Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 8, 2016 - Project Camelot

02:22:13

DAZ SMITH - REMOTE VIEWER - EDITED FOR SOUND

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	As you know, we did an interview about a week ago with Dick Allgaier And Jim Mars, and that was a fascinating discussion.
	Today we're going to be talking to Daz Smith, who you'll soon see is quite an amazing remote viewer in his own right, and so we're going to be very, very excited to have him with us.
	And I'm going to read from his bio, just very briefly, sort of skim it, and then we'll get the real sort of 411 from him.
	So I just want to say that Daz Smith is a remote viewer from the UK and he's been doing this since 1997.
	He is trained in the military technique called CRV, which is controlled remote viewing.
	And for the past 16 plus years, he's practiced remote viewing and developed it to a level where he feels very confident.
	He wants to remind people that remote viewers are not 100% accurate.
	But if you're good at what you do, you can be around 60 to 80% accurate.
	And I have to say that Daz has got quite a record himself.
	So he might even go above the 80% from what I can tell of looking at his prior viewings.
	We're going to be talking by the way about August which has already happened obviously and September which In theory, has not happened yet.
	And talk about what he's seen for September and what that's all about.
	And we'll also go over his results from August, which appear to have been correct.
	And we're going to talk more about that.
	And so I want to say, again, he's part of the Farsight Institute.
	This particular project is called Cross Time.
	That they've been remote viewing lately for the last three, let's see, four or five months, I think it is.
	And that is a remote viewing the future as the biggest events publicized in major media outlets such as the New York Times.
	There's a few other newspapers they're using.
	So that's their target for each month and has been since April.
	So And this is now the beginning of September.
	He's worked with a missing person, I guess, 200 missing person cases up to 2013 at that point.
	And he'd worked for both U.S. police forces in cooperation with Find Me Group and apparently does remote viewing for other organizations as well.
	He has a remote viewing magazine that he published in 2009.
	And he's got several books.
	One is called Surfing the Psychic Internet.
	And I want to say that lately we've got this sort of cooperation with Amazon where we put all of our speakers' books on our store.
	And then if you go into our Camelot store at projectcamelotportal.com, You can find their books, and if you click on the book from there, you know, it helps Camelot, helps us pay the rent, and that sort of thing.
	So he's got, as I say, Surfing the Psychic Internet, Controlled Remote Viewing is another book that he published.
	Looks like 2013.
	Remote Viewing Dialogues, and that was in 2014.
	And he's written several articles.
	So his website is highly recommended and that's linked also on this, the same place on projectchemelotportal.com that you find the announcement for this show.
	So that's about what I've got for you.
	So thank you for joining us and I'm going to put Daz on the screen so you can say hello.
	To everyone, Daz, and it's great again to have you here.
	Hi there.
	It's nice to speak to you again, and it's nice to be here for everyone.
	Yeah, looking forward to a good show.
	Okay, lovely.
	So, I gave you, kind of reading your bio really roughly, and gave you something of an introduction, but could you, I actually, you know, Dick Allgaier on my show before, Maybe he misinterpreted that.
	I don't know what that entails, but maybe you could elaborate on that.
	Yeah sure.
	I initially first heard about remote viewing in 1992 and at that time it was a completely secret program so there was very very little information out and the internet was in its infancy so there was nothing on the internet either.
	So I initially had to wait for four or five more years before I could actually train in remote viewing and what I did then was I found some very basic Instructions on how to remote view online.
	And that was actually from Courtney Brown and Farsight, but we're talking, you know, 1995, 1996.
	And that was his method called SRV. So I trained myself in that in a little bit over a period of months, getting very good results.
	But it was a very complex method.
	And then, by pure chance, in an internet forum, I managed to hook up with an ex-Special Forces guy who was training medical techniques in Russia.
	And he offered, because he saw I was interested at the time and I didn't have any money, he offered to give me two days training in controlled remote viewing in London.
	And that was essentially the only training I ever had.
	And you really can't learn this kind of thing from two days training.
	So I took the two days training, but I've initially spent the last 20 years honing my craft myself, teaching myself, and asking questions of all the experts.
	And yeah, it's just practice, really.
	Practice and talent, natural talent, because that plays a part as well.
	Well, apparently in your case, that's the truth.
	So when you started out and you had such good results, how were you...
	Kind of doing your self-taught method.
	Well, unlike most remote viewers out there, I'm slightly different in the fact that I came from a household where being psychic was the norm and it was honored.
	We always had a library of books.
	So from the age of 10 onwards, I was reading the books and interested.
	And from the age of 15 onwards, I took what we call classical training in psychic techniques.
	So I'm essentially a trained healer, clairvoyant, medium, channeler.
	I've used every divination tool out there from sand, sand reading, TD reading, tarot cards.
	So I practiced in all those techniques.
	For, I think, eight years before I initially found remote viewing.
	So I wasn't really a newbie.
	I was well versed in those techniques.
	And I was good at them.
	But what they lack and what I got from control remote viewing was, well, the keyword control.
	Control puts you in charge of process.
	The classical techniques you see, you're kind of going along in the car and you're a passenger and all the psychic information speeds past you and you just have to look at it and you don't get a chance to control what's happening because you're the passenger.
	What happens with controlled remote viewing is you kind of swap places and you become the driver of the car.
	So as the information's coming in, I'm in control, being a driver, I can stop the car, I can look around, I can make a left turn, a right turn.
	So yeah, that's essentially the process really.
	Remote viewing that I found homed my natural techniques and gave me control over them.
	Oh, I see.
	Okay, well that's very interesting that you have such an interesting background in terms of Remote viewing and being psychic, that combination.
	And I think it's Joe McMoneagle has a background as a psychic as well.
	I often believe, I know remote viewers who teach this don't necessarily say this or advocate it, but I think the best remote viewers are psychic, have developed their other psychic talents.
	So that's, you know, excellent on your case.
	What I'd like to say, though, in terms of what has gone on with, you know, the viewings that you've done for Courtney, you seem to be right on, but there also seems to be a limitation there.
	And I'm wondering if it's self-imposed or if this is the nature of, you know, the kind of Protocols that you're using or how you would term this because, for example,
	when you did a very excellent remote viewing for August and it appears, and you can tell me for sure if you agree with this, that the Italian quake was something that you basically, you know, targeted.
	I agree about it.
	Okay.
	And yet at the same time, what I see is that you guys don't really, you don't try to go to figure out what part of the map you're looking at.
	In other words, you don't really drill down as far as one might think you could.
	And especially, yeah, in your case, I think you have the talent to do so.
	So can you tell us What limitations are you operating under when you're doing the Courtney Brown remote viewing and your thoughts about that?
	Yeah, sure.
	I mean, when I do, because I also do a lot of paid for client work and other projects as well, mainly science projects, I tend not to work Personal projects.
	Like every day of the week, I would get people inquire with me, will I help them find their cat and all this kind of stuff, and I would say no.
	Because it just doesn't interest me.
	I want to do something that fervors a remote viewing.
	So I do these projects like the one for Floursight, and Courtney's doing something that isn't done within the remote viewing community in the fact that not only are we doing this stuff predictively at the moment but we're also doing remote viewing live on camera and that's never really been done before because I know it sounds interesting but remote viewing itself especially through the CRV process When I sit down and I do a normal remote viewing session,
	not on a whiteboard, a normal way of doing a remote viewing session, it's a three hour process and it's, you know, it's really laborious on video because for an hour beforehand I'm meditating to get all the noise out of my head.
	Then the remote viewing goes on for an hour, an hour plus.
	And then it takes me another hour to scan 20, 30 sheets of paper and make a report for the project.
	So it's a three-hour process, which is really boring.
	But we can't show it up on video because people wouldn't want to watch it for that amount of time.
	So what Courtney's done is he's come up with this whole way of us trying to Do the remote viewing on a whiteboard.
	That's a whole new concept within remote viewing.
	No one really works like that.
	It's new to what Courtney's been doing the last two years.
	Also, at the same time, it's also hard for us as a remote viewer because not only am I there trying to do Be in a state of meditation and also get psychic information.
	But because we're doing this on a budget, I'm also the cameraman.
	I'm also doing the sound and doing the lights.
	I'm trying to control the environment.
	Not only that, I also have to do the psychic stuff on a whiteboard, but also try to remember at the same time that I need to speak to the camera and not go off into a zone.
	And I also have to keep in mind that I'm trying to do this to a 15-minute window as well because, you know, we can't do, Courtney can't do a video of three to four remote viewers each with an hour each doing remote viewing sessions because, again, it's boring.
	So I'm condensing all my information.
	It's a 15 minute window.
	What we usually do with remote viewing projects is, more complex ones, is we'll do the initial one like you guys see me do on, say, the Italy one that we just did.
	As part of a proper, bigger project, A tasker or an analysis person would then come back to me and say, okay, you've got all this information.
	Now do a second remote viewing, and on this one, hone in and tell me the actual location.
	And I would then go away and spend another hour to three hours finding a location.
	It's just that the constraints of these projects with Courtney, because Courtney does pay us for doing these, constraints of time in trying to create a media package that is YouTube friendly and Courtney's budget of paying three to four viewers to do this doesn't allow us to do multiple rate views.
	So what I'm saying is we could do it, but not within the constraints of Courtney's project because he doesn't have the budget or the media allowance.
	Okay.
	Well, you know, I think you and I talked offline a bit, and one of the things we talked about was the idea that actually, you know, there is a responsibility.
