A Remote Viewer On WTC & Other Events
An Interview With Lyn Buchannan
By Ericca Feste
http://www.conspiracycafe.com

In November of 2001 Lyn Buchannan a former US Army Remote Viewer stopped by the Conspiracy Cafe for lunch and granted us this exclusive interview.

Lyn, can you give us a brief overview of what CRV is and how you got involved with the government program?

That's like asking for a brief summary of Russian grammar, but I'll try. CRV stands for Controlled Remote Viewing. Now, that is a lot different from "remote viewing", which these days is a term that has so many definitions it no longer has any meaning. Controlled RV is just that - very highly controlled. It was originally designed to provide a way to take the dumbest grunt soldier off the battlefield and teach him how to be just "psychic" enough to tell his commander where to point the guns. It was not originally meant to be used with natural psychics, but to circumvent the need for them. The military and psychics do not have a great history of collaboration to begin with, and the US military certainly did not want to deal with them - but did need to get the benefit from them. How to do that? Simple - have scientists find out what happens during a real "psychic event" and create a scientific simulation of it. That's what was done, and the result was the US government's highly controlled and scientifically oversighted program of Controlled Remote Viewing.

In light of the recent 911 events, have you, the former Army unit members, or a current group looked at 'Domestic Terrorism' or 'Bioterrorism'?

Let me answer the three questions you're really asking, there - in reverse order:

First of all, by "current group", you are really asking, "Does the Army still have a 'psychic spying' unit?" The official answer is, of course, "No." Once you quit the military and give up your clearances, they don't tell you much, any more, but I do still have my contacts, and as far as I've been able to find out, the real answer is also "No."

Second, when you say, "The former Army unit", I am assuming you are asking whether or nto we ex-unit people still keep in contact and work together. Of course, we do. The answer to the question is that we have worked this problem, both separately and some of the old members have worked together in cooperation as a group.

Third, have I worked the tasking personally? Of course. At first, it was very hard to do, since I was just 4 blocks from the WTC when the attack occurred. Talk about emotional impact! To answer the unasked portion of your question, though, let me say that I don't work any target unless properly and officially tasked, and yes, I have worked quite a few sessions on the terrorism question(s).

If so what were your findings?

Far too many to go into here, and because I do work for specific customers, I am sort of constrained to give very little of that information out. Even giving the findings can lead to understanding what the taskings were, and that can lead a creative person back to the names of the customers. So, most of what I find is not available, simply because of security reasons - even when there is no reason to keep the findings secure, in and of themselves.

I do keep finding that there is at least one plan to use a radio-controlled plane - one of those large model planes with the 10-12 foot wingspread. It could be rigged for "crop dusting" and used to spray any number of agents. Equipped with a camera, it could also be used for pinpoint Kamikaze runs, targeting specific individuals, and can even carry small explosive warheads. Many of the "plans" I find being made by terrorists, both domestic and foreign, both organized and individuals, wind up being little more than flights of fancy - plans and nothing more. Very few of the individuals and groups I have viewed actually have the materiel, money, or organization required to pull off more than simple acts.

Wow! You were at ground zero when it happened. Can you tell us about your experience?

It was like watching a movie until people started falling from the upper stories. Some people say that they jumped, but it didn't seem like it. I think that they held on as long as they could, and when the fire finally burned their hands to the point where they could no longer control them to hold on, they fell. When the building collapsed, it again seemed more like a movie than reality. I guess our minds just protect us from such realities any way it can.

Gosh - I've got to ask this...did you ignore your own prior taskings by being in New York on that day or just challenging them?

The night of the 9th, my wife and I were out on the patio discussion how we both felt that this trip was going to wind up in disaster, and that I shouldn't go. My wife professes to be about "as psychic as a rock", and even she felt the ominous pressure of the event. The 10th, it took me 19 hours to get to NYC from El Paso, because the planes I was scheduled to be on kept breaking down on the runway, and the storm of the century hit NYC, so we were in a holding pattern above the city from 10PM to 1AM, waiting for a chance to land. Then, the next morning, the unthinkable happened. Part of me says that I'm lucky to have been there to see that major historical event. But a bigger part of me would settle for not having seen the people falling and dying. They would not let us help, but kept sending anyone not in a uniform away. I wish I had been allowed to help. I think I could have made a difference.

Did the official Army unit 20 years ago do taskings on this subject?

I don't remember seeing any such tasking. I kept the unit database, and so I saw all the data, tasking, results, etc. I don't remember seeing anything on the WTC bombing, though. Strange. We did a lot of terrorism targets. We should have done that one, too.

With the new influx of funding to the CIA do you believe that Remote Viewing Intelligence will be more greatly utilized?

I certainly hope so. This will be an intelligence-based war, and (little known fact, here) CRV had the highest accuracy rate of any of the intelligence services - including such things as ground agents and "spy-in-the-sky" missions. The government would be stupid to resist using CRV as an intelligence collection method. Of course, that leaves you with the question as to whether the government ever does anything stupid or not.

