Gorad states : "I knew about this incest many, many years ago. Other people who were there at the time knew about it." In the light of this, it's astonishing that the Ethics Council took no action to understand what had happened. The action the Ethics Council did take was to write to Betsy Ross, effectively accusing her of being an enemy of humanity, and suggesting she go "in the water", i.e. leave the School. A clear case of shooting the messenger rather than paying attention to the message. The Ethics Council was also clearly sending a message to other members of the School - if you find anything wrong keep quiet, or you'll get the same.

If the Ethics Council had not been busy attacking the messenger, a number of observations and questions might have come to mind : -

1) What sexual activity does Carolina allege took place between her and her father. Where and when did this take place? How old was Carolina at the time? Did Carolina consent to the alleged sexual activity? Where any Aricans or other persons involved? Does Carolina have any witnesses of what she alleges?

2) Oscar Ichazo attempts to destroy Carolina's credibility as a witness by accusing her (and her husband) of being involved in "shadowy activities". Is there any evidence to corroborate this accusation? Needless to say, Carolina's involvement or non-involvement in "shadowy activities" does not prove or disprove her allegation of incest but it does affect her credibility as a witness. In any event, if Carolina's life does turn out to be a complete mess, might this be a consequence of the alleged abuse?

3) Oscar Ichazo attempts to destroy Carolina's credibility as a witness by alleging Carolina sent him an unsigned letter of extortion. What is the text of the letter? Can the letter fairly be construed as a letter of extortion? If Carolina had been abused by her father, could she have not reasonably sought (what she would see as) reparation from her father?

4) There is one internal inconsistency in Oscar Ichazo's denial letter. In the paragraph relating to the alleged extortion letter, he talks about Carolina "repeating her accusations". Of course in 1998, according to Oscar Ichazo, Carolina was not repeating any allegations. Oscar Ichazo's account in the previous paragraph of the 1991 letter makes no mention of allegations. Is this just a slip of the pen or is it evidence of fabrication? [If one were to believe Carolina's allegation, a possible explanation of this discrepancy is that Carolina only wrote down her complaint against her father in 1998. Previously, her complaint had been made orally only. This could be why Oscar Ichazo says "repeating" when according to his account, no allegation had been previously made. This hypothesis may shed light on Oscar Ichazo's curious statement that "I had never heard of her story, which I understand has been circulating for years". Is it not peculiar that the story had been circulating for years and he had never heard of it?]

5) Who are the people Stephan Gorad said knew about this alleged incest years ago, and what do they know?

6) In his penultimate paragraph, Oscar Ichazo states : ". I must leave it to the people who have lived with me in Chile, who know for a fact that I never had much contact with Carolina, who I saw periodically in School gatherings and never alone." The question is who are these people and what is their testimony? The observation is that in this paragraph, Oscar Ichazo denies that he had "much contact" with Carolina and that he was "never alone" with her. Here, Oscar Ichazo is making specific denials but not of that which his daughter accuses him. It would be clearer if his denial was more specific.

I emailed a member of the Ethics Council on 3rd December 1998, suggesting the Ethics Council should investigate Carolina's allegations. I suggested the Ethics Council should appoint a non Arican Chairman for the investigation, so that Carolina could expect fair play and that justice could be seen to be done.

"ARICA INSTITUTE INC 145 Palisade Street, Suite 401 Dobbs Ferry, NY 10522-16617

Jan 7th, 1999

Dear Andrew, This letter is dated Dec. 17th and I attempted to e-mail it to you at that time. I have just received your new e-mail address and will try to resend it today. Normally the Ethics Council communicates as a team over the signature of the Secretary. However, Roger Zim has processed with the Ethics Council his desire to respond directly to you since he has personal experience regarding Carolina O'Connor. His letter follows.

Lincoln Freeman Secretary

December 17, 1998

Dear Andrew,

Thank you for your communication to the Ethics Council regarding Carolina O'Connors accusations. You are correct that these allegations, if not dealt with properly and completely, could resurface in the future, to the detriment of the School.

To update you on this matter; in the past month Oscar has been in touch with Carolina several times and they have begun to clean the karma that undoubtedly exists in their relationship. Carolina, her husband and their children are planning to visit Oscar and Sarah in Hawaii during the Christmas Holidays. I would suggest that we respect their family process and wait until after the holidays to see what further action, if any, needs be taken.

Let me also say that, as a member of the 'Chile group' that worked with Oscar in Arica in 1970, I was an eyewitness to the interaction between Carolina and Oscar. That is why, when I first read Betsy Ross'report of her conversation with Carolina, I believed it was a terrible mistake, both for Carolina and for Betsy, who accepted and published (without verification) Carolina's story.

At the time Carolina alleges the events occurred, Oscar lived in a small house in Arica with Jenny Perada, his assistant and general aide. Jenny was always with Oscar: She drove him to his meetings with us and took him away afterwards. There was literally no time when these events could have taken place. The only time Carolina and Oscar were even in the same room was at our parties, which Carolina attended at the invitation of the Chileans. Any of the Chileans, who were in Arica, can verify this, as can any of the 'Chile group.'

