JNLII1McMoneagle1

an interview by Palyne "PJ" Gaenir

(Note: the complete version of this interview is available in full at http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/pjrv_interviews.cfm and

http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewing/stargate/stargate-qa.shtml )

The human instinct for adventure takes many forms - from scientific enquiry to geographical and space exploration, from deciphering the language of the subconscious to seeking out ineffable aesthetic and spiritual experiences.

But what if we realized that all these different journeys could be made to converge in one point, that a new form of exploration was available to us, which could redefine both the experience of physical adventure and the intellectual pursuit of fundamental reality - which would reshape our sense of self at the same time that it expanded our physical and cosmological models?

From 1972 to 1995 the US government funded a pioneering research program on Remote Viewing - the ability to access information which is blocked from the normal sensory ways in which we gather data about the world. The program was sponsored by the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, ran by a physics research team at the Stanford Research Institute, and involved volunteer subjects, most of whom were recruited from among highly accomplished, high clearance military personnel.

A senior projects officer for Signals Intelligence and Electronic Warfare, INSCOM, Joseph McMoneagle was viewer 001 in this program, and the only one who was associated with it for the entire duration of the project. The author of several quintessential books on remote viewing, a current full time research associate with the Laboratories for Fundamental Research and a full member of the Parapsychological Association, he has participated in protocol design, statistical information collection, R&D evaluations as well as hundreds of remote viewing experimental trials and intelligence applications. For his contributions over a 34 year career (twenty of which were spent within paranormal operations) he was awarded the Legion of Merit by the US government - the highest honor that can be bestowed upon a member of the intelligence community.

In September-October 2002, Palyne Gaenir conducted several interviews with Joe McMoneagle, the full transcript of which can be found at http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/pjrv_interviews.cfm and http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewing/stargate/stargate-qa.shtml . With their permission we have reproduced here several excerpts from those interviews.

L. Sidorov

*****

Q: Where did the concept of "Remote Viewing" originate?

A: After determining that the Soviets and others were using psychics for intelligence collection efforts, the CIA financed preliminary investigations into the phenomena at SRI-International. During those early investigations (1972-1975) Remote Viewers were able to successfully penetrate a secret Soviet site located at Semipalatinsk, USSR, as well as a Top Secret facility being operated within the Continental United States. While the data obtained was somewhat sketchy, it did show a capacity for gaining access to information that was unavailable through ordinary means. The work was officially documented and reported within classified intelligence channels. As a result of these studies, Dr. Hal Puthoff and the other scientists at SRI-International also published a report in Nature Magazine describing the accessing of information via psychic means, what they called "Remote Viewing." The origin of the techniques and methods were born out of that earlier testing and research.

Q: How did you wind up working as a psychic for the United States Army?

A: I was stationed at the Headquarters for the US Army Intelligence and Security Command, in Arlington, Virginia in 1978, and was the OIC or Officer in Charge of the Emitter Location and Identification Branch, and was responsible for the entire Army wide military occupational specialty (MOS) both operationally as well as administratively. Out of the blue, or so it seemed, I was called into a small room by two guys in suits who identified themselves as US Army Special Agents. They showed me some documents that said the Soviet Union was using psychics to collect intelligence information. The Special Agents asked me what I thought about the possibility. My guarded and, I hoped, neutral response was that if any of it were true, then it posed a great threat to our National Interests. A few weeks later, in a follow-up interview with other people, my personnel file was reviewed. It contained records of some very bizarre experiences I'd had, among them, a Near Death Experience (NDE), uncontrolled Out of Body Experiences (OBEs) and what I called spontaneous knowings. The result was that my next orders were to travel to SRI-International, where I was tested by scientists for two weeks and targeted against six (6) double-blind target locations. Apparently they were so blown away by the success of the experments that I was promptly asked to volunteeer for the Top Secret Army Project GRILL FLAME. I did, and became Remote Viewer #001.

Q: Does participating as a remote viewer alter your perspectives on reality?

A: Yes. Many of my perceptions of reality have altered during the twenty-four years I've been a Remote Viewer. I worked in the military RV unit the whole time it existed, eighteen and a half years. I'm also one of a few participants who moved over to the research and development side of the project where, since the project was closed down, I've continued to participate as a Research Associate with the original lab. I also started my own company, Intuitive Intelligence Applications, Inc., in 1984. When you come to know that information is directly accessible to the human mind, regardless of physical access, it completely alters your perceptions of time and space, and our relationship to it.

What things about psi and RV interest you currently (Sep ’02)?

