firedocs media/politics article
Section: Dames Trashes Remote Viewers
The following was written by Paul H. Smith in response to copies of Ed Dames's military records that were sent him via email. Paul was a remote viewer for seven years in the Army unit that utilized RV. He was a Captain at that time (as was Ed Dames; they both retired Majors) and he was an Operations officer as well. He also trained with Ingo Swann. As such, he worked very closely with Ed Dames, although Ed was not a remote viewer himself, and being of generally equal rank, training, title, etc., Paul is a good one to make comment on this subject. For the public who is not aware of the details of military documents and how they are created, this should be educational. A few comments of my own follow Paul's write up. I should mention that as of January 1997, Psi-Tech's "TRV" training manual was in fact a bad photocopy of the original CRV training manual that Paul Smith wrote while in the military unit. So, quite obviously, they are working from the same page, so to speak...
I am probably in the best position of anyone to respond to this issue, as I and Ed were contemporaries while captains at the Ft. Meade RV program.
<<As a result, we have posted Ed's military records. These official documents clearly state that he was second in command of the RV unit, and that he was the Operations & Training officer, amonst other things. These records prove that the other RVers were not telling the truth..." [quote from Jonina Dourif]
We are dealing here with only two sorts of military records--annual officer efficiency reports (OERs) and award presentations.
An OER is a Department of the Army form that includes blocks for job description, evaluation of personal character traits, evaluations from the rated officer's supervisor, and an additional evaluation from the officer's "senior rater"--usually the supervisor's supervisor.
Nearly EVERYone's OER (unless the officer has really messed up) tends to be fairly hyperbolic in verbiage--in effect, everyone is "above average." There are even lists of suggested words that are often provided to raters so they won't sell their subordinates short by using inadequately grandiose terms. Everyone's writeups sound absolutely wonderful--mine sound a lot like Ed's.
The fact is, during his time assigned he probably was for a year or so the deputy commander of the unit. What being deputy commander means is that, if anything happens while the boss is away YOU get blamed for it. Beginning in January of 1988, my OERs list me as serving as deputy commander myself. It wasn't a big deal, it wasn't a little deal. It was just a job that didn't demand much--especially in as laid back an outfit as we were in. But as far as this goes, I think Ed is probably telling the truth about it.
As far as being operations and training officer--well, until Skip Atwater retired,in December '87 HE was the chief operations and training officer--and had been during the entire ten years of the unit's existence, since long before Ed Dames even knew it existed. Ed functioned as AN operations and training officer--he DID play a primary role in scheduling sessions and the use of the RV rooms for training and ops (I have dozens of scheduling calendars with Ed's handwriting all over them). He DID conduct collection projects; he DID perform first stage analysis on data collected.
But again, starting in January 1988 my own OER job-description blocks show me as being operations and training officer also. Now, while I DID get involved in some operations management (which is what an operations officer does), and while I was primarily responsible to conduct CRV theory training and assist with training sessions, I was otherwise almost exclusively a viewer, and make no other claim to the operations and training officer title. Ed WAS primarily engaged in operations and training--but whether he was the chief of these two functions is debatable. During the time there was a GS-13 and a GS-14 on board, both of whom had major responsibilities for ops and training, and who might dispute the question with Ed as to who was in charge of whom.
This brings us to award citations and recommendations. Each award consists of a recommendation, which includes several paragraphs explaining why the person ought to receive the award, plus a justification and a proposed citation. The citation is what appears on the actual award certificate when it is presented.
In Ed Dames's case, there is only one award that is relevant to remote viewing--a Joint Service Commendation Medal, which is equivalent to an Army Commendation Medal, and is the lowest rung of the award structure for joint assignments. [The next up is the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (equivalent to an Army Commendation Medal); what's up from there I don't recall at the moment--it wasn't relevant for ANY of us anyway:-)] Ed's award covered the period of his official, full-time assigment to Sun Streak --January 1986 to June 1988.
