firedocs media/politics article

Section: Dames Trashes Remote Viewers

I copied some quotes from the Psi-Tech public BBS that Joni Dourif (Psi-Tech's VP) had posted to the world. Seeing as how they are/were presented to the public, and harm the reputations of others, I thought a few were worth addressing, and I asked a couple people if they would respond. I include their comments here. There is an additional document with commentary by Paul H. Smith, which can be found on the DTRV menu or here.

From the Psi-Tech Web BBS:

(responding to a comment by Buchanan that RVrs (such as those claiming aliens, doom, etc.) had some tendency to "see what they wanted to see")

:::...If the nature of remote viewing is that you see what you want to see, then WHAT IS THE POINT to remote veiwing at all? I think if you follow the strict protocols that Major Dames' speaks of, the nature is seeing what is there, not what you want. [Joni, Psi-Tech VP]

Lyn: PJ, I have included a file which is going onto the page this week addressing this question. (Here.)

:::Mike, For your information, Ed Dames was sent by the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) to be personally trained by Ingo Swann (the developer of the skill). Lyn Buchanan was trained by Ed, while he won't admitt it, he cannot come up with a straight answer. I once heard him say when asked who trained him, "oh, everybody did." Lyn was only partially trained, as Ed states "he kept taking shortcuts and falling out of structure." ..which addresses your other mistatement-that they use the same protocols. Lyn skips over several pertinent stages and mixes others together. He includes his imaginary analysis into the RV data which is why he and his altered technique ultimately fail. Talk is cheap, Mike. Buchanan doesn't deliver! [Joni]

Lyn: I'm tired of addressing this trash. There isn't one single thing in this which is true. Even where she quotes me as saying, "oh, everybody did", I always add, "everybody except Ed Dames, who wasn't there yet." If I didn't add that on the Art Bell show (and I don't even remember it coming up), then I was very remiss not to do so.

:::...Mike, For your information, Ed Dames was sent by the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) to be personally trained by Ingo Swann (the developer of the skill). [Joni]

Joe: Not true. We all know who sent Dames to be trained by Ingo. Dames was trained through Stage III and part of Stage IV. The only person who was trained through Stage V, was "Tom." At that point (late 1984) the training by Ingo was terminated. This was done for two reasons; 1) It took too long. 2) They weren't getting the results they felt they wanted to be getting. The method was then modified in house, and the training was then completed in-house. This training in-house was done primarily by Atwater and Smith.

:::Lyn Buchanan was trained by Ed, while he won't admitt it, he cannot come up with a straight answer. [Joni]

Joe: Lyn was not trained by Dames. He began his training and completed it under Atwater, with the direct assistance of "Tom" and Smith. Dames may have had a hand in running some of Lyn's practice sessions (as did a number of others [working as monitors]), but that's it.

:::...I once heard him say when asked who trained him, "oh, everybody did." Lyn was only partially trained, as Ed states "he kept taking shortcuts and falling out of structure." [Joni]

Joe: I've never known Lyn to take a short cut for anyone. ... This reads like the BS it is.

:::...Take a look at Ed's military records (they are in the process of being posted) and read in black & white, Major Dames' title and his acomplishments which specifically refer to his work with CRV/TRV. [Joni]

Lyn: They do not refer to any CRV/TRV work. CRV (that we were using it, and what for) was classified, and TRV wasn't even "invented" yet. That's just dumb!

:::...Buchanan won't show you his, [Joni]

Lyn: PJ, I have also attached a few documents I send to journalists (like Mike Miley) and numerous others, and have always made available to anyone who has asked. They are the same types of documents Ed is making available and say basically the same thing. Everyone got them. In fact, the fourth one is sent just to point up that fact. It is from the president, himself. It LOOKS grand and glorious, but in reality, it is a standard form. Everyone who retires from service gets one. (Here.)

:::...instead, he attempts to mystify you by stating an untruth, that his records are "classified." [Joni]

Lyn: I have never once said that in any format, or as a response to any question. I have said that the records of the project were (and mostly still are) classified, including those I did, but I have never said that any of my records (personally) are classified. None of them are. Why would I say that?