The social implications. Why, when presented with a macro-PSI event accomplished under the strictest of controls, do scientists walk away and make no comment? Why macro events are never discussed independently? Why people within the media feel such a strong need to automatically ridicule PSI, even when it displays gross ignorance? Why everyone seems to need an understandable structure for why remote viewing occurs or works in order to validate the scientific study of it?

Why people who are interested in remote viewing feel such a strong need to be considered “expert remote viewers” rather than using the opportunity for understanding more about how their own minds work or how they process information, or how this might impact on their relationships and spiritual nature?

What questions about psi would you ultimately like to see answered?

Aside from the above - the real nature of time/space, and how we interface with it. Where does it come from and how much effect can we exercise over it through thought processes alone. I want to know how this ties into our perceptions of mental and physical health, how it affects it.

I would also like to know why we can’t seem to find a different reason for living and pursuing knowledge other than money?

Do you still hold to the idea of the Matrix, like the CRV theory? (Did you ever hold to that idea?) Has that idea evolved? If so, into what exactly? If not, what do you think is the source of psi information?

The idea of the "matrix" is a cool idea, but I do not believe it has anything to do with reality or at least the reality that drives us or how we access information. If there was anything that related to something like the Matrix, then it's something we've created within our own minds, not that which someone or something else creates for us, or that we might be beguiled into believing is true. Whatever our beliefs, they are ours and ours alone. We can blame no one for what we believe to be true. It is our responsibility to determine what is true or not true for us in our own universe of experience.

The whole idea of a matrix or akashic record stems from the idea that there is some sort of signal line that we tap into or strip information from. This idea of signal line is a metaphor for the line of information or thoughts we deal with in our heads that may or may not be relevant to a remote viewing target.

That's one of the reasons you can't take the CRV theory seriously. If you do, it sucks, it won't work. It's the reason I've detested it from the outset as a method of producing valid information. It just lays one more line of fences between your conscious mind and the unconscious information.

If you consider that everything that you might ever remote view is something you will eventually know about anyway, then the information always exists/originates within your own mind at some point

in time. The only difference between knowing something right now and knowing something at some future date is time. We create time, so why not the information or the format within which it occurs.

It would take about a week to outline what I’m talking about here, so this will have to suffice for now.

If time doesn’t exist as is often said in RV, is it possible that “facts about” the past are as variable as those about the future? If there really is no time, why shouldn’t RV on things past be as difficult as RV on things future?

Neither is more difficult than the next. Your logic is faulty.

What I think you meant to say is that since we have errors in RV in the present, they should be expected to be about the same in the past or future if time is not real. Which would be correct.

All that happens in RV is a prediction (assumed truth made from whole cloth) is made about the past, present, or future. If the assumption turns out to be judged correct based on information at hand for that specific time, then it is assumed to be correct. If it is wrong, it is nothing more than that, it is simply wrong.

What is interesting about RV, is that sometimes what is judged to be incorrect at the time turns out later to be correct, or vice versa. With RV, one is stuck with trying to describe a truth about a specific time within the vernacular of when it occurs - sort of like lining up the sights of understanding over a word to capture its meaning at the precise point in time that it stops moving.

We assume that is the only time the word is going to stop. But, in reality the word moves and stops many times. Again, it would take a few days to make clear here what I am saying.

How do you see the time connection between present, past, and future and causality and free will? Are multiple realities coexisting? Is “probability” an issue? If so, how can the future be predicted? Do you think free will is an illusion, a reality, or a partial reality?

All things exist simultaneously. Past, present, and future all just “are.” We pick where we focus and understand through intent or expectation and that creates reality. The only problem is that we are usually not awake while we are deciding.

It’s the most perfect example of free will that I think could ever exist. In this way, all things are possible, but the only reality at the time is the one we chose to experience.

The future can be predicted very simply - with a good guess made in as alert and understanding a state as possible.

First, the researchers are correct, because they have tested for many years to determine that to be true. But, what does that have to do with one’s personal belief? Because they say it, so what?

The point is that no one ever knows how good or how bad they are ever going to be at this thing called RV, until they put energy into it and find out. If I believed what half the people on the planet say about things, I probably would have skipped this lifetime altogether. The only person who knows is the person doing it.

Unfortunately, most do not invest the energy necessary to find out. They believe erroneously that they can pay a lot of money to someone who will teach them the “secret” to how it’s done and that’s all that’s required. Wrong! There are no secrets. There’s no one specific method that works better than any other.