	If you look at the future and see something that is about to happen, as we have now, you've got one for September, But especially if it's kind of like, you know, the one for last month where you're seeing, you know, buildings collapsing, people dying, this sort of thing.
	There's an implied responsibility.
	It's one thing if you don't see the future, then you have less responsibility.
	But as a human, looking at the future, there is an implied responsibility that goes along with it, that goes even outside the protocols of Whatever Courtney has set up in his institute, let's say.
	So outside those parameters, it's a real world and lives could be saved or lost.
	So as a viewer, I think that there's sort of a schism, you might say, with the process and with the reality.
	And I also noticed this a long time ago when You guys did the Phoenix Lights.
	That's where it first became very obvious to me.
	You did a remote viewing of the Phoenix Lights.
	There was some kind of time travel implied in which you guys were, in theory, in touch with what could have been a cat being piloting one of the craft, etc., And then I was told by Courtney, you know, that you couldn't go and ask further questions or something.
	Like, you could ask three questions.
	And I understand you guys have protocols.
	I understand the limitations you're talking about.
	But then I'm thinking, this could be, you know, groundbreaking for humanity.
	If we are able to cross time, literally, he's calling it cross time in this case, but go across time and space and In sort of a real-time scenario, ask questions, get answers, and have a dialogue, and that human beings could actually witness this.
	And, of course, this is a huge case for also there being other beings in the universe and multiverses besides humans, which is really important that people start to realize.
	So, to get back to the Italian quake, Yes.
	Okay, you say you prepare, if I understood this, you're saying you're preparing or you're doing work ahead of time, ahead of the videotaping for three hours or so.
	And so you've already gotten some of your results and then you turn the camera on and then in a sense you become almost a performer.
	But at the same time you do appear on camera to actually be still doing a viewing.
	Yes.
	You're still immersed, so you've gone back in, in a sense, since the three hours.
	Correct.
	Okay, so all of that's going on, and what I'm thinking here is, you know, time and place are paramount.
	It's all very good.
	We have earthquakes all over the world all the time, to say, you know, or even collapsing buildings, you know what I mean, for various reasons.
	But if it's a large event and a lot of people are dying, etc., it seems very important To zero in.
	And to get the time and the place.
	And to just say, oh no, we can't afford it.
	I appreciate that, but I still think that that's sort of stepping out of the responsibility as a human being for something larger than what you're doing.
	And I understand this is outside the parameters of what you guys even signed up for.
	Suddenly you're Doing something where you are actually anticipating what could be, you know, a dangerous event, right?
	Yes, yeah.
	I totally agree.
	There is an ethical question here.
	It's kind of hard to answer fully because the project as it stands was changed after I think the first or second target where we had a problem with putting sessions timestamped on YouTube because none of the predictions we were making were ever meant to be fully in the public until the event actually happened.
	They were meant to be encrypted files that people could open up after the event and know that they've been timestamped and been done before the event.
	So that we wouldn't have this, we wouldn't have thousands or tens of thousands of people seeing the RV online and then waiting for an event to unfold.
	It would have been a bit more personal and only four or five of us would have known what the real data was on the event that was going to happen until it actually happened.
	But ethically, you're correct.
	The only problem is, I'm working free jobs.
	RV is a hobby, yes.
	I've worked with the Find Me group trying to find 250 missing, dead, murdered children and people.
	I would love for us to be able to put more time and money into being more accurate, but it would need more money being put into it.
	Not work and do remote viewing instead.
	I would love to.
	If someone wants to fund us, hey, I'll give locations.
	Me and Dick have been trained to give locations.
	When I work for the police, I can give the police a 20 page report, but they don't want to know How the missing person went missing, you know, if they're dead or alive and if they've been murdered, which I can give them and I do on many occasions.
	All the police want off us is a GPS coordinate of where they can go and find that missing person.
	And that's what we all have to provide as psychics and intuitives to the police.
	And on occasions, not every time because it's hard to do, but on occasions supplying a GPS coordinate, I've been within 100 metres of where they've actually found the body or the missing person.
	But again, it takes time and effort to do that.
	So it's very hard when we're in a context of a very small project with very limited funds to do that.
	But we could do it.
	It's just getting a project structure involved and a mechanism to allow people to do this.
	Without a doubt we could do it.
	And I know there's an ethical reason behind it.
	I mean, you know, just with some of the targets we've done, you know, the very first target I did was the plane that went missing and it turned out to be Egypt Air and I had a couple hundred people on it.
	Then the next target we hit was the Istanbul airport attack by terrorists.
	I don't know how many people were killed in that, but we predicted that a month in advance.
	And now we've got this big Italy earthquake things.
	Between all three of those, you're talking hundreds to thousands of people there.
	Potentially, if we had the time budget and the means, we could have possibly, I say possibly because it all depends on how time works, we could have possibly influenced or stopped any or all of those events.
	In a certain sense, it's all fair because this video, this kind of a discussion, allows for people who might be interested in funding you to hear this kind of thing and to realize that this is serious, that you're helping the police.
	Why not help the rest of humanity?
	Why not make this possible for You know, people to partake of and to understand that, you know, I'm hoping, you know, just as Project Camelot, making this kind of thing out there for people and, you know, asking the hard questions to you guys and drilling down a little bit in ways that perhaps other people don't do.
	This will raise awareness and people understand that humans are psychic.
	We are naturally psychic.
	And it's time that we realize that we're not psychic for no reason.
	In other words, it also has to do with saving our own lives, saving the lives of our friends and family.
	Not always can events be avoided, the results of events you might say.
	But it can be.
	It actually can affect things.
	In theory, if there was a missing person and you found them before they were killed, for example, then you can do a service in that way.
	And it's fascinating to hear that that's some of what you do, that you do search for missing people.
	Not anymore.
	I did do it for, I think, six years.
	Wow.
	And after a few hundred...
	Because a lot of them are deaths, rapes, murders, and it's children and all sorts of stuff.
	Right.
	It just starts to weigh on you.
	So after a while, I stopped working with the Find Me group, but they're still working as an organization.
	So if anyone out there is or feels they're psychic, they can approach the Find Me group, take a test, and join them and help the police themselves.
	Absolutely.
	Well, and, you know, it kind of gets down to a personal mission in that case.
	Yes, exactly.
	Now, I see that you have studied CRV, you know, through the protocols.
	I'm wondering, you had your own method, I assume, that you were using in the early days, and then CRV protocols came along, and then you studied that.
	Did you find there was any kind of issue between the one thing you had done in the past and the new thing you were doing, and how did it compare?
	Yeah, it's completely different.
	It's like stone and water, really.
	But for me, the archaic nature of being what we call a free-form or psychic or intuitive, I just didn't like the lack of control.
	By the way, I do still practice that kind of psychic intuition stuff, which is like channeling and talking to Talking to other life forms and beings, angels, aliens, all that kind of stuff.
	But that's completely separate from what I do with remote viewing.
	Because all that stuff, all that other classical side, because it has no protocols to it, no rules or structure like remote viewing, which comes from science.
	Not a lot of it can be verified.
	Whereas everything we try to do within remote viewing has to be done within...
	That's a very set structure and set of rules.
	We have to be blind as remote viewers.
	The data has to be recorded.
	Nothing can be spontaneous.
	It has to be proper organized projects.
	There has to be solid feedback for us to test accuracy.
	So all those together give us a very scientific construct.
	So it is two different things.
	But I prefer the more structured approach.
	And what I found is Two decades of doing controlled remote viewing has kind of honed to that part of it, so I'm very good at that now.
	But I would say my natural, intuitive, spontaneous side has atrophied, so I don't get as much spontaneous psychic information anymore because it's almost like I've turned that part off and turned this part on.
	But saying that, you know, when I do my remote viewing, I literally, because there's no hocus pocus about it at all.
	I could do it now.
	I could literally just sit here at this desk, grab a pen, stack of paper, do a few minutes to a half hour of meditation, you know, just where I just...
	Quiet my mind to get rid of all the worries about bills and noise in the street, all that kind of stuff.
	And then just spend an hour doing my remote viewing.
	So it's the control thing, really.
	But yeah, I am more controlled, which I think makes me more honed as a psychic.
	And not only that, because it's all scientific, I can verify it as well.
	So I have a track record and I've gone back years.
	For Courtney and many other people out there that I've done projects for showing a very high accuracy, you know, I would say I haven't really been solidly off target now.
	Now I've said this on camera, I probably will be.
	But up until this point today, I haven't been solidly off target on any kind of target for, I don't know, four, five, six years now.
	So I've had a very good accuracy rate of 80 to 90 plus percent on pretty much every target I'm doing.
	Yeah, I'm not surprised judging from what I've seen from you.
	Now, I also wonder about the filming of it, you know, because I am a filmmaker, and so I think, you know, I am aware of Project Camelot.
	You know, I do my interviews, you might say, on the fly, and I have to think on my feet, and I'm Doing it at all times.
	And I'm not running a script.
	I don't have a script in front of me of any kind.
	So I know the challenges of working with a camera and trying to also be on it, so to speak.
	And I wonder, you know, is this interfering, do you think, when you're doing this?
	And how have you been able to kind of adjust for that?
	And do you have any thoughts about that?
	It definitely interferes, as I said, because you do need to get a little bit into a zone, a little bit of space now trying to get on focus on what you're trying to do.
	But because we're doing this on such a small budget, you know, and I'm setting up and videoing myself.
	I am a photographer or training to be a photographer, but...
	Trying to set up and be a video person, then attaching a microphone, setting up lights and trying to get myself in focus.
