firedocs media/politics article

Section: Dames Trashes Remote Viewers


Although I'd already provided a rebuttal to a very public and very slanderous post made by Psi-Tech against other people in the remote viewing field, whom I have investigated, become familiar with and feel certainly deserve respect and defense, there are some things I missed, as well as issues that should be responded to by the persons themselves. Mr. McMoneagle did not want his clarifying comments to me to become public; he seems to feel, as does just about everybody in this field, that the negative politics by Mr. Dames are bad enough; that responding only creates more flames and further misdirects the public away from the vital issue, which is remote viewing itself, and he does not want to participate in or perpetuate this behavior. Misc. intelligence officers who were part of the remote viewing Army unit provided me comments personally, most of which I also must keep private; but they are probably only added fuel to flame anyway. Mr. Buchanan provided some comments and clarifications, and since he is the person attacked, and since he cleared up some things I was slightly in error about or incomplete about, I did feel his comments should be made public along with my initial point by point rebuttal.


Point by Point response to
Ed Dames's 14 October 1996 attack on Remote Viewers
by Lyn Buchanan

Items in <<brackets>> are quotes from a letter posted to the public on the Psi-Tech web site on October 14, 1996, signed by Edward Dames, President of Psi-Tech Corporation.

Responses are from Leonard Buchanan.

<<This group of individuals had failed to make the grade as trained military remote viewers.>>

This is one of the few times Ed has ventured so far as to say "failed". If you look closely at this repeated theme, he usually says something to the effect of "could not pass MY test", and further, always uses the subjunctive, leaving as implied the phrase "(If he/they had taken my test, he/they) could not pass it." The way it is usually said makes the phrase "could not pass" equate in people's minds to "failed".

The actual fact is that he never gave a CRV test to me or anyone else. Had no reason to anyway. It's all in the wording. I was surprised to see this sentence. It is way past the disinformation phase over into pure lying.


<<he had called Sergeant Buchanan for help, but that Buchanan's response was, "If I use remote viewing to help you, and the CIA found out, they would come and get me."

This is not what I said. I told the guy that I don't work for the families, but with the police. When he kept calling and pressing, I told him that I can't work for the families because I still have a top secret clearance, used for computer contracts in DC, whenever they need the original programmer to come out and work on a programs—which I originally programmed.

There is a presidential order (originally Executive Order 11-905. I think the latest version is Executive Order 12-333) which states that American intel agents will not collect information on any U.S. Citizen unless properly directed to by Congress, or unless working for an authorized government agency (which must meet its own jump- through- the- hoop requirements before doing any tasking against US citizens).

The EO then goes on to list the authorized government agencies at all governmental levels down to city and town governments. One of the agency categories is specifically stated as "police organizations involved in criminal investigations".

[PJ is] right that I fall back on this as a way to keep from working with the families, when they won't listen to anything else, but the actual fact is that it is absolutely true. If I did work for the families, I could 1) lose my clearance and 2) be subjected to fines of up to $10,000, and 3) be given a jail sentence of up to 10 years. Would all that happen? Probably not. I, for one, don't care to test it. I will not work for the families. It is against the law for me to do so.

In my conversations with Mr. LaGuardia (the man who called, wanting me to work for him because he felt that the police "weren't doing anything"), I explained all this in great detail and never said anything about the "CIA coming to get me".

(PJ said) "...Lyn ... knows plenty of people who can and would, so there would STILL be no reason for him to simply refuse a case..."

That's right. If someone wanted, they could infer that my turning the case over to someone else would be the same as working on it - to even that minor amount. In spite of that, what I generally do is call one or more viewer(s) and tell them I have a case where they would be working with the family. I ask them if they want to do it. They almost always say no, but when the family asks, I always do at least do that much.

BTW: the reason the guy called Ed [at all] is because I referred him to Ed, since Ed doesn't have any clearance at all and is not subject to 12-333. That was only after I had called several viewers, all of whom refused to work with the family.


<<at levels of DoD much higher than McMoneagle (or Buchanan) ever dreamed of having access to.