The interesting thing is that Dave Morehouse wrote this award in June of 1990, while he and Ed were still friends. I remember Dave talking about this at the time. He was quite annoyed that the unit chain-of-command failed to write Ed an award two years before at the time Ed transferred to a new unit. Dave had a point. While awards are not automatic, they are important to advancement, so it is unusual for an officer to leave a unit without SOME sort of "end-of-tour" award. I myself don't know why the branch chief didn't write up an award for Ed. He was a civilian and perhaps not that well versed in managing military officers; or it may have been that he was dissatisfied with some of the somewhat "irregular" things Ed had been involved in concerning remote viewing. He didn't share his reasoning with us very often.
At any rate, Dave decided Ed ought to have an award, so he wrote one up and by-passed the branch chief by making friends with the awards clerk and getting it into the system at our higher headquarters (there is nothing particularly illegitimate about this--within certain limitations Army regulations allow any military member with knowledge of another military member's achievements to put that person in for an award; but it is frowned upon to keep the chain-of-command in the dark about it). Since Mel Riley was retiring shortly, Dave wrote up an award for him as well.
Then Dave wrote one for himself. The way one can tell is that, first, the verbiage is identical over major portions of all three award recommendations. The Dames and Riley award recommendations were both signed by CPT Dave Morehouse, on 8 June and 1 June 1990, respectively. Morehouse's award recommendation (remember, almost identical verbiage) was signed by the deputy director of the RV unit's next higher headquarters--the awards clerk's boss--on 27 June 1990.
In an interesting sidelight, in the award recommendations he wrote Morehouse credited himself with 1200 operational RV missions (after a total, including training time, of 24 months in the program). But he credited Mel Riley--who had a total of EIGHT YEARS with the unit, with only 1000 RV missions. From my own experience at Ft. Meade, I suspect the total for Mel was probably pretty close to reality, if perhaps a shade low from what he actually did. However, after allowing six months to reach operational status (which would be quite fast for an estimate), Morehouse would have at most 18 months to attain his claimed totals--you can do the math yourself, but it works out to more than three RV sessions a day for a typical work month (we didn't work on weekends). Anybody who actually does RV knows that somebody must be smoking something to make a claim like this! But I seriously digress; this is about Ed Dames' documentation, not Dave Morehouse.
The bottom line is that Dames actually deserves at least a little credit for some of the rather souped-up claims in his award and his OERs. Though he sometimes got off on strange tangents as far as the military was concerned, he was usually a productive, contributing member of the unit. But he is being disingenuous if he is really asking people to take all that stuff too seriously; the documents are riddled with half-truths, exaggerations, and boiler-plate statements that crop up in the documentation of ALL of us who spent time at the unit (for example, stuff about cutting training time by half, 200% increase in operational efficiency, increases in training/operational mission load, etc.)--or any Army unit, for that matter, since hype rules in the promotion game. Particularly in the case of Ed's award, much of what is said in there has some anchor in the real world; but some of it--particularly concerning the database--really belongs to others, in this case Lyn Buchanan.
Well, this is probably not going to resolve anything, just make matters worse. But I wanted you all to know that there IS a middle ground. Ed is not the monster some make him out to be; but he's also far from being a god.
After having sent out my previous post on Ed's documentation, I'll go through this and add what I can.
At 08:31 PM 4/15/97 EDT, Joe Murgia wrote:
<<The award in question says that Ed briefed some higher ups in the government including the Office of The Secretary of Defense. Those higher ups, in turn, briefed the President, NOT ED.
<<Reason for submission is listed as Annual, the senior rater listed on the form is Jack Vorona, the rater listed on the form is William G. Ray. ...The most effective officer in grade and time in service with whom I have ever worked..."
This line is in my OER from the same period as well. Bill liked to take shortcuts with admin stuff; he knew no one would ever see both OERs together at Dept.of the Army.