	All this just adds to the noise that you just don't need as a remote viewer when all you want to do is get in front of the whiteboard and just attack the target and get the data down.
	So it's one of those things that, whereas if it were a proper organisation doing it with a proper budget and they had a small team to do that, I could literally just walk into a studio or something, get straight to it, And work on it.
	But yeah, we are slightly hindered in what we're doing.
	So I'm not trying to make excuses for us in any way.
	I'm just trying to let people know that we are amateurs trying to advance an area of study that needs advancing.
	But we're trying to do it with very limited budgets and very limited time scales.
	We would love to get more.
	We would love to get all the locations for you guys.
	And we can do it.
	It just, it all comes down to time and budgets.
	And bear in mind, especially with the Time Frost ones that we're doing, Time Court gets all the videos together, puts them all together and puts them all online and stuff from three or four different people from all over the world.
	It doesn't actually give us that much of a time window of time to actually all of us do paper remote viewing sessions and then move on to live recorded remote viewing sessions.
	You know, we haven't got huge amounts of time there, especially to go back and then him and him say, go back now and do another two hours and get me a location.
	The days are very, you know, we've only probably got about a seven day window within a month to get this kind of thing done.
	Right, okay.
	So in terms of the actual target, let's kind of make a transition onto there and talk about, you know, when, okay,
	see, what I observed, you know, and I don't know, you know, I think we had a little back and forth about this recent thing with the Elon Musk SpaceX explosion that did seem to match Dick Allgaier's At least portions of his fines.
	And I know the jury is still, or at least it was still out on all of that.
	But, you know, I had my own point of view and someone else who worked with me a bit was Keith Hunter, who happens to be in the UK as well, but he's an investigator and was watching these shows that I'm doing with you guys and the posts that I'm making.
	And so he was giving his own view of what he thought was maybe going to happen.
	And then I took that and kind of ran with it, I guess you might say.
	And I made an announcement.
	I even warned, I don't know if you saw that, but I warned Elon Musk on August 15th that there could be a hit on...
	The way I saw it was that SpaceX was being targeted.
	Yes.
	So I took the information about the capsule, which is there was an incoming object, according to Dick Allgaier, that was coming supersonic speeds and actually was going to be coming in one direction and then hit off what appeared to be possibly hit off course and hit buildings.
	Now, this didn't happen, but SpaceX was hit and there was a target and the target happened to be the rocket, which is called the Falcon.
	And he has, I think, four of them, and this is one of them.
	But, you know, some people thought the payload was the objective, but I don't think so, because you can get a payload once the satellite's up.
	If they want to hit it, they could do that and take it down.
	But hitting it while it's on the ground is very much a hit on SpaceX, the company.
	As I see it.
	So that target seemed at least to be feeding into Dix.
	So maybe he had a combination of what you saw and a combination of what this other incident.
	Maybe there was a mixture there and he was getting bleed through, so to speak.
	In your case, you seem to be pretty much right on and only on what appears to be the Italian quake.
	And yet we could pull that apart a bit and see just how much you were on and what, you know, because the evidence is also out there that there was a harp signature in the sky prior to the Italian quake, which indicates at least to many of us that have followed these sorts of things, that we've got a tectonic, you know, weather wars weapon in essence or some other form of attack.
	On Italy and there could be political reasons for doing this within these various factions that are vying with each other for power etc.
	So you've got this backdrop and it always interests me that when you're doing your remote viewing you don't necessarily see the backdrop or at least you if you do you don't talk about it and So I want to get into, first, if you could sort of analyze your own remote viewing and say that it does appear to me that you, Princess, and Dick were all three seeing different, possibly different targets on the August viewing.
	And I had misunderstood thinking you were supposed to all see the same target.
	It may be that...
	Okay, so do you want to kind of address all that?
	I mean, we're always meant to be seeing the same target, which is meant to be the...
	In this project's case, anyway, I'll talk about this project.
	We're all meant to be seeing the same target, and the target is meant to be the top...
	This is what I cue myself with, is I sit down and say, okay, I now have to sit down and remote view what's going to be the top news story next month that's going to be given to me as feedback.
	So that's kind of how I cue it, and that's how they should cue it as well.
	So we should all be viewing the same thing.
	Remote viewing in most cases isn't 100% accurate And what you tend to get with most remote viewing data is a combination of 60-70% real information and 30-40% noise.
	And this is the hard part of the remote viewing process.
	The hard part is for the person who's doing the analysis to work out what is real and what is the noise.
	And it's kind of complex because we're doing a project here that's Hard.
	If we were doing a project which were past events, I'd be able to give you a lot more solid answers.
	But because we're trying to predict, prediction projects are well known for many years.
	We're talking four decades now of remote viewing research.
	Predictive projects are known.
	To have very low accuracy ratings for trying to predict things in the future.
	Because we don't have a remote view and fully worked yet, we don't know why it's hard for us to nail these predictive projects down.
	So it's all speculation at the moment.
	Dick had all this stuff like this other stuff which could be based, and I'm not excusing it, it could have been the event that happened literally a day after the end of the month, the SpaceX blowing up stuff.
	I'm absolutely convinced it could be that.
	But at the same time, it could have just been noise in his session.
	Because we're doing a predictive project as well, because the structure of the project changed after the second month, and it's now a predictive project that's being discussed and analysed by tens of thousands of people online as we're doing it.
	There's just as much possibility that every single one of these people that are looking at the project are also changing the project before our very eyes.
	Yeah, well, chaos theory says that something changes when you look at it.
	I mean, there is that aspect and there's no doubt that, you know, we're getting into things like, I mean, time travel is an issue, time and space, multiple dimensions bleeding through possibly.
	What we also call is potential timelines, timelines that may be in the process of forming but haven't quite taken formation.
	And then maybe get discarded because you get a whole audience coming in who is then having their own filters, etc.
	So I think that's a very valid argument for...
	And it's my belief that because we don't know how remote view works and we don't know why we can't get the future, it's very hard for us to say which bit is interfering or if there is any interference at this stage.
	But it's my theory that...
	After two decades of doing this, that everything we just discussed here is all happening.
	You know, it's not black or white, what we're doing here.
	Everything has an influence.
	So Dick might have had a bit of noise in his sessions.
	He might have been a day out because, you know, you can't tell your subconscious not to skip a day.
	If it sees an event, it sees an event.
	It doesn't know...
	You know, your subconscious doesn't know to stop at certain time dates because time doesn't physically exist.
	Time doesn't exist around us.
	So you may have skipped a day.
	It may have been noise.
	It may have been something to do with multi-dimensions.
	It may have just been the nature of time itself.
	It may have been the tens of thousands of people that are all looking at this and because they're looking and they're all the next day saying it could be SpaceX.
	That could have been what they looked at.
	You know, you could have been looking at the feedback, which is all these people saying it could be SpaceX.
	Yeah, but what was, you know, one thing that was interesting in my, because it was just, well, you could call it a coincidence, wasn't a coincidence, but my interview with Dick Allgaier, who I couldn't get a hold of the whole month of August as it happened.
	But finally got through to Jim Mars, and because Jim got a hold of Dick, then we got it scheduled for the last day of August.
	That's when the show happened.
	So it was literally the night before the event at SpaceX.
	And even, you can watch that show that I did, and you can see that Dick is actually saying, oh, I just made a mistake.
	I had, you know, like you said, you know, things.
	And I was arguing that no...
	I thought he was accurate and that what he was seeing hadn't happened yet and that it may still have to do with the SpaceX thing.
	I mean, I actually was arguing that point with him and saying that, you know, he was being too hard on himself.
	That's where we have to be as remote viewers.
	Yeah.
	Because we've trained ourselves to work within these very rigid scientific protocols.
	If it doesn't fit within the confines of the project parameters, we have to say to ourselves, okay, You know, it was out.
	So it's out.
	We have to take responsibility for it.
	Right.
	Okay.
	But nonetheless, okay, but to get to your actual viewing, let's talk about the Italy quake and let's talk about how did it hit you when you heard about the Italy quake and you knew about your own viewing and where did you think you were on and did you think you kind of got off on any areas?
	Let's zero in on that.
	Well, I mean, Earlier in the month, when I spoke to you over email, and I spoke to Dick and a few of the others as well, I never agreed with their data.
	Because we all have our own opinion.
	All I can agree with is my data, really.
	And I knew from the very early on that it didn't feel like a terrorist attack because it didn't feel like what I felt in a terrorist attack because there was so much grand vibration.
	And I tried to get that across.
	And I don't know if you've seen my paper session, but in my paper session, three times I wrote down that this is an earthquake.
	So I was convinced right from the very beginning that the whole event that was going to happen, or the main event for that month, was going to be an earthquake.
	The only thing I didn't get, I feel, and I didn't get Correct.
	I didn't explain myself properly because I'm trying to do it within 15 minutes on a lightboard.
	I did this little sketch of the world and I said, okay, it doesn't feel like you're up.
	It feels like down here.
	And I've I didn't explain myself right when I said that because I did it too fast.
	What I meant was when I said it didn't feel like Europe, I meant it because I'm always using where I am in time and space as my reference point, which is in the UK, which is usually cold and wet.
	So what I meant by it didn't feel like Europe, I meant it didn't feel like it's a cold, wet place like this part of Europe, which is France in England and Yeah, Northern Europe.
	Yeah, what I meant to try to say was it's south of me and it's hotter and it's dry.
	Right.
	But I didn't explain myself when I said that.
	But I didn't give an exact location.
	I just knew because remote view is very subtle as well.
