Response to (Name Withheld)
by Lyn Buchanan
Dear ------,
In your email to Joe you said:
>... His (Ed's) thought at the time was that his "media agent"
>(NFI) had pieced it together from notes and recollections of
>things said or discussed in the past, and had added stuff
>the agent thought was true but that he had either misunderstood
>or imagined.
One of the first things I noticed when I read Ed's two statements was that they were both in 3rd person, as though it were written about him by someone else rather than being a statement he made, himself. I think you're correct that he didn't make all those rediculous claims. I don't see how he could have.
However, that may worry me more than if he had said those things, himself. It indicates that he is out there telling exaggerated stories to people who don't understand even the first iota about the intelligence business or world, and who don't have the foggiest notion about how to maintain accuracy when repeating or reporting what they have heard. He's talking too much - and to the wrong people. I hate to remind everyone of the obvious, but this stuff is still classified. I have been very worried about Ed lately. One of his ex-students, as you know, took Ed's 9-day course, came home and wrote a book, and is now starting his own remote viewing school. (I worry about that, too, but his (the ex-student's) heart seems to be in the right place, in spite of his near total lack of experience. We'll see how it flies.)
Anyway, he (the ex-student) showed me the first galley proofs of his book, and in the first chapter was a list of almost everyone in the project. Now, there was no way he could have gotten those names by himself, and Ed is the only person he knows who could have given them to him. I don't know about you, but one of the first rules I ever learned about clandestine work was, "Even if you've broken under interrogation and giving away secrets, you NEVER tell the other agents' names. You die first." Yet, there it was... a fairly complete list. All I could think of was that Ed had committed treason, and I couldn't understand why.
I reacted strongly, and he (Ed's ex-student) took that information out of his book. I convinced him to erase and overwrite all backup copies and every past version of any file which might contain that chapter. The idea of him going to all the trouble and considerable expense of writing the book, and then having it confiscated from the market because a few pages contained classified information didn't please him too much. I don't know if that would have happened, but he got rid of the information, anyway.
My point is that while most people focus on the fact that the project was mainly classified to protect politicians from their constituents, there were certain other very valid reasons for the classification. The first that comes to mind is protection of those doing the work from those who would like to see us stopped from doing it, and wouldn't care how they stopped us. I happen to think that's a very valid reason!
Ed spoke at a public conference about 3 years ago and, to an audience of total strangers, began talking about what PsiTech had done. He mentioned several of PsiTech's projects, and included one that I had done as a personal project, and had only told him the results of. He claimed that PsiTech personnel had done it, and barely 2 minutes later in the talk, gave my name. I didn't know about any of this until I was officially approached by you-know-who and handed the transcript of it - in the publicly published Conference minutes, on sale to anyone. I was furious. I called Ed about it. I told him, "That's a country full of crazy -----s with guns, and I have an unarmed family!" He laughed it off and said, "Don't worry about it! Nobody ever reads that stuff, anyway!"
Do you personally know of any government on this planet which doesn't have a group of people sitting around gleaning open-source literature for intelligence purposes? I don't. I am absolutely certain that there is now a file in that certain country's foreign intel group's safe with my name on it and "flagged". Ed had no right to do that, and I told him so in no uncertain terms. Yet, when I saw that first chapter of the book this year, there was my name and everyone else's.
I was talking to Ingo not long ago and dumped a lot of this concern and frustration on him. He was surprised at how upset I was, and said that he thought Ed and I were friends. I told him, and I still say, that Ed IS a friend. I like Ed. But that doesn't mean I have to like what he is doing.
CRV is a phenomenal and sensational thing in its own rights. OK, so it was used by the government. That's not surprising - it's a very useful tool. The surprising thing is that they admitted it. OK, so he was in on it. Big deal! Several of us were. Why can't he let it go and get on with his work? Why does he have to still be MAJOR Dames? He's MISTER Dames now! Live with it! So we did a lot of good work... we were unsung heroes... we MORE than did our part. Now, it's time to get on with life.
OK, I'll get off my soap box now.
Lyn
Return to the News & Comments menu
Return to the Main menu
The Controlled Remote Viewing Home Page is a service of
Problems->Solutions->Innovations (P>S>I),
26944 Bosse Drive, Mechanicsville, MD 20659
Tel: (301)884-5856 /
email: rviewer@mail.ameritel.net
Your comments and questions are encouraged.