My name is Robert Lancaster.

I am a computer programmer living in the Los Angeles area.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

You shouldn't.

You should read and consider the contents of this site.

You should dig around the web and see what you can find.

If you have access to "Kaz," you might ask her to explain some of the holes in her story.

Then, you should make up your own mind.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

No. Prior to my research into "Kaz," I had never met, spoken nor corresponded with any member of the deMille family, nor anyone representing them. As of this writing (8/16/2004), my contact with them has been limited to email and some online messaging. I am not - nor have I ever been - in their employ, nor have I received any payment (from them or anyone else) for anything I have done in relation to "Kaz" or this web site.

The views I express on this site are my own.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

My mother heard "Kaz" speak, and was extremely impressed with her, and her story. When she (my mother) related "Kaz's" story to me, it sounded suspicious, to say the least.

I may have left it at that, if "Kaz" had not claimed to have survived the attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001. If that claim was false, then I felt that what she was doing was spitting on the graves of all of those people who perished on that day, and was a slap in the face to those who actually DID survive.

That bothered me. A lot.

At that point, I started searching the web for information on "Kaz" and her claims, and the lack of supporting articles about her was, to me, an enormous red flag.

I continued searching and gathering information, and the results of that search are on this web site. I created it in hopes that others who meet "Kaz" and search for information regarding her on the web will find this site, and find its contents food for thought.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

Not to everyone. I have spoken with several reasonable, intelligent people who initially accepted her story, and only later began to have their doubts about her. I have spoken with others who had no doubts at all about her until I pointed out many of the holes in her story.

Keep in mind: reading all of her claims here, one after the other (with my questions and comments) is a very different experience than hearing them in person, one at a time (many of the claims are never made in front of a large group, but only in front of individuals and small groups of people). And evidently "Kaz" is a very charismatic and persuasive speaker.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if there were a term for the psychological effect of hearing a story while in a group, particularly in a group of similarly-minded people (such as in a church). Even if a person within the group has a little doubt of the story, they look around and see everyone else accepting the story, and - perhaps ashamed that they doubted someone with such a "Christian message" - the small doubt is pushed away and forgotten.

One woman I spoke to said that after she had accepted "Kaz's" story, she later heard other elements she did not believe (such as the "rock from Jesus"). When I asked her why she had continued to believe the rest of the story, she said that she had simply chosen at some level to "not think about" the parts of the story she did not believe.

There is an all-too-human tendency to selectively ignore unpleasant truths about things, people and beliefs we hold dear. Sometimes referred to as "ignoring the elephant in the living room," this allows some people to continue accepting "Kaz's" story despite any number of red flags which they have noticed, but have chosen to ignore.

What I hope to do with this site is to put a bright spotlight on that elephant, and to set a marching band to parading around it in a circle, until it becomes impossible to ignore.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

No. I am an agnostic, meaning that I do not claim to know whether or not there is a supreme being.

I am not "anti-Christian".

I am anti-"Kaz."

And if I am correct about her (and I firmly believe that I am), she isn't a Christian. She is a wolf in sheep's clothing, fleecing flock after flock.

I have heard that "Kaz" is now telling pastors of churches where she speaks that they should ignore what I say, because I am an "unbeliever."

To that I would say this: If a man tells a shepherd that there is a wolf among his flock, the shepherd doesn't ignore the man if he is a not a Christian. The shepherd checks it out to make sure his flock is safe.

Similarly, I would hope that a pastor would not ignore this site because I am not a Christian, but would read it with an open mind, and decide for themself whether or not there is a wolf scheduled to speak in front of their flock.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

No. I am critical of her because she makes claims without backing them up, and she - if I am correct about her - is callously attempting to obtain money and admiration by riding on the coattails of one of the greatest tragedies that America has ever known.

Her religious/spiritual claims (having died, meeting God, talking to Him, receiving a "mission" from Him) are really of no consequence to the issues I raise here. Of course, if the rest of her 9/11 story is untrue, then these claims, which are intrinsically a part of her 9/11 story, must then also be untrue.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

No.

Exposure of a fraud within the Christian community is not an attack on the church.

In fact, it is something I believe that Christians should support and welcome.