	I don't know if people, if your listeners know this, but we don't get big Flashing images in our head or not all the time anyway 99% of what I get as a remote viewer are these very Very indistinct, very subtle feelings inside me.
	So I'm writing on the board and I just know things.
	So I don't see that it's south of me or feed it.
	I'm just there right on the board and I kind of get the impression I say, okay, well, I know the location's going to be warmer and it's drier and it's kind of down here somewhere, but it's so subtle.
	That's the only way we can express ourselves.
	We don't get flashing pictures in our heads of big pieces of information.
	Well, you do sometimes, though.
	I do, but in CRV training, you're trained to ignore those, because most of those are imaginations.
	Yeah, you call that overlay or something.
	Yeah, when you see us right to the side, or when you see me right to the side, AOL, which stands for Analystical Overlay, That's where the mind and the imagination is creeping in.
	Because what it does, it sees all the data coming in, and your mind always wants it to please because of the ego.
	So it sees all this data coming in and saying, oh, I know what this is.
	I know what this is.
	It's an earthquake.
	But that's a conclusion.
	And this is another thing I need to describe for your viewers, really.
	Another part of the controlled remote viewing process is we are not allowed to name anything.
	So if the target actually is a plane, we're not actually allowed to say it's a plane.
	Anytime plane comes into our mind, we have to put it over here to one side because that's an analytical process.
	So your mind's seeing bits of information come in and then it makes a guess.
	And that guess could be right, but it could also be wrong.
	So we always have to put that to one side.
	So CRV, or controlled remote viewing, is all about describing.
	That's why you'll see me on the board say things like, it's code, it's hard, it's dark.
	There's rang bits, jagged bits.
	We're trying to describe the targets in as much detail as possible so that you kind of know what it is, but I'm not actually allowed to say, this is what it is.
	Anytime you claim anything, it's wrong.
	Well, it eliminates the possibility of being actually, you know, as you say, jumping to conclusion because, for example, like what I did was when Dick Allgaier used the word supersonic, I went and looked to see what goes supersonic.
	Do planes go supersonic?
	And at the moment, although they may have some secret planes that do that, You know, commercial jets don't.
	And so immediately I knew that whatever object that was, that if he was accurate in saying supersonic, that it had to be something that would come in at those kinds of speeds.
	So, you know, and I understand where it could be a plane, it could be a UFO, it could be a, you know, it could be a metallic object that we don't even know exists.
	You know, it could be a drone, it could be, you know, there are so many options when you get into describing well it's it's it's appears to be metallic or he said like burning and this and that in your case I was wondering if you saw that it was landlocked did you at any point see this area as being landlocked because it is landlocked and I I think that was somewhat of a problem in terms of the description because As it happened right
	off the bat, Dick had a bay, you know, with land jutting into a bay.
	And so, you know, that was an issue.
	No, I didn't...
	I have to be honest, I didn't...
	I didn't...
	Because sometimes in remote viewing, you can key yourself to move, you know, 200 feet above the target or wherever you want.
	I didn't really do any of those movement exercises within this target.
	I kind of just, for some reason, have my attention focused around a set of structures that just...
	We're collapsing and vibrating and lots of people are dying.
	I didn't see anything other than this this village or city of structures that were in trouble and maybe trying to focusing and what we call door knobbing where you focus too much attention on one place I kind of I feel I felt I was looking at one structure in particular but I don't know but I felt there were more than one so to answer question no I
	I've heard in the immediate surroundings of a few hundred meters or so, I didn't really go any further than that within my remote viewing.
	Yeah, and I thought that was interesting and I also want to look at September as well.
	You know, for people to understand that it does seem of the three viewings, you got the Italian Quake.
	Again, actually, Princess, I thought her viewing was fascinating, but I am not sure what she was getting.
	She seemed a little more similar to Dick's as it happened.
	But even then, and you know, at this moment, To be honest, I'm wondering, you know, it might be, you know, I don't know if you guys would agree or disagree with this, but since you're doing this on video, it would be very advantageous to have a crew that is filming you instead of yourself.
	Because myself, when I do, even when I do interviews, the fact that I have to deal with technology, it's an interesting thing, and I don't know if you have this, but...
	The more I get, and this happens to me when I'm also speaking in public and I have to film myself or have a team working for me that I have to tell them, you know, put the camera here and do all this kind of thing.
	When I have to think about what I'm looking like, what I'm doing, all this kind of thing, it distracts me from my internal...
	Information that's coming in.
	And what happens is I am getting downloads when I interview.
	And, you know, I haven't talked a lot about this in public, but it's a fact.
	I get psychic information coming in.
	I get downloaded information.
	And sometimes I even feel like I'm channeling.
	And it's wonderful.
	You know, I'm not terribly happy that that happens, but I seem to be doing a mission in which I have a lot of, you know, unseen backup, let's say, who help me and help me clue into certain things.
	So I'll ask amazing questions, and I don't take credit for that sometimes because they come in out of, you know, they can be completely off in left field where I had no clue that this was going to be the case with the person.
	And then it ends up being right on.
	And so that's very exciting when that happens.
	So in your case, I'm wondering, because I saw you and particularly you and Princess, it seems.
	Could use kind of a director, in a sense.
	Someone who would say to you, well, ask you a question so that you would drill down a little deeper, even in those 15 minutes, and say, okay, we got that.
	We got that there's, you know, buildings.
	But could you go up a bit higher?
	Is there anything you see there?
	That type of thing.
	Absolutely.
	And that's how remote viewing was initially designed to be done.
	You'd have what we call a monitor in the room.
	Who would also be blind to the target.
	They would generally know what it is.
	But because they're not doing what we're doing, they have an outside view so they can kind of guide the person and say, well, no, you missed a bit here.
	Or what they also do is they get very good at looking at micro-movements of the remote viewer and getting to know the remote viewer so they kind of know if they're doing something where they should be looking over here or if they've looked at something and quickly bypassed it where they should be going a bit more in-depth.
	So absolutely, yeah, I totally agree with that 100%.
	Again, it comes down to We're doing this project, you know, at an amateur level.
	We would love to do more and it's very experimental and there's so much more this kind of project could do if only there were more people with more budget and time allowance to do it.
	Absolutely.
	I totally agree.
	Okay.
	Yeah, I think that would be really interesting because when I'm watching your sessions, I'm saying to myself, God, you know, I see him going to, you know, over the same ground during the 15 minutes.
	I would love You know, to see him look higher.
	Because I know Princess, she's pretty good at actually putting herself in a different...
	She keeps kind of stopping, checking, and then going to a different place.
	Now, in her case, what I'd like her to do is drill down deeper because you tend to drill down...
	Really deeply in the areas you go, but sometimes you don't go to the areas outlying.
	Whereas, you know, it's all, you know, a person's proclivity, you know what I mean?
	Absolutely.
	We're all individuals, so we all have individual skills.
	And, you know, I've always said, after doing this for two decades, I've always said, if I had my dream team that I could build, because remote viewing also relates to your life skills as well.
	What you're good at in life, you just bring into remote viewing.
	I'm an artist.
	So sketching and moving around, creative processes is very easy for me.
	But I would say my dream team would be an engineer, a physicist, a doctor or nurse, an artist, and an architect.
	If I had all those as good remote viewers and one team working a project, I'm sure we'd be able to nail every project every single time because they all bring their little bits and pieces of their day jobs into their remote viewing.
	Yes, yes, your skill sets, you know, additional skill sets.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	So what I would like to do now is look at September.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	So can you talk about September and tell me what you think about, you know, let's describe, go ahead and describe your session and tell me if you think it happened yet.
	And if it hasn't happened, you know, see if you could Even in this thing, take your viewing that you saw and say, were there gaps in what you were doing then?
	Like, did you not back up and look higher?
	Did you not do this or that?
	Or, you know, even just kind of critically looking at your own September viewing.
	Here we are in, I think it's the 9th of September?
	Yeah.
	I'll try to do as best I can.
	You have to bear with me now because...
	I know you do a lot, and you've got a lot of other things.
	I've moved on to other projects, and I'm essentially trying to do it from memory, what I talked about.
	It was a conflict session, wasn't it, if I remember correctly?
	I do remember now.
	It's a bunch of crowds, and it appears to be a riot, and so on.
	Yeah, it felt...
	This is where it's hard because it's feelings.
	It felt like a riot type situation, but I couldn't say it was definitely a riot.
	It did feel like a social uprising.
	It's a situation that started off very small, with a very small incident that kind of snowballs and gets bigger and bigger.
	It's almost like, and as these people were moving through streets, and it was definitely streets of an urban city, it seemed like they were picking up more people as they moved through the streets.
	It felt very social, and the social kept coming up a lot, and I don't know if that meant it was social because it was picking up people off the streets and they were joining it and moving along with it.
	Or whether, or if this is both, or whether social media has a big part to play in this.
	And people were tweeting, and then they were meeting and joining because of that social event.
	My personal feeling is it's part of both of those.
	So I had this, it's a very small event that snowballs out of control.
	It's almost like a civilian population.
	It feels like they have an uprising.
	They say, okay, we've had enough now.
	This has gone too far.
	It feels like they move in great, and they were very angry, very loud, very vocal.
	They're moving through the streets of the city, somewhat stealthily in parts, where they're ducking behind walls and all this kind of stuff.
	In other parts of it, it's very abrasive, very angry, throwing frames, shouting, very volatile, maybe destroying things as they go.
	And what they do is they end up having a clash with Another group of life, and this other group of life feel like they're in a defensive mode.