Please also note that your statement, "...the "Ethics Council did kick the person who published the allegation out of the School," is not true. The Ethics Council is currently processing with Betsy Ross because she has shown a marked lack of self-responsibility and other points of the Arica Ethos in her postings on the e-mail conference. The insights of pillars 10 and 11 of the Fourteen Pillars of Perfect Recognition seem particularly germane to this process and I would recommend them to you for your own self-observation.

Best wishes for the holidays. In the spirit of the Arica Ethos,

Toham Kum Rah

Roger Zim"

AH's Comment : I was amazed not to get a response from the Ethics Council. What credibilty can the Ethics Council have in this matter when Roger Zim is acting as Oscar Ichazo's public relations officer, is a member of the Ethics Council and now is a witness for Oscar Ichazo as well? This is a hopeless conflict of interest. Roger Zim should recuse himself from the Ethics Council while they look into the allegation. As I suggested, the Ethics Council needs to appoint a non Arican chairman to see the basic principles of Natural Justice are complied with. Roger Zim could then properly give his testimony to such a reconstituted Ethics Council. At least this solution would avoid the obvious conclusion that the Ethics Council has taken no action because it only ever does exactly what Oscar Ichazo tells it to. [For more information, see below under Section 9 'Mind Control in Arica', Subsection d) 'Enemy of Humanity/Totalitarianism'.]


Part One "…Oscar moved to New York City where he taught this theory and practice to over a hundred thousand participants at the Arica Institute from 1971 to 1981." The Arica, Autumn 1996 P17.

"Currently we have a total of 614 members versus 672 members by the end of our last fiscal year." Arica Day of Unity (ADU) Report, December 13 1998.

AH's Comment - So the 100,000 people Oscar Ichazo taught from 1971 to 1981 plus the people taught thereafter yield 614 members. Ignoring, the people taught after 1981, 100,000 students yielding 614 members is a conversion rate of 0.614%. The "Violet Door Meditation" Step 34 (The Arican, Winter 1990 P69) mentions "millions upon millions of Aricans". Well with a conversion rate of 0.614%, to produce one million Aricans, over 161 million people would need to take Arica trainings. Does this seem likely to you any time soon?

Part Two

The same December 1998 ADU also notes that "income from product sales is expected to be down $35,000, a reduction of approximately 35% from last year". Also "Income from sponsor royalties is also expected to decline steeply this year…. a reduction of 46%". Nowhere in the 15 page ADU Report is there any discussion of why the income has gone down, or why membership is dropping. This is simply incredible when it is considered that this "Report" includes the Board report and the Treasurer's report at the AGM. However, the Report does contain a statement from the Board describing the new Protoanalytical trainings as being "brilliant and concise". This is what has been described as the "reality gap". If the trainings really were "brilliant and precise", the membership would not be going down and revenues would not be collapsing. I ask the reader to ask him or herself why no one at the meeting felt able to make this simple observation?


Recently while reviewing Arica materials for this note, I came across an Arican dated Fall 1986 in which a "Members' Newsletter" appeared. This rediscovery surprised me as this Letter (which contains much interesting historical material) is not included in the book called Letters to the School (Arica Press, 1988) which contains all Oscar Ichazo's significant letters of this time. Then it dawned on me why. The letter starts "I have received letters from members of the School in reference to the current book by Macklin Smith about Prudentius' work Psychomachia." After reading this I checked the two Arica manuals which contain parts one and two of "The Golden Eye Ritual", which contain the Arica psychomachia work. In the lengthy introductions to the two parts of the training, the reader would not know the word psychomachia had ever been used before. There are no references to the classical works of psychomachia. Furthermore, in The Golden Eye Ritual Initiation Manual, the word "Psychomachia" is even listed as a service mark of the Arica Institute!

I suspect that the discovery by his students of the classical author Prudentius came as an unwelcome surprise to Oscar Ichazo. Oscar Ichazo's letter contains a protestation that "The psychomachia I propose is a totally different type of work…". Clearly Oscar Ichazo was happy for this incident to be forgotten. Although the fall 1986 letter does contain interesting historical information about various historical examples of psychomachia, this work (almost uniquely) was not chosen for inclusion in the book and so was excluded from the permanent record. My guess is that there is very little original at all in Oscar Ichazo's presentation of psychomachia. All he did was take the classical concept and mold it into the usual ninefold Arica classification. If the fall 1986 letter had been included in the book "Letters to the School", it would have appeared between the letters of April 1986 and November 1986. Both these letters are long complaints about the plagiarism of Oscar Ichazo's fixation work. Given the derivative nature of Oscar Ichazo's psychomachia and the lack of acknowledgment in the original training manual, this would have been a very awkward juxtaposition. Finally, it has been pointed out to me, that the rest of the eighth level work (MS1 and Divine Nature) is very similar to Tibetan Bhuddism. This is a subject of which I know little and so will abstain from further comment except to say this might be an interesting angle for someone else to research.

More lovely links

ahead to the fantastic spine-chilling rodomontade conclusion
return to rodomontade part 1
return to metaton home page
a break at the theatre?