I'm sure that everyone reading this has alot more questions about current events. Has your group looked at events in the near future such as: Smallpox, Bin Laden, Jersey Anthrax, or the next target of the terrorists, who were flying the planes that hit WTC ......

Of course. We have done a good deal of work on it. However, like I say, we don't do anything without tasking. It would be a waste of our viewers' time and efforts to do the work and then run around trying to find someone to listen to what we found. Right now, there are thousands of psychics of every kind sending "findings" to every government agency. They throw them into the trash. I won't have my viewers' and their work treated that way. So, we work when we are tasked.

Would you share any of your findings?

Again, most of that information is not really sharable.

Has your group seen any 'alien' influence to recent events?

None of the viewers have reported any such involvement.

Would you care to comment on the article "Psychics Join the Manhunt" in the Sunday Times in the UK?
http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2001/11/11/stiusausa01012.html

The article may have had some very negative results. I had tried to stress that there is no official use of remote viewers right now. There are individuals within the different agencies who are, on a personal basis, asking remote viewers for help. But the article indicated (actually said outright) that agencies, themselves, are doing the tasking. That just isn't so.

There is a sort of "grass roots movement" with many of the "individuals" in the different agencies to get the government use of remote viewers an official policy. Now, since that article, several of these supporters are backing off as many of the agency managers are upset that the press is saying they use psychics. The article actually hurt our chances of being used officially, and may have actually blocked our chances, altogether. It also implied that there is no need for the public to push for such official usage, because the article made it look like it is already happening. It is not.

Also, the article implies that Prudence Calabrese and Angela Thompson Smith are ex-government viewers. They are not. Prudence was trained by Courtney Brown, who was the major player in the disastrous "Hale Bopp Comet" fiasco, where he (and she) were saying that the comet was followed by a space ship 7 times the size of the earth, filled with lizard people, etc. That fiasco abetted and was further inflamed by the "Heaven's Gate" people committing suicide to go be with the aliens. Since that fiasco, Pru has cleaned up her act very nicely, and is now doing some reputable work. But, Pru was never a part of any government program. She might have done some work concerning terrorists and sent it uninvited to some agency, but that is not the same as being asked to do the work.

Angela has been a researcher in this field for a long time and is one of the most honest and reputable people in it. She was not, however, connected to any military or government programs.

I realize that the shortness of the article prevented any lengthy explanations of any of this, but reporting that government agencies are using remote viewers (with the implication that it is official) may have actually prevented them from doing that at any time in the near future. Our efforts to make that happen have been set back quite a bit because of the way the article was (and was not) worded.

Anyway, it was a good article, overall, and I think that it definitely got the public interested, which is really the bottom line. I want to thank you for bringing it up and making it an issue of public interest. That is the most important thing of all. The bottom line is that I am very glad the article was written and published, and I want to thank you for doing so. The more the public knows of this science, the more acceptable it will become. I think that the total end result was very positive.

Finally; since anyone can be trained to use CRV, how can people learn from you?

We teach courses to individuals and to organizations which want to start their own in-house CRV efforts. For businesses, you would not believe the edge such a team can give a company. For individuals, we have a continuing program called the "Assigned Witness Program", which allows them to use their skills once they become trained, experienced, and fully tested, proven and thoroughly databased. For information on training and the AWP, readers can take a look at the website: http://www.crviewer.com.

Do you have any tapes etc.. that people can purchase?

Yes. None of them are what you would call training tapes, though. There are some very real dangers to the student when learning CRV, and I am totally opposed to "how-to" tapes and books. You really need a trained and experienced teacher working with you. I personally break the training into three separate courses, and usually spend about a total of 300 hours with each student after each course. This is the real thing, it is not a toy. It has real dangers, and should be done correctly and professionally, and you can't get that from a tape or book.

Anyway, the tapes we have are tapes of lectures at the annual CRV conferences, and workshops. Readers can either buy them through us, or can through the producers. Information on these can be purchased here.

What books would you reccommend to someone who wants to learn more about remote viewing in general?

Well, ahem! My book, of course! Plans are that it will be out next Fall under the title of "The Seventh Sense", published by Paraview/Simon & Schuster.

As for books on the market now, I would recommend "Mind Trek" by Joseph McMoneagle, "The Remote Viewers" by Jim Schnabel, "Tracks in the Psychic Wilderness" by Dale Graff, "Psychic Warrior" by David Morehouse, and "Your Nostradamus Factor" by Ingo Swann

Lyn; thanks for dropping by... be sure to try the blackberry cobbler next time. It's out of this world.

I wanted to bring you some blackberry jelly we make here - it tastes wonderful when you are eating it, but then has a distinctive aftertaste, due to the jabanero peppers (about twice as hot as jalapenos) in it. It really is good.