	They feel like they're behind a defensive structure or barrier of some kind.
	They're all wearing uniforms.
	They're a bit more calmer because they're quite trained.
	They have weapons.
	They're under orders.
	They're in a tiered structure of organization.
	Yeah, so it felt like it had the word conflicts.
	It felt like a war, but not It didn't feel like a proper war with two sets of armed soldiers and support weapons and helicopters and all that kind of stuff.
	So I have to say it felt like a war and it felt like a conflict and it felt like there were some serious injuries and I would say some deaths but I'm not sure if it's a lot of deaths because I didn't feel there was a lot of death.
	But there may be one or two.
	So yes and that does describe what I watched your viewing and What I would ask you, though, and what was coming across my mind was a few things.
	One of the things that I noticed is you can pick up language.
	So you can pick up whether people are speaking English or another language, for example.
	And so I would wonder whether you picked that up.
	And the other thing is where.
	And you kind of seem to think possibly Middle East, but you weren't sure about that.
	And there do seem to be buildings and so on.
	But, you know, so this is the kind of thing where I'm wondering, could we drill down?
	And, you know, obviously, I know there's a tendency when I ask you these questions to actually, you know, say that you're going to go look at it again.
	In other words, you could even do that while we're on the show here now.
	But that's not really fair to you because, you know, I'm not paying you and so on and so forth.
	But first of all, so can you drill down a little bit at all?
	Or did you have paperwork that drilled down that you don't talk about on the screen?
	No, there's nothing.
	I mean, all the paperwork we do for each of these is all up online for people to have a look at.
	Right.
	Right.
	So you can download the paperwork now for that session and have a look at it.
	Okay, but because I didn't do that, and we're here with the audience, is there anything in the paperwork that you haven't addressed right now?
	I wouldn't know, as I said, because I'd move on from one project to another.
	I'm hardly remembering what I did on that target.
	So I wouldn't know without having a look myself, to be honest.
	When I say...
	The location of it, I say it felt Middle Eastern, and again, this is where I'm not being specific enough.
	I say that because it felt warmer than where I am in the UK. The air felt different than where I am in the UK. I think that might be the humidity.
	Again, I'm just trying to describe it as best possible as I can possibly.
	It felt dustier.
	The people The way they were dressed.
	This is a very subtle feeling.
	The way they were dressed, how they moved the actual state of the houses or the environment of the city felt quite a bit more basic than a modern city.
	It felt modern-ish, but not like New York or London-type modern.
	It felt Some of the structures and streets they were moving through seemed to be almost like simple dwellings, back streets type things.
	It didn't feel like modern glass and stone built-up buildings.
	But I'm not saying all of it wasn't like that.
	There may have been one or two like that, but the back streets weren't like that, where I saw the people moving through the back streets.
	So that's why I said Middle Eastern, because it feels...
	It felt like it was a hotter, dustier, more basic kind of living type location.
	And in my mind, it was feeling kind of, yeah, people felt kind of Middle Eastern-y in what I was feeling.
	Okay.
	So at this moment, do you think it's happened?
	I haven't seen anything in the news like I did with the rest of the targets, right?
	All of them that maybe go, that's what I saw.
	Okay.
	I would say no, not yet.
	Alright.
	Okay, so in terms of, just out of curiosity, are you guys doing an October viewing as well in the same project?
	Or is this the end of it?
	The others are.
	That's my last target for this project.
	I've left the project now.
	Oh, you have?
	Yes, that's my last one.
	Oh, alright.
	Okay, so that's interesting.
	So we'll see what happens as a result with this target.
	At the moment, are you aware of what Dick and...
	This time we had four people.
	I think it was Dick and Princess and another person who I'm not familiar with.
	Aziz, yeah.
	Yes.
	I think he's going to be my replacement.
	I think that's Courtney's son.
	Oh, alright.
	And...
	How does it work?
	You do your viewing, I assume, isolated without knowing the target or without knowing the other people's viewing results, and then afterwards you get a chance to actually hear about their viewing results or not?
	No.
	The only time I would get to see it is when Courtney puts it online for everyone else to see it.
	Oh, alright.
	I've never spoken to Aziz or Princess.
	I've only spoken to a handful of times.
	Okay.
	And I hardly ever speak to Courtney.
	So we never dialogue at all either.
	Okay.
	This is very funny.
	We're not allowed to.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, we're not allowed to.
	So none of us ever speak.
	And even though the September stuff's online, and this is the same with the August stuff, I hardly ever...
	Even afterwards.
	I haven't seen all the dicks or princesses stuff for all of us.
	And I haven't seen all of their stuff since September.
	Because although it's interesting for your guys' point of view from doing the projects and stuff, the only...
	I'm just interested...
	I know it sounds a bit egosistical, but I'm only interested in what I've got, really.
	I can't verify or say anything about what anyone else has got, so I tend not to preoccupy myself or try to...
	Just in case something might happen and, you know, we do remote viewing each other's information without knowing, I tend not to even look at what other people have done on targets most of the time.
	Okay, well, let me ask you though, you know, just to bring it into the real world, you know, you guys could see something near one of you.
	You're all in different parts of the globe and, you know, it might be important that you have some communication.
	You know, this is...
	Okay, it's not allowed in your protocols, you're kind of saying.
	And it's also not allowed for you...
	I mean, I wonder about that.
	And this is just, again, just exploring this whole notion of what you're doing, is if you were to come together as a team, since you are, in a sense, whether, you know, it's a remote team, but it's a team...
	You know, and have feedback, good feedback, like sessions where you, you know, sure, Courtney has his conclusions or whatever, I'm sure.
	But they're not necessarily in just because a person has a good interpretation or a good analysis from the outside of what you saw doesn't mean they still understand what you saw because maybe it wasn't conveyed properly.
	You know, it's like if I see a film And then I go back and I tell you about the film I saw.
	You're not necessarily going to have the same impression of the film I saw.
	And you might even get the wrong impression.
	So dialoguing and having feedback sessions, etc., etc.
	I know that this is a different philosophy or whatever, different approach.
	But let's say you were in the military and you were doing the same thing.
	I don't know, but it seems to me like if you had a session and you brought the team together and you said, okay, in this session, it looks like I've got three different targets, three different things going on.
	It looks like you've got some overlays, you know, here.
	It looks like you didn't go high enough over here, you know.
	And then also having a viewer also go to another viewer and say, actually, I'm seeing what you saw, but it's not what I saw, and I'll tell you why.
	You know, all the kinds of dialogues you can have.
	It's a learning experience.
	It's learning for all of you, not just, you know, the public, right?
	As part of approach...
	Before I start, this doesn't go on in any other project I've ever worked for, and I've worked for everyone, that kind of thing doesn't happen.
	But it's something that I and others have suggested should happen because an analyst always looks at my data, including Courtney and many others, and comes up with a conclusion.
	But hardly ever have they ever come to me after I submit my data and say, okay, well, what do you think?
	Yeah.
	Which is a missing part of the entire process.
	Incredible, really.
	So what they're describing would be an absolute ideal situation to get all the remote viewers around the table afterwards, all of us conflab, compare information, and get that on camera as well as part of a process.
	Yeah, that would be, you know, that would be invaluable.
	Again, though it's, you know, time, effort, money, you know, four of us being in different parts of the world is kind of hard to do, but If there were sufficient means and viewers to do a project with all the things we discussed that we could do if there were means to do it,
	like going back and getting more information, doing this extra remote view where we all discuss it, They would be very, very big increases to remote viewing on projects, and they would massively help the, not accuracy of data, but the amount of data that we could give across as remote viewers.
	Absolutely, 100%.
	They would massively improve it.
	Well, yeah, and it also, you know, because viewers could learn from each other, you know, we all learn from each other, and It's possible.
	It's just like a team.
	Let's say you have a reconnaissance team that goes out on a job, even in Iraq or whatever.
	And they all had experiences out in the playing field, so to speak.
	And they come back and they compare.
	They say, well, this, that, and the other.
	I think we could have done this better.
	You know, you can learn from each other's mistakes, so to speak, as opposed to just your own.
	That would be a great part of the process.
	And at the moment, it kind of happens individually.
	So, you know, on some projects, we will look at each other's data and say, oh, yeah, they got this and I got that.
	But it's never anything that's formalized.
	And in reality, if the budgets and the facilities were there, it would be an added bonus to have all that recorded on video.
	You know, all of us sat around the table preparing stuff.
	Because what we could essentially do is take all our individual data, And if we, you know, if the technology were there, and I think it is there now, we could probably even build 3D generated maps of all our data actually there live, you know.
	So one person would say, okay, I got this from above.
	And I would say, well, I got this from the center of the target.
	This is structures and they're falling.
	And then someone else can say, well, I got this at a street level, you know, 100 meters away.
	So we can actually build, you know, physical, almost 3D rendered, yeah, maps and diagrams of targets if the facilities were to allow us to do it.
	Well, one can imagine, let me say this, that the military is doing this in a more, and I don't know whether they use the process that I'm talking about because, you know, with the military, who knows what they do, but...
	You know, this is the future of humanity.
	Understanding that if we're, you know, a species that sees the future, or possible futures, and can predict sometimes with very good accuracy.
	I mean, I think it was the Harvard study that revealed that everyone had seen, in essence, Had a precog about 9-11, even though they didn't necessarily know what they were seeing.
	They definitely got something was coming.
	It was big, et cetera, et cetera.
	And all the, you know, graphs were showing this kind of thing.
	So it's like animals, you know, animals before an earthquake, they get weird.