<<"...Operationally, the rating period has been the most productive in the unit's/project's history. He developed and successfully implemented a training program which cut by more than half the amount of time required to bring newly assigned personnel up to the operational level. This feat is a milestone in the history of the technology employed by this project. Not stopping with training innovations, he pioneered additional advanced intelligence collection techniques which have facilitated deeper and more rapid access to a wide range of targets..."
Yup. This one is in mine too. And probably in a couple of others--maybe even in Lyn's.
>"...During this rating period CPT Dames participated as Team Chief in >eleven critical intelligence collection operations which provided >information unattainable from any other intelligence collection >system. Particularly noteworthy were reports he produced in support >of operational missions..."
Note that Team Chief is not chief of training and ops. Teams were formed around a monitor/analyst and three +/- viewers for a specific collection project. Ed was chief of 11 of these. This is no mean feat.
>"...As training officer he has greatly increased the capabilities of >his collection team while maintaining a high level of team morale. A >superlative manager, he strikes the best balance of personnel and >mission-accomplishment to maximize mission performance and minimize >personnel turbulence..."
Average writing for a rater's block.
>"...His leadership abilities could best be utilized in command of a >Military Intelligence field office or detachment..."
Standard boilerplate "potential" recommendations.
<<"...His enthusiasm and drive have revitalized his unit's training program. He conducted a record number of training and advanced training missions, at the same time conducting 20 intelligence collection operations during the course of the rating period. This resulted in a 200 percent increase in the quantity of intelligence collection operations performed with a corresponding increase in the quality of those operations. Highly versatile, a brilliant leader, performs exceptional well in a many-faceted job...."
Several others of us had similar things in our ratings; this result could not be accomplished in a vacuum--it was a team effort. Ed was involved, and got credit for it, along with the rest of us.
<<"...He should continue to be placed in positions of increased responsibility and command in the human intelligence/ counterintelligence arena..."
>>From the Joint Service Commendation - Narrative (Was he in the RV unit at this time or is this from another unit?)
What follows is somewhat distressing. It is the award narrative for the JSCM that Dave Morehouse wrote for Ed covering the period Jan 86 to Jun 88. But the dates are obviously wrong here. The first date is actually the date on the award recommendation transmittal sheet--the date Morehouse signed the form. This was two years after Ed had left the RV unit and gone on to another "black" unit. The last date is pure fiction.
<<"...Captain Edward A. Dames, United States Army, distinguished himself by meritorious service while assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency, Directorate of Scientific and Technical Intelligence from 07 June 1988 to 01 June 1990..."
<<"...Additionally, Captain Dames, recognizing a need for a more effective unit data processing system, personally designed and implemented a new system of collection, recording and analysis. This system provided a substantive degree of error reduction and an enhanced final analytical intelligence product. Captain Dames personally engineered techniques enhanced productivity and reduced the inherent conflict associated with coordinating a highly sophisticated and esoteric discipline. Captain Dames pioneered new and creative training protocols, the impact of which effected revolutionary improvements upon the future and potential of the very unique mission in which he was involved. His skills as an administrator, leader and an intelligence collector proved to be invaluable..."
See my other [first] post for comments on the above.
The [Meritorious Service Medal - First Oak Leaf Cluster] has nothing to do with the RV unit. Ed was awarded this MSM for a very real and successful intel operation he promulgated while assigned to SED; it did not, however, involve remote viewing.
In case it escaped you, let me recap a few salient points brought out by the above:
1. As an example of his prowess in the remote viewing unit, Dames has presented documents that in fact have zero to do with any of his work during his time in the RV unit. They may be legitimate documents, but they are completely unrelated to what he is using them to make a point about. This is quite misleading. You note that no attempt was made in the Psi-Tech presentation (visit their site for details) to clearly state Ed's actual time in the unit. This is probably because most people would be shocked to see how brief it really was -- less than three years, out of 17. You may note that Mr. Dames has insulted individuals who have have a great deal more experience in this field (not to mention they were actually remote viewers). Such as Lyn Buchanan, who was in the unit nearly 9 years; Paul Smith, who was in the unit for 7 years; and Joe McMoneagle, who was in the unit 6 years, was one of the original six founding members, was the ONLY viewer in the unit for awhile, and who was in the overall program (doing both intelligence and scientific tasking) for its full 17 years.