Now, about that clearance. Everyone in the unit had SECRET level clearances except me—for a short period of time. Because I came from a unit where I had a TOP SECRET clearance, and because I was assigned to the unit to do special work over and above what the unit was doing (no further explanation, please), that level was maintained for the first 2 years I was there. The "special work" did not materialize, so when my clearance was renewed, it was renewed at the SECRET level.

So, when Ed came into the unit, I was at SECRET level. So was Ed, because moving to our unit, he would have lost a TOP SECRET clearance, if he had had one (which I supposed he did, knowing the unit he came from). Now, his BI (background investigation) probably OK'd him for TOP SECRET, which is the highest level of clearance the government has in any way, shape, or form. But then, all of our BIs OK'd us for TOP SECRET, but it wasn't considered necessary, and TS billets are limited to a certain number, so we were given only SECRET. (By the way, I'm not using all caps for emphasis, but because the regulations always require a classification to be in all caps, any time it is referred to. Reading Ed's letter, I see he evidently isn't familiar enough with the regs to remember that.)

Since getting out of service, I have been called back many times to work on programming I had written and/or other projects which I had started or participated in while in the service. As a result of the natural tendency to pirate software, my programs have spread throughout the intel communities of all branches of service, and some other non-military agencies in government, so my clearance has now been kicked back up to TOP SECRET, and has the added "modifiers." (The way a clearance is "raised" is by adding limiting modifiers. "We don't care if you have a TS clearance. If you aren't cleared for TS BOOGALU, you don't get to see our TS BOOGALU documents!")

I have been given the modifiers which make my present clearance TOP SECRET SIOP/ESI, which is an extremely limited billet, allowing me basically access to all straight TS and many of the modified TS information, not just in the Army but in all five military services, many of the investigative agencies, the White House, and specific other agencies not related to military or investigation.

Ed, working in DET G, where he was before coming to our unit, and in the other unit (their unit name, by the way, is classified) that he went to after working for us, would have had no more than TS followed by 1 or 2 straight US Army modifiers.

(PJ said) "I don't know about Lyn, but I bet Ed doesn't even know what levels Joe was cleared for."

That's right. Believe me, Joe's clearances aren't anything to sneeze at, either.


<<Buchanan states that he cannot produce his records, because they are classified.

Absolutely wrong. I produced the same documents to Mike Miley [a journalist], just as Ed had done. I can send them to you too or anyone else. You will note that Ed, in sending his documentation to Mike, didn't send anything classified, either. There are a lot of things which neither of us can send. However, again with the wording, he is making it sound like I'm saying I can't, whereas he, by default of logic, can. Ask Ed for the project reports he wrote up on Khadafi, Idi Amin, or any of the other work he produced in the office, and he will say, "I can't produce those records because they are classified." The 'barfjobbies' which are given at the end of an assignment, though, are personal records, and don't contain classified information. In fact, they often contain lies to cover up the fact that classified work was done. Those, we all have, and we all can produce in great quantity.

[PJ's note: you can view those documents here.]


<<As the lowest ranking member of the team, he was also assigned many menial duties, ergo his unpleasant memories of the unit. But that's what being an enlisted man in the Army is about.

What a bunch of elitist puke!!! Besides, it's not true. Let's take this one one at a time:

>>As the lowest ranking member of the team...

For most of the unit's history, I was the only enlisted man there. The reason? All the billets were for officers. I was holding down a Major's slot. The Army doesn't do that with just any soldier off the field. The only other enlisted were Mel Riley, who held down a Chief Warrent Officer's slot his first time with the unit, and a woman sergeant named Dawn, who was a very good natural psychic, didn't take to the Ingo method, so left the unit after a short assignment.

>>...he was also assigned many menial duties...

Not so. I was treated like everyone else in the unit. There was no rank structure there. Whoever drove the company car was responsible for gassing it up. When the yard needed cleaning up, I, a Captain, two Majors, and several other officers got out and picked up cigarette butts, raked leaves, etc. And I was absolutely in charge of two of our "away missions", being the acting commander over Captains, Majors, and a Lt. Col. I was never given any more menial work than anyone else in the unit.

>>...ergo his unpleasant memories of the unit...

That's why I volunteered to stay for almost nine years, turning down the opportunities for promotions if I'd go back into the regular service. Must have really hated the place.