	Dogs are said to bark a lot, you know, so-and-so.
	They go hiding.
	Sometimes they actually go missing.
	I forget who it is.
	There's a geologist who...
	Started tracking missing animals in a way to trigger himself to know when the quakes that he thought might be coming along might be coming along, you know, that there's things you can test.
	So I'm just saying how this is the wave of the future.
	And so people that want to discount this, I have to caution them that this is what we do anyway.
	Yes, you're doing a controlled situation, but in essence...
	Looking at the results, seeing where you could have taken them, seeing the opportunities possibly lost, you know, for learning, for preventing, for protecting, for healing, etc., etc.
	You know, in other words...
	This is the kind of thing that I think it's worthwhile for people to look closer at.
	So that's why we're doing this show here and that's why we're having this discussion.
	It all helps because as we've just, you know, I think I've described on Dick and maybe even Courtney, this is all highly experimental.
	Hardly anyone's doing this kind of, well, no one, there are no other remote viewing practitioners or schools that are doing public projects and Courtney, although I'm not going to be working with him on these projects anymore, fair play to the guy.
	He's spent the last seven years doing fully public projects, putting the information out there, and there are no other remote viewers or schools doing that kind of stuff.
	He is trying as best as he can, and every bit of money he makes from selling DVDs when he sells the DVDs from remote viewing, it all goes back into paying For people like me and Dick and stuff to carry on doing these projects, because Courtney is aware that we are holding, well, some of us are holding down two or three jobs just to survive, really.
	None of us are rich.
	Right.
	Okay, one last question for me, and then I'm going to look on the chat to see what...
	We have quite an audience here, and I'm asking them to put their questions in all caps.
	So what I want to know is...
	Do you ever see the background?
	Do you ever see the perpetrators?
	Do you ever see information pertaining to that?
	And I do see that you never mention it.
	So is there a protocol saying you can't mention it?
	Or is this some kind of self, you know, editing thing going on with all of you guys?
	Because it seems to me the perpetrators are worth identifying if there are any, you know.
	I mean, we do to a certain degree.
	Like on the Istanbul terrorist attack I predicted a month in advance, I said that it was going to be three dark-skinned males that were going to go into the airport and they were going to blow it up.
	So, I mean, I didn't go, you know, we can't name them by name because you can't get names within the way of viewing.
	Okay, but what about the idea that some of these, because there are these things we call false flags, and we know they're false flags, and we've got people that study them.
	In fact, I'll just give a plug right here, because tomorrow, at the same time, I'm going to be interviewing Ole Damogard about some new evidence that's come forward about Martin Luther King's assassination.
	And so, in other words, yes, you saw, you know, just like the box cutters and the supposed, you know, 9-11 so-called terrorists.
	The whole thing was an inside job, and we know it was an inside job.
	Well, we reviewed that as well.
	I don't know if you've seen our...
	No, I haven't.
	But again, what I'm saying here is, do you go far back?
	Because again, when you see something, you see it.
	You're seeing the physical, you might say, the physical evidence in front of your eyes.
	But what about what happened before the event that led to the event that may stimulate the event to happen, especially the human side, the planning, the conspiracy?
	Yes.
	Yeah, we can do that.
	And on a target like Courtney's 911 target, because we spent three months doing that one, and Courtney paid us to keep going back to each target, both Dick and I described how the towers were rolled down, how the Pentagon was attacked, And these sets of people behind it.
	I go into great detail describing two or three teams of mercenary-trained white people, you know, people placing explosives in Building 7, WTT 7.
	We go into great detail.
	Dick draws sketches of the people and I draw sketches of people sat around board tables wearing suits and ties.
	Some of the sketches can be identified to being very famous people high up in the US government.
	So yes, we can and we do get very detailed data.
	But on a target, we're allowed to go back in and re-task.
	So if you want to see some stuff like that, I'd definitely advise you to have a look at the 9-1-1 sessions we did.
	And the same on the...
	On the Kennedy assassination, which we did as well, we looked at the Kennedy assassination, and not only did we fully describe where the shots came from and the people behind the shots, it so blew Jim Mars away, he just couldn't believe it.
	He said, you know, you've got in a few hours what has taken me three decades to find out.
	Okay, excellent.
	On the ones where we're allowed to do really in-depth information, you know, which are constrained by time and money, we can get massive amounts of data and follow those people right back to who conspires.
	And in both those cases, we do say who are behind the shootings.
	And, you know, in the JFK, when it wasn't possible, it was, you know, it was an absolute conspiracy.
	I think we spent two whole sessions each, which is for me four hours and same for the other guys, all on video describing the board meetings that these people were having planning the 9-1-1 events.
	And it wasn't Saudi Arabia, it wasn't Saudi Arabians or ISIS or Afghanistan people, it was people in business suits.
	Right.
	So yeah, we can get that kind of data and it is there.
	Excellent.
	Okay, so let me tell you something though.
	Now for September, did you watch the September results of the other people at all?
	I... Not fully.
	I kind of YouTubed it and scanned through it and went, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Okay.
	Because when I'm struck by, I think it was Dick, but I'm not sure, you know, so don't quote me on this.
	But you can go watch the video, by the way.
	It's also on my website now in the same page.
	Section that is advertising the show today as really background viewings for people that were going to watch the show.
	Hopefully they would have watched this and know what I'm talking about, but if not, go to my website projectcamelotportal.com and click on this event and you'll see the videos for both August and September viewings.
	So the September viewing.
	He's actually viewing two things.
	One, which appears to be a sort of a meeting at a very official place with limousines pulling up and what I think are flags.
	And it sounds actually similar to the United Nations in New York.
	I don't know if that's actually exactly the target, but he describes something very similar to a big meeting there or a big meeting at the City of London with the bankers, that kind of thing.
	Is G20 going on this month?
	It already happened, though.
	Okay.
	Actually, it may still be going on, but it started a few days ago, as I recall.
	So I think it might be over by now.
	But anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that he saw two sets.
	So then he saw that, and then he saw what you seem to be describing, more similar.
	So again, we have sort of a split going on where you're seeing one event, he's seeing at least two different events at two different places, and...
	But bear in mind that you've kind of seen that Dick had that pattern in his previous session, so maybe that might be a Dick pattern.
	Maybe.
	Maybe even lately.
	Maybe it's a new pattern for him.
	We don't know.
	Because this is public, again, it could change the way you're doing it.
	I think because we've now gone public, and this is one of the reasons why I'm leaving as well, the project, is because it's now public...
	It's my belief, and it's not quality of belief, but it's my belief that because it's public now and there are more people involved watching it, that each moment we do this now that it's more public, it becomes less and less accurate because there are more people changing it.
	Well, could go in the other direction, let me just warn you, you know, with all fairness and in due respect, to say that something is going downward because there's more people It can also go the other way.
	It could get more accurate.
	Now, it depends.
	It's like any sort of psychic group event in which we're all a part of, and this is possibly how the future is built anyway.
	In other words, right now we have potential futures.
	Right now people are weighing in, and right now they're changing their decisions from moment to moment to day to day.
	For example, in other words, I was thinking of moving, but I don't have enough money, so I changed my mind and decided not to move.
	Anything can happen, you know, with humans, right?
	But my belief is that that's speculation.
	It causes noise, and noise is what causes the problems in the system.
	Because of distraction for you guys, maybe.
	Yes.
	Perhaps, but it could also happen that you become better at interpreting the crowd, you know, in a sense, you know, what's his name, Wow, Cliff High's WebBot.
	You know about that, right?
	It goes out and gathers all this information on the web that people are talking about, and then it basically figures out what we're looking at.
	And because we're psychic, it bases itself on that notion that we are precogs, in essence.
	And then it picks up what's going to happen in the future by, you know, percentages.
	But I think it's often...
	In my opinion, rather inaccurate.
	And there are reasons for that.
	But nonetheless, there are also reasons for its accuracy.
	And it could have to do with, you know, because as a public person, let me just say, the minute you, you know, I was talking about the difficulty in doing the job I do and doing it publicly.
	So, and this, you know, obviously, you know, Hollywood stars know this syndrome.
	Anybody who's well known, anyone on a public platform knows that you may in the beginning get thrown off by being in that position.
	But eventually you can actually it can actually help you.
	You can work with it and the energy coming towards you.
	If assuming it's positive.
	Now, if they're aiming nothing but negativity, that's a whole other ballgame.
	But you know what I'm saying?
	In other words, I just would caution you to assume that it's going to be a problem.
	It may be a problem in the beginning.
	Eventually, you yourself as an instrument...
	Could begin to weigh that in in a more filtered way such that it helps rather than hinders your process.
	I'm open to anything because, you know, we don't know how any of this works.
	So any theory and anything's possible.
	So I am open to that.
	Okay.
	And it's not the only reason why I'm leaving the project.
	I just, me and Courtney, have conflicts of opinion on how the projects run and stuff.
	So, yeah, that's another reason why I'm...
	I'm not doing it.
	So it's not wholly that reason, because it's public, but based on my experience, that's one of the reasons why I'm moving to other stuff, really.
	Okay, so I guess somebody wants...
	I'm looking at the chat now to get questions, and I am seeing that some people are not even understanding what we're talking about, but I can say that if you don't realize that During this conversation, maybe you came in late, Daz has been accurate in his August viewing.
	He viewed the Italian earthquake.
	It did happen.
	Go read the newspaper if you want to hear about the Italian quake and go watch his viewing to see how it matches.
	So that would be your homework in that case.
	As far as September, he's already said the September one did not happen.
	They're not just viewing any events.