2. In an attempt to mislead by omission, it is clearly stated by Mr. Dames in numerous documents that he was "the" (and on one occasion, "the only") operations and training officer for the unit. In fact, there were numerous Ops officers in the unit. Some of them, such as Smith, were predominantly remote viewers. Some of them, such as Dames, were predominantly Ops. The title is not glorious, it's just a title, and was not in any case exchangeable with "commander." It is also one of many attempts to pretend that he was "the only" person doing RV instruction. He did some lecturing, and some monitoring. The vast majority of RV instruction was handled by still-private identity officers, and by Paul Smith, and some by Lyn Buchanan. So, it is quite deliberately misleading to insult persons such as Buchanan for supposedly never having learned RV, particularly when he not only learned and worked as a Viewer prior to Dames even arriving in the unit, but even worked as an instructor for the subject for many years.
3. The vast majority of everything in the records Dames presents is either (a) common verbiage for records of that sort, or (b) common to the records of most or all the unit members at that time. The only real variances between individuals relates to rank and boilerplate comments based on that. (It should be noted that Buchanan has made his records available to inquiring journalists or public since early 1996. This is well known to Psi-Tech, but they inform the public otherwise.) It is also worth repeating that Joseph McMoneagle received the Legion of Merit award for his RV work -- which no other public remote viewer has.
4. As perhaps the most telling item in this whole recount, it should be noted that Mr. Dames (then Captain Dames) did not even receive the standard write up from his commanding officer when he left the remote viewing unit. Not even a neutral write up. Nothing. To obtain the glorious document that Mr. Dames now presents for his history, two years after the fact Mr. Dames's best friend and coworker went around the chain of command and wrote him one, retroactively, and filed it. (Perhaps I should note that this is the same officer, David Morehouse, whom Mr. Dames now insults at such length.)
Ed Dames has every right to be proud of his brief tenure in the remote viewing unit. It was an interesting job with interesting people and I'm sure he did well. He is intelligent, creative and charismatic, and has plenty of positive attributes. However, it is difficult to spend much time talking about them, when one is so constantly forced to defend everybody else from him and rebut his incorrect claims and presentations instead. His continued and excessive insults of other respectable, honorable, experienced fellow soldiers, in fact about all of them who have gone public, in an attempt to make himself look better by comparison, tries even the most patient soul. Especially when these people are so vastly more qualified than himself that it is pure chutpah.
Ed's revelations of classified information over the years, including the names of private operatives, have made him no friends among military personnel, and bring into serious question the "honor" which normally accompanies an officer's uniform -- particularly when those revelations were made solely to drop names and get some glory by association, or to brag and get some notoriety. Most soldiers, let alone officers, are not expected to reveal this during mild torture, let alone for financial and ego reasons. Combined with his slash-and-burn campaign of other soldier's reputations and his revision of history to fit current media and corporate needs, and a consideration of #4 above, I am personally inclined to question his desire, while in a 'strategic disinformation' black ops unit (to which he transferred after the RV unit; that is many steps beyond disinformation, by the way) to found Psi-Tech. In the past it was backed by noteworthy people including those he today insults at such length. Today, it is simply his project.
One can wish Mr. Dames well with the project without necessarily supporting the childish and malicious behavior sponsored through his company. I urge individuals to write Ed (his VP Jonina Dourif will retrieve it, most likely) at firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com and encourage him to be a little more rational in his future behavior.
Return to Dames Trashes Remote Viewers
firedocs main menu