A reverend by the name of Nathan Wilson has created a web site which exposes another possible example of fraud within the church. On his site's FAQ page, Wilson says the following on the subject (emphasis mine):

"This is not only a permissible thing for a Christian to do, it is something that, in principle, every Christian should want to do. Christians should hate lies, but above all else, lies told within the Church at large. Religious fraud isn't only a lie about a thing (a miraculous healing, contact with angels, a relic, etc.). Religious fraud is a lie about the Church and Christ Himself. It is just another way of taking the Lord's name in vain. We should want to debunk religious hypocrisy far more than we want to debunk secular hypocrisy. We should want lies gone because we love the Church and want her pure. I was very happy to publish my article on all this with a Christian magazine. Christians should be the first ones to holler if there is a possibility of deception within the camp. The world should never have to do our laundry for us."

Can exposing "Kaz's" fraud cause embarrassment to some within the church? Of course. And that's unfortunate. If it could have been handled privately, I would have done so.

But the very nature of what "Kaz" is doing requires a public exposure of it, in order to get the word out to as many potential victims of her scam as possible.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

If she is not telling the truth about her story and herself, then no matter what her "message," is, it is couched in lies, and is (in my opinion) an insult to all of those people who were really in the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001. If you see no harm in any of that, and think of it as a "positive message," then I really don't know what else to say.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

I am agnostic, but here is my take on that:

It is true that bad events can have some positive consequences.

For example, the death of a child getting run down by a drunk driver in a crosswalk could have the result of making that child's friends more careful when they cross the street in the future.

That doesn't make drunk driving an acceptable behavior.

And it doesn't mean that we should allow someone to drive who we know is drunk.

A Christian friend had this to say on the subject:

"Jesus was all about the truth. He wouldn't approve of allowing someone to tell lies on His behalf."

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

Some do. Some most definitely do not.

Sometimes a church will simply accept the recommendation of a member of their congregation. Also, if that member of the congregation saw the speaker give a talk at another church, it is all-too-easy to assume that the speaker's story was checked out by THAT church.

And some churches, like some people, will seemingly not question a person's claims, no matter how fantastic, as long as those claims are made within the context of a Christian-sounding message.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

If the contents of this site have given you cause for concern, you need to express that concern to the leaders of your church/organization, and/or to whoever schedules speakers there.

Refer them to this site (or print it out for them) so that they can see the reasons for your concern, and decide for themselves what course of action, if any, is appropriate.

If you would feel uncomfortable sharing this information with your minister, or if you feel it would be helpful if I I contacted him/her, feel free to email me (see this site's Contact page) and let me know.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

As with the previous question, if the contents of this site have given you cause for concern, you need to express that concern to the leaders of your church/organization, as well as to whoever schedules speakers there.

Refer them to this site (or print it out for them) so that they can see the reasons for your concern, and decide for themselves what course of action, if any, is appropriate.

Some actions they may wish to consider:

• If they have already recommended "Kaz" to other churches/organizations, they may wish to call them and inform them of any concerns they have.

• An announcement of any concerns to the congregation/group may be appropriate. While this may be uncomfortable, it allows members of the group to consider this before in turn recommending "Kaz" to yet another group.

If you would feel uncomfortable sharing this information with your minister, or if you feel it would be helpful if I I contacted him/her, feel free to email me (see this site's Contact page) and let me know.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

I am interested in any input you may have about this woman. If you have any such information, please see the site's Contact page.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

If I am given proof that any of her claims on the site's Claims page are true, I will post that proof.

If the majority of those claims are proven to be true, and if the majority of the questions on the site's Questions page are answered to my satisfaction (and in a way which supports her story), I will take this site down and replace it with an apology to "Kaz."

Do I expect that to happen?

No.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

The person making a claim is the one who needs to provide proof that the claim is true.

And, as they say, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof.

If I were to claim "I can fly like Superman," the burden of proof would not be on you to prove that I can't fly.

It would be on me to prove than I can.

Similarly, the burden of proof for all of "Kaz's" extraordinary claims lies squarely on her.

And she has yet to provide proof for any of them.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

I definitely have an opinion on this, but, from the standpoint of this board, the answer is:

It doesn't matter.

I firmly believe, based on all I have seen, heard and read, that her story is false.

Whether that story is, as I say on this site's opening page, "the ramblings of a sadly deluded mind, or the lies of a con artist" does not matter.

Because either way, she needs to stop.

Return to list of "Frequently Asked Questions."

---

Next: Read what's new on the site at the News page.

---

---

Copyright © 2004-2006, Robert S. Lancaster