	They're only viewing the major events of that month that are going to show up in the newspapers.
	Would you have another way of...
	Describing the target, the way you've been told to target?
	The target for me, when it eventually happens, is the one, you know, because I have to go by the rules of the project, is the one that the four news sources Courtney are tracking by their links is the top news feed of that month.
	That's the only way I determine what the target is.
	Okay.
	So that's what they're looking at.
	In a sense, they're not just looking at the globe for important things happening.
	They're looking for what's going to show up in the newspapers, you know?
	It's kind of interesting because some very important things can happen, but they won't be in the newspapers, obviously.
	Absolutely.
	And this is one of my problems with Courtney's.
	We discussed this with me and Courtney.
	One of my problems with the way the project's being run is that the four news sources that are tracking the news in this project are primarily US-based in what they deal with in the news, so some of the smaller but higher news events around the world aren't being tracked.
	Well, that's important, I have to say.
	And the other thing I have to say that I think is really important about this is that, of course, the mainstream press lies.
	So they're constantly misleading you.
	They mislead themselves, let alone others.
	And so, again, you've got somewhat of a...
	In other words, I think your targeting, however that's being targeted, is a little bit, you know...
	It has a little overlay in the targeting.
	You know what I'm saying?
	Because it's not a clear target.
	I've discussed this.
	Again, this is another reason why I've got some conflicts on leaving is because I feel that the project could be tightened with its scientific protocols to be a better project.
	But, you know, it's Courtney's project.
	He runs it how he wants to run it.
	And, you know, all kudos to him for doing it, really.
	Yeah, I mean, we're all very thankful.
	Let me just say, I've interviewed Courtney a number of times now, and he's a fascinating guy.
	He's very, very serious and very dedicated to this discipline.
	And to forwarding the scientific, as she calls it, you know, exploration of all of it.
	So, yeah.
	And, you know, I have to say that I think we're giving him some great advertising and all you guys here.
	And hopefully this pays off and maybe he'll get more funding as time goes on.
	There's no doubt in my mind, anyway, that there are militaries watching you guys and also...
	They're seconding you behind the scenes probably with people that are checking out your results to see if they can get better results than you and see how close you are, etc., etc.
	So they're watching you in essence.
	That's inevitable.
	Because I've tracked this kind of psychic research for two decades now, and I've read the entire CIA Stargate documents they released, which is 92,000 pages of information.
	When they did predictive projects, they did a project called Project X where they tried to predict almost the same as what they're doing, where they tried to predict what was going to be on the front covers of the New York Times a few weeks in advance.
	They only managed a 17% accuracy rating in doing that.
	And what we've done so far is far beyond what they achieved.
	So I'm sure if they are out there and they're interested, they're probably watching the project.
	So, again, people want to know if you RV'd who's going to win the elections.
	I haven't done that yet.
	There's something I'd like to do, but another thing with remote viewing is I can't give my own targets because I have to be blind to them.
	There's so much I want to look at in the world.
	I mean, it's been two decades I've been doing this, and no one yet has given me Roswell as a target.
	I'm dying to do Roswell's target.
	I'm dying to do some Bigfoot stuff or anything like that.
	So all the interesting stuff, like who's going to win the US election in Roswell, all that kind of stuff, no one's given to me.
	I would love for someone to give me targets like that, but I have to wait and see what people give me.
	Okay, so I understand that.
	Let me ask you along those lines, though.
	If that's the case, why is it...
	I appreciate you need to make money and so on like other people and all that.
	But if you're as good as you are, which you seem to be on many levels, then why don't you set your own targets?
	Now, I know you guys like to remote view blind, but it is possible to actually decide to look at something that you aren't, you know, like, let's say...
	If I had a team of military remote viewers, I would say, you know, I'd like you to go look at the latest inventions in black projects in Russia, for example, or China.
	And I have no doubt whatsoever that remote viewers from the other side are doing the same about us.
	You know, so this is going on and it's possible, in other words, to have a target.
	You're not there.
	You still have to do the remote viewing protocols to get there in your head and so on and so forth.
	But even if you're told, you know, remote view what's going on right this minute in the Kremlin, you know, we may not be able to find out the truth.
	I do do a lot of client work.
	Some of it I can talk about, some of it I can't because it's confidential for clients.
	Okay.
	So yeah, I do do work like that.
	On the other note, because it's my personal belief that I don't like to mix what I'm doing here with making money.
	I only charge enough money to allow me to survive, really.
	And when I work with clients, I work on a rule of, if I don't get them exactly the information that they need, then none of my clients ever have to pay me.
	But saying that I've never had a client not pay me, so I'll always give them the information they wanted.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Let's see.
	I'm looking in the chat for questions.
	Again, it helps if you put them in all caps.
	Do you have any comments?
	Let's see.
	About the BRICS and South Africa?
	South Africa, I don't know.
	What's that in regard?
	I'm sorry, I don't know what I was asking.
	Yeah, it's just like a general news question.
	I think that people, you know, in a sense, they're kind of seeing...
	Maybe these are the questions aimed at your psychic side, if you will.
	You know, it's interesting how people, you know, they don't quite know what's going on.
	Someone wants you to...
	Talk about Simon Parks.
	I mean, this kind of question, why are you asking him to look at Simon Parks?
	What's the point?
	That's not a specific question.
	The shape of the earth.
	Some people are what they call flat earthers and somebody wants you to remote view the flat earth.
	Have you ever done that?
	I haven't been asked to do that.
	Again, it's one of those things that would be nice.
	I've followed for many years the hollow earth theory as well.
	How was it?
	The The polls and stuff.
	Again, it would be a fantastic target.
	It just needs for someone to set it as an official project.
	Okay, well, have you remote viewed your own future?
	Someone asked.
	No, I've never.
	Some remote viewers do do personal work.
	I've never bothered to look at anything to do with myself.
	I kind of hope that anyone who gives me a target, you know, the target they're going to give me is going to be much more interesting.
	You know, there's so much amazing stuff out there in the universe.
	Why would I want to open myself?
	It's just...
	I mean, bear in mind, you know...
	I don't know if I can get this emotionally across to you guys, but remote viewing is just absolutely awesome.
	We can all do this.
	Everyone's got this skill, which is one level or another.
	With remote viewing, you can go anywhere in time and space, forwards and backwards in time.
	We can all do it.
	We're almost like we have these inbuilt time machines that almost make us on levels of individual little gods.
	I know that sounds egotistical, but we have so much power as individuals.
	We can do anything we want.
	Using that to look at myself just seems like a complete waste of that skill.
	There's so many mysteries out there to be looked at.
	JFK, Marilyn Monroe, Roswell, UFOs, life on other planets.
	Why would I look at myself when people have asked me to look at the pyramids on Mars and bases on the moon?
	That is so much more better than looking at what I'm going to be doing in five years time as a person.
	So, Okay, I appreciate that answer, but I would like to drill down a little bit more in that, because I have to say, if you are psychic, you come from a family that sort of reveres psychic ability, etc., then there would be a natural tendency,
	especially as a young person, to kind of try to see in the future, even to the next day, of what's going to happen in your life, such that there will be events that have come along in your life where Maybe, you know, I think everyone has this even, where you knew something was going to happen.
	It came to you, you know, psychically.
	An event in your family, an event in your life, an event in someone close to you's life, and that you saw and you may have talked to them about and then it happened or you may have warned them and then so and so.
	Do you have anything of that nature?
	Yes.
	Absolutely.
	I always have, and we all have, these intuitive gut-feeling moments.
	You know, I have many of those throughout my life.
	You know, I had one just before my mother died, you know, that I had to go see her, and then a week later she died.
	And so that allowed me that very important day with her, that last day kind of thing.
	So, yeah, I have those, but they're very fleeting moments.
	It's very uncontrollable and nothing to do with remote viewing.
	Remote viewing is very, I'm sitting down at a table like, this is what I'm going to do, and I just do it.
	Almost like a job kind of thing.
	So yeah, there's one slide which is very fleeting moments that come in and I've got feeling impressions from in here, whereas the remote viewing really is from in here a bit more.
	That's the only way I can describe it really.
	Yeah, fair enough.
	So the people that are putting questions are just kind of asking, you know, random events all over the planet, it looks like.
	And I guess they need to listen to your answers to understand where you're going with it.
	But let me say that with all due respect, it's still an interesting thing because when you find that you have, you know, I've done remote viewing and I was accurate.
	I did what you said earlier.
	Somebody was doing, which is remote view the front page of the newspaper for the coming day.
	And I had, I think, a better than 17% just for what it's worth.
	You know, I was actually surprised and it proved to me that remote viewing, you know, absolutely worked.
	But what I would say is that, you know...
	Are you such a workaholic that you never sit down and say, to hell with it, I'm going to do a session for myself on this question that I have?
	And if not, why not?
	Absolutely.
	20 years of doing remote viewing, I'm such a stickler for all roles that I cannot self-task because it's not blind.
	I have never created my own target pool and never done my own targets.
	Okay, well...
	I would love to.
	I just can't because it's just not within the rules.
	When it comes to remotely, I'm a stickler for the rules.
	Okay, but those are other people's rules.
	I appreciate that, but I think a little flexibility of mind wouldn't hurt at this time, but I appreciate that you make money and so maybe you don't want to mess with the program, so to speak.
	The money I make from this is this.
	It's incidental.
	It's hardly anything at all.
	To be honest, nearly 100% of my work, other than the little bit that Courtney gives me, is I only really work for projects where it's for the betterment of remote viewing or something scientific.