<<Buchanan,...(see below)...did not have the proverbial but necessary "need to know," i.e., in this case, which intelligence agency had generated the unit's task/target packages. And, because the targets were run "blind" by the viewers, each remote viewer merely took away a piece of the puzzle after each session.

Note that here, he centers on my duties as a remote viewer and completely ignores my duties as Database Mgr. As a CRVer, I was not allowed to know anything about the targets except a number, and now and then, some frontloading. As DBM, however, I had to know all that information in order to log it into the database. This came after I had worked the targets as a CRVer. Ed twists the fact that I wasn't given information before a session to mean that I wasn't given it at all.


>>... like McMoneagle...

Same situation, only even more of a deliberate falsehood. I took over the DBM job from Joe, who had been working the projects and entering the information into the database. Not only that, but Joe, for the longest time was the only viewer, and was not working by Ingo's protocols. Therefore, he was often sent to the customer to find out about the projects, and knew a lot of information about them before even working a target. Ed's BS really doesn't hold water in Joe's case.


<<Only the operations officer (i.e., me) and the commander had the complete picture.

And the database manager. Not only did I know the session material of the other viewers (and had to fight AOLs like crazy because of it), but also was briefed at the end of every project on all its facets. If I didn't have the complete picture after the projects were over, there wouldn't be any records of the projects.


<<Upon my permanent transfer to the unit, Buchanan constantly whined to me about how he had been promised remote viewing training by the previous commander.

No, I didn't whine [to anybody]. The only time I have ever mentioned the fact that I was done out of training by Ingo himself, simply because of some financial bureaucrat who didn't want to spend another dollar for something he wasn't allowed to know about, I out and out bitched about it!


<<I felt sorry for Lyn that he failed my training.

Again, there was no test to fail. Again, I NEVER took training from Ed in any way, shape or form. The fact that he called his ET targets "advanced training" doesn't mean that any training took place, or that we learned anything from him except not to trust his tasking.

When his "proficiency maintenance targets" all started being ET & UFO stuff, we, as a unit, went to the director and asked him to forbid Ed from giving such targets, again. That is the only reason he started calling it "advanced training", so he could keep giving them to us.

We balked at that, and the director finally made it so Ed couldn't assign us any targets which he had originated himself. That was the extent of Ed's "training", which everyone failed, I guess.


<<He lacked the discipline to attend to the rigorous protocols (remote viewing structure) required to successfully prosecute an intelligence collection mission;

This comment, and the one about Joe not being able to distinguish imagination both made me laugh out loud. Ed's reputation, before he ever came to the unit, was that he would get one perception, decide what the target was, and the rest of the session was an attempt to prove himself right. That is why the decision was made before Ed ever came to the unit that he would not be allowed to be a viewer.


<<Moreover, Buchanan was unusable against targets where the threat of bodily harm prevailed, such as distant battles or weapon systems tests.

Actually, I was pretty much that way before Ed came to the project. However, the decision was made at one point (about half way through Ed's two years there) to "cure" people of their weaknesses (everybody had them). That was deemed to be one of mine. Several people acting as monitors (including Ed), gave me every blood and gore situation they could find, until I was finally desensitized to those situations. They ran me on targets which were so gory that the other viewers would back out of the session.

After that, I got to love the "death defying" situations and would try just about any target, just for the experience of doing it. That's why one target in particular was given to me, instead of anyone else: It was the interior of a certain weapon's "death-ray" beam. The interior structure of the beam was the question being asked, so they had me step into the beam when the weapon was being fired. After the first session, they told me what it was, and asked whether or not I would go back. I did 4 more sessions on it, each time stepping into the beam, going to the beam's target point, the beam's source, once trying to see if I could "materialize my consciousness" enough at the site for the beam to have a physical effect on me. They also ran me on the interior of cyclotrons, magnetrons, battlefields, suspected (and real) torture chambers Amin used, etc.

============================

PJ thanks again for your support. Ed's the original LCOD ("loose cannon on deck"), and is getting worse. I am trying not to let him make me mad, but it is getting harder and harder to do.

Lyn Buchanan


Return to Dames Trashes Remote Viewers

firedocs main menu