I’ve talked about RV needing to be within a specific protocol to be called RV - that’s true. Many will say this has no bearing on how good or how bad someone will be at RV. That too is wrong. In fact, the hardest person to convince that RV is real and works is called “self.” If you leave one iota of doubt in your own mind that it is possible, you will never be good at it. You have to set up the circumstances that are the most difficult to beat and then when you succeed, you will understand more about RV than all the lessons in the world can teach you.

It doesn’t work all the time for anyone, it isn’t perfect all the time for anyone, it isn’t nearly as accurate as many would tell you it is. The fact is, that it will work reasonably well for anyone who is able to convince themselves that it will - there are no other secrets.

Some scientists suggest as far as lab results go, even practicing over years doesn’t make anybody better. Yet the best viewers have spent a lot of time practicing and it seems like one gets better. It is hard to make sense of research results when they seem to contradict hands-on experience. What do you say to this?

I practice in order to maintain my capacity to translate what I sense into usable information. The only way I’ve improved over time is in my reliability. I’ve not improved very much in accuracy.

One has to remember that there is always an expected improvement that takes place simply from understanding the rules. The research shows (that’s testing under controls over long periods of time in a lab) that there is very little improvement over time in the quality of remote viewing (accuracy.)

Over time, many who do RV within applications scenarios begin to feel that the scientific controls get in the way of getting to the target. They are able to convince themselves that such draconian controls are no longer necessary - that they are able to differentiate between the right and wrong way to approach a target. This is called deluding oneself. Even scientists who study something in a lab over long periods of time sometimes fall prey to this self-delusion.

As one slowly moves away from the strict controls the remote viewing will improve, but only because other things come into play - neuro-linguistics, inappropriate leading, etc. People will make up excuses as to why this okay - we get information that seems to be correct anyway - right? Well in not too delicate terms, this is called cheating. All it does for someone trying to learn that remote viewing is possible is that it produces doubt in their mind. This makes what they are actually trying to do more difficult, to the point of significant failure at a latter date, when they try to accomplish the same accuracy and reliability under severe controls.

It’s the reason a lot of self-proclaimed experts in RV won’t do RV under those severe controls in public.

When you were practicing RV (as you described in your book Mind Trek), what were the most frustrating issues you dealt with in your viewing or development as a viewer?

Failure. I had to learn how to deal with failure. This means I also had to learn to deal with ego investment in the outcome.

They try to do too much to quickly. They do the RV too quickly. They want the results too quickly. They go to the next target too quickly. They don’t think about what they are going to do, what they are actually doing, or what happened after the fact. No real focus on what’s going on.

They are doing it just “to get to being an expert ” faster. When they should be doing it to understand why they process a certain way. Where the information comes from in their own mind, why they deal with it the way they do, what’s wrong with how they deal with it, etc.

That’s always a possibility. At the moment, I’m not buying that, however.

I think in RV we are dealing solely with information. That is also the possibility with OBE’s as well as NDE’s. Since there is no demonstrated physical interaction with a remote location vis-à-vis OBE’s or NDE’s, at least one that’s provable, that will also have to remain an open question.

I believe we have a tendency to jump to conclusions about energy states because they present the easiest answer to the conundrum, but there could be a multitude of other possibilities we have not yet conjectured. I’d rather keep my mind open to those not yet extant possibilities.

There are lots of rumors running rampant about telekinesis, but to my knowledge, I have never seen it demonstrated within a lab anywhere on the planet.

The Chinese make claims of being able to do it with young children, and I’ve see the tapes, but they are heavily cut and edited so highly questionable.

I’ve met people over the years that have experienced losing something by having it disappear right in front of them - that’s happened to me as well. Where does an object like a pencil, pen, paperclip, quarter, that sort of thing go when it disappears is beyond my ken.

In terms of seeing something appear - well, again there are lots of stories about that. Some of the incidents, which were filmed were quite convincing to those doing the observing but on analyzing the films later frame by frame, you can clearly see slight of hand. Usually the things that appear and disappear are small enough to hide within the hand or palm which again raises some difficult questions around the entire subject.

I personally think that there are items that sort of morph in and out of real-time space, but so far it hasn’t been accomplished on demand while under controls. Until that time, well…it’s still going to be questionable.

Yes to all the above. They exist at the very least as mental or thought form creations as real as when they are experienced. When we cease to be, our intellects appear to carry on, so then must the intellect thought forms. Do they have thought forms of their own? That is an interesting question and one that I believe to be true, although that is instinctive and difficult to prove otherwise.