:::...Notice, that Buchanan is quick to accuse Ed of "treason" for taking CRV/TRV out of the confines of the military and forming PSI TECH. [Joni]

Lyn: CRV was never classified in any way -- what it was used for and the fact that it was used was classified; the techniques themselves, however, were not. So how could someone be accused of treason for making it public? I accused Ed Dames of treason because he committed treason. If he had been in any other military unit, he would be in prison right now. I have the proof. The proof that I have contains information which is still classified, but I am ready at any time to present it in any court of military or civilian law to convict him as a criminal.

:::....However, when confronted with the fact (as Art Bell did) that the commander of INSCOM (the same General who Buchanan claims hand picked him) was the chairman of the board of PSI TECH, Buchanan replies "well, does that exonerate Ed?" (sound like jealousy ?) [Joni]

Lyn: No, it sounds like a good question. What does one thing have to do with the other? Bert being on Psi-Tech's board doesn't mean that Ed was not personally committing treason. Does Joni say why Bert resigned from the Psi-Tech board? Could it be to divorce himself from what Ed was doing? In my talks with Bert in the year that followed, he was so hurt by Ed's actions that he didn't have a single good thing to say about the experience. He didn't want to associate himself with Ed ever again.

Joe: Joni should mention that Lyns remarks were a direct response to whether or not Dames had violated his oaths as an officer in the United States Army, by disclosing information he was not permitted to disclose. Art Bell asked this question based on a FAX he received from PSI Tech, wherein Dames had claimed that since the ex-Commander of INSCOM was the president of the board at PSI Tech (at one time), then why shouldn't Dames be talking about the things he was talking about. Thus implying that he had permission to make disclosures simply because the General worked in the company or might have been making disclosures himself.

Lyn was pointing out the fact that no matter what the ex-Commander of INSCOM does, it doesn't alieviate Dames from his own responsibilities as regards following his sworn oaths as an officer. I would also add that I said; "Because someone else said it doesn't make it true, and it certainly is no valid reason for violating a, the oath that an officer makes, or the security oath that someone has committed to." I further stated that, " Ed Dames's case, I would rather not comment directly on him, but I don't see it as a valid reason for what he may or may not have done." I would add, this holds true for any agreement one makes, whether business, military, or otherwise.

:::...I suggest that you relisten to that tape with an objective mindset. You'll also hear Paul Smith state that Joe MacMoneagle does not practise the same protocols [Joni]

Lyn: Methodologies, is meant there. True. Paul says that.

:::...nor, was he in the same unit. [Joni]

Lyn: Paul does not say that. Joe was in the same unit as we were. What Paul says is that Joe and Ed were not in the unit at the same time.

Joe: Again, as a matter of record:

There is no such thing as numerous "protocols." There were numerous "methods" used to RV over the 19 year period. I too have been well trained and versed in the "Ingo Swann Method," as well as many others. So what? No one method has ever proven more effective than another, some are just preferred over others, dependent upon which person is doing the RV. For RV to exist, one must simply follow the RV Protocol which is not method dependent (it hasn't changed since 1972). The term ERV did not exist while I was assigned to the portion of the project that existed at Meade. This was a later title applied to help differentiate one "method" from another.

As regards my being in the same unit: There were two significant elements or units within the project. One was the unit at Meade, the other was CSL in Menlo Park. The RV'ers in Menlo Park historically provided RV to both R&D as well as applications from beginning to end of the project. The RV'ers at Meade historically provided RV to both applications as well as CSL for R&D (the latter until 1988--the non-use of the military viewers for research purposes after 1988 was a managerial decision and had nothing to do with implying accuracy of those viewers). I was assigned from the beginning of the project 1978 at Meade, until my retirement in late 1984. I was then hired as a consultant at CSL in Menlo Park from my retirement until the project closed in 1995. For that entire period, the project was the same project, although it went through four name changes. I am currently a research associate with the same lab, CSL of Palo Alto. You can verify this by simply visiting the web site at:

:::...As far as PSI TECH is concerned, there is no "RV war." ...only deception grabbing for a piece of the market. [Joni]

Lyn: That is very true. But the fact remains that Ed is the one doing it. Everyone else is getting along with each other just fine!

(PJ's note: It's Ed vs. Joe, Ed vs. Dave, Ed vs. Lyn, and now that Paul is competition as a CRV instructor, he has begun to come under Psi-Tech insult as well. You will not find this kind of stuff coming from any corner except Ed Dames's. You will also find, if you look, quite a number of Ed's now-alienated former students, former employees, former coworkers, former associates, former soldiers... I think you get the idea.)

Lyn: PJ, in regards to the post that quoted Dames: "I teach only children. I no longer teach adults. I have a training manager that teaches adults. And he's a superb instructor. He writes for national computer magazines, and his name is Lyn Buchanan." -Ed Dames, 1992 TREAT IV Conference in Atlanta, Georgia

This was at the time when Ed was trying hard to get me to become his Director of Training, and I kept refusing. I had taught several government-types who had called him and asked for training, but lived in the DC area, so Ed had called and asked me to train them. One was an FBI agent (who recently wrote me, asking me why Ed would say I couldn't remote view and had never been a viewer, since Ed had sent him to me for training). One was a member of the State Department. One was a retired Naval Officer, returned to duty for Desert Storm cleanup, who had heard of CRV because Ed had started advertising to the public about the project (which was still classified). His literature which was being sent to anyone and everyone contained information about the project, and the first day this Naval Officer and I met, he was MOST interested in finding out why Ed was "spilling the beans" (his words) in public about classified information. Other than those, I also trained other government-types who had had some information, through their jobs about CRV. (Remember, CRV was not classified, but the project's use of it, and the results of that use were classified.)

Anyway, Ed had been trying to get me to come to work for him for almost a year. I kept telling him that I would work with him, but never for him. I had worked for people all my life, and now, I was going to work for myself. One day, Ed called and said that Psi-Tech would virtually fold as a company if I didn't immediately drop everything I was doing, leave the house for Linda to put on the market and sell, and come immediately to Albuquerque to be his Director of Training. I refused. He said, "...even if it means my business?" I said, "I'm sorry, Ed, but I will only work for myself." With that, he hung up the phone, and has treated me like his worst enemy ever since.

(PJ's note: Ed's story has also changed numerous times since then. He began saying great things about Lyn and his skills, as a Viewer and Instructor, back when Lyn had retired from the Army and Ed was really promoting Psi-Tech (partly by promoting other people's skills related to it). (He also said great things about other people back then who have since become un-experted, such as Dave Morehouse.) Later, he said Lyn wasn't a good Viewer/Instructor because he hadn't been taught by Ingo personally, and therefore Ed was the only public expert (others have trained with Ingo, they just weren't public). Then he said that "he trained Lyn," inferring that therefore, he was a bigger expert. (Lyn was trained and working as a Viewer before Ed even arrived in the unit, and insists that Ed did not train him and was not even present to do so.) Finally, lately, it has devolved to how he "tried" to train Lyn, but Lyn was so incompetent he "failed my training" and so forth. You can see how Ed's personal resentment has created more layers of insulting fabrication over time. What's most unfortunate is that Ed has used the public's interest in RV to pursue his personal vendetta, and that he has used his media opportunities about RV to make himself look glorious and everybody else look bad, hoping to make himself look good in comparison.) Below is a scan of an old business card that Lyn emailed me.

Old Psi-Tech Business Card with Leonard E. Buchanan as 'Training Development'During the time he was trying to get me to come to work for him, he sent me business cards and PsiTech letterhead, trying to induce me to work for him. I have included a picture of the business cards he sent. The card still has his MD address, since he was still trying to get things going in New Mexico (they weren't up yet), and just couldn't make a go of it. (He didn't make a go of his company until moving out to Beverly Hills and finding a rich girlfriend whose parents would foot the bill.) He had even gone forward, like in the '92 TREAT conference as one example, and announced that I was working for him as his Training Director, though I was not. Although I did do some remote viewing consulting (for money from Psi-Tech, after I had left the military and was working for myself via P>S>I), I never did accept the position.





(PJ's note: it's almost beside the point. The real point is, if Ed thought he was a good enough viewer to include him as a Viewing consultant once they had retired from the Army, and a good enough instructor to use Lyn's name to brag and to try to recruit him as Director of P-T training — well that would be totally illogical if, in fact, Lyn had been 'so incompetent that Ed couldn't even train him' many years prior. And of course, Lyn isn't the only one that has had Ed's insult, or who was once considered an expert by him, until they were no longer associated with Psi-Tech. This only spells out how far Ed will go to completely revise history and fabricate stories for the sheer joy of humiliating and insulting anybody he considers competition. This one point alone, given the many horrific things Ed has said about Lyn (and others) in public, should demonstrate Ed's serious lack of either ethics or credibility.)

Return to Dames Trashes Remote Viewers

firedocs main menu