	Right.
	I make tons of money off this every day because I get so many people ask me if I could tell them what their future is going to be, who they're going to fall in love with, if I could help them find their car keys, all kinds of stuff that every psychic gets.
	But that's not what I do.
	The money side of it is not a part of my life.
	It never has been a part of my spiritual belief system.
	And self-tasking and doing things for my own I've never been a part of who I am as a person.
	The people within the RV community know this about me.
	All I do this for is for the betterment of remote viewing, really.
	Okay.
	That's why I do, you know, that's why I've been doing public projects for Courtney for the last seven years because it's about time someone put this stuff in public so everyone can see what he can do.
	Someone asked if you remote view in your dreams.
	You know, you're so controlled in the real world.
	Do you find yourself remote viewing in dreams?
	I find myself doing psychic stuff in my dreams, but it's not called remote viewing because it can only be remote viewing if it's done within the six rules.
	Anything else is just class.
	It's just being psychic.
	Right.
	In my dreams, I have psychic precognition.
	Okay.
	Of events that are going to happen and stuff.
	But again, it's very out of control, very fuzzy.
	You have to wake up the next morning and try to remember it.
	Whereas remote viewing, I could just literally sit down and just write it all down and it'd be nearly 80, 90, 100% accurate.
	That's why I prefer remote viewing.
	Okay.
	Someone else is asking, have you remote viewed CERN or would you like to?
	And if not, why not?
	I would like to.
	Again, it's one of the targets I have to wait until someone targets me.
	But is that really, you know, again, this gets into that gray area that, you know, I appreciate your own, you know, sort of, you know, code of ethics, so to speak.
	But it does get into a bigger picture again, because it's kind of like the remote viewing that, I guess it was Dick Allgaier was having a conversation with this cat being.
	You know, where do you draw the line when something can help humanity?
	How can you not do it in a certain sense?
	I don't care who tasks it to you.
	I don't care what the protocols are.
	In those cases, we're living in a very strange time now.
	You can appreciate that, right?
	And someone else asked about the financial reset, for example.
	There are reasons why waiting for somebody else to target you is, if you have a skill and a demonstrated accuracy rate, Then I understand you might not want to make it public necessarily, but on the other hand, maybe if it involves, again, saving lives, there is reason to widen the playing field so that you can do things that could help humanity in spite of the fact that you're not targeted.
	So does this ever plague your brain?
	I did bend the rules.
	By not being 100% blind when I did the finding people because you know the target's a person that you're looking for so you're not 100% blind.
	Right.
	So for the humanitarian projects for those and when I do and bear in mind I still do the occasional helping find a missing person type situation for people and clients.
	I do that kind of humanitarian work whereas I'm not 100% blind as the official rules of remote viewing, but I don't bend the rules for everything, because once you bend the rules, you can only bend them so far before they snap, and I'm very rigid on how I am.
	Other people can do whatever they want.
	It's up to them.
	But I'm very rigid and I never self-task.
	For example, I could create my own target or hundreds of targets here in envelopes, but we may not know what's in each envelope.
	But I know, because through my study, I know the capability of the human mind and people can memorise entire telephone books.
	So for me, having a couple hundred targets in a box in envelopes, Just isn't blind enough.
	I don't trust that through some weird mechanism my mind still might not know what those targets are without it being a psychic.
	So I refuse to do it.
	I will only do a project if I'm 100% sure that every information I give is purely psychic only.
	I'm trying to be as pure as I can with this.
	Right.
	Okay.
	So...
	In terms of, along these same lines, someone is, for example, asking Planet X, have you ever remote viewed Planet X or been tasked?
	No, again, it's another one on my would-love-to-do list.
	Okay, well, this is what I would say.
	I don't know how you get hired to do jobs, you know, like...
	You have a contact form on your website.
	Is that how people contact you?
	Yeah, they can do.
	I'm very specific.
	I turn 99% of the work down because, again, I get contacted through Facebook and through my website.
	You get people come to you and say, I've got an amazing project I would love you to do.
	But I don't know who that person is.
	It could be a terrorist from Afghanistan, for all I know, and he could be asking me how it would be the best way to target the Statue of Liberty in New York and try to get me to remove it from.
	So I tend not to do targets for people unless I know that they're reputable people from solid backgrounds and from solid projects because this could be a tool that could be massively misused.
	Okay.
	Now, in that case, though, you know, in a certain sense, you know, we use our psychic abilities every day, every second of every day, you know, walking out their front door, what moment you choose to do that, you know, where you could be hit by some flying, whatever.
	Or anything else.
	Crossing a street or figuring out whether somebody is trustworthy when you rent something or buy them something.
	All this stuff, all of your psychic ability is going to come into play.
	And I'm sure you benefit from that and use that.
	Now, somebody...
	So what happens is somebody hires you to do a job and you decide whether that person is reputable and then you do a job.
	Exactly, right?
	That's how you do your targets.
	Yes.
	I try to, at this moment in time, only work with reputable people within remote viewing that I know are highly trained and I know their backgrounds because then I know that they're not going to give me targets that could be ethically bad.
	And bear in mind, you know, there's all kinds of rules here, you know, breaking ethics, breaking rules of business.
	You know, you can't look at what a competitor is going to What Apple will bring out for their next project in 2018?
	Because that's corporate espionage.
	So you have to be very careful what you do as a remote.
	There are responsibilities.
	So I don't work with everyone that approach me off the street.
	I do lots of background checking first because this is a skill that can be misused.
	It has great power and with great power comes great responsibility.
	I'm very wary of that.
	Okay, fair enough.
	Let me see.
	So.
	I'm trying to see if there's any new questions here.
	Some of the questions.
	Some of your questions, everyone, are already answered in the body of this interview, so I'm not going to repeat a question if he's already answered it.
	You'll just have to watch the whole thing.
	I can answer the question there about what did I learn from speaking to Ingo Swann.
	Okay.
	Ingo Swann was the guy that essentially invented remote viewing.
	He's the world's most tested psychic with over a million remote viewing and psychic experiments.
	An amazing guy, an amazing intuitive.
	Spent a day or two with him in New York at his studios.
	That was an amazing time.
	Two key things I learned from Ingo Swann.
	I tried to confirm with him whether he trained another secret military unit in remote viewing, as rumours claimed.
	And he said to me, because of my security oath, I cannot confirm that.
	But he said that as he smiled and winked at me.
	So he kind of confirmed that he did.
	The second most amazing thing I learned from Ingo Swann was, he wrote a book called Penetration, about how the government approached him to remote view aliens and bases on the moon.
	I asked him many questions about that and he actually went to a filing cabinet and pulled out the exact coordinates that he was given and the feedback information he was given to confirm his data.
	So that confirmed to me as well, you know, what I and Courtney have done and many other remote viewers, pretty much every viewer out there of any credibility have all remote viewed structures on Mars and the Moon and Ingo confirmed that his were as well.
	So that was two amazing pieces of information.
	Yeah, excellent.
	Very good to hear.
	Okay, so one minute here.
	There's another question.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	For the International Remote Viewing Association, two years ago, they set, I think, maybe as many as 20 remote viewers a target, and it was to try to remote view the makeup of a virus called a bacteriophage.
	and we all went away and we did we all did this and all this information is online on the IRBA website and on my website now we got information and sketches so accurate that the scientists did the virologist scientists involved in the project they were assessing the information were blown away and with the sketches especially my sketches because they said the The sketches look like they come from a person that has spent many years assessing viruses.
	So yes, we can remote view diseases, and we can medically remote view as well.
	The American military spent decades investigating another side of remote view called remote influencing, or what they call it, remote action.
	And that is possible.
	You can influence other people through some kind of psychic connection.
	In fact, many people do it many times each day when they do things like prayer or meditating for people because that seems to affect people as well.
	So yes, there is some kind of interconnectedness between us all and your thoughts can interact with other people out there.
	A couple of years...
	A few years ago I worked on a project with Courtney where we did a climate change experiment where we tried to, I think it was a year in advance, work out what climate change were going to occur throughout the planet and I think we were semi-accurate on describing many of those and in fact one of those we actually described and Courtney accurately predicted to the day was an earthquake that was going to happen in LA. So we did some good work of that but some of it was off as well I have to say.
	Psychic abilities, developing them.
	You've obviously spent your life doing that.
	Do you want to talk about how you might encourage someone else to do so?
	Yeah, by all means.
	I think everyone out there should try remote viewing because we can all do remote viewing.
	It's very easy to do and there are loads of ways to do it.
	There's loads on my website and many other places.
	But just psychic development in general, The biggest thing I can tell people is just listen to your instincts because that's all I ever do is that feeling you have in here and in here, in your stomach and in your head, that gut feeling.
	Always follow your gut feeling.
	And if you have the time as well, just take a very simple meditation.
	So take a little bit of time to yourself each day, you know, put on some music that you can kind of...
	Relax to and just try to zone out all the worrying about bills and about partners, about what's going to happen, all this kind of stuff.
	Spend five or ten minutes to yourself trying to quieten your mind and by doing that, that will help you immensely.
	It's helped by remote viewing and my accuracy immensely just by basic meditation.
	Absolutely.
	So, let's see.
	Someone keeps asking about Planet X. The person who's doing that, he's already answered you.
	He has not been tasked with looking at Planet X. So, let's see.
	Do you take any particular pills or dietary routines?
	Someone is asking.
	No.
	Not to help me psychically.
	I mean, a few years ago I was quite a bit heavier.
	I was six stone heavier than I was now.
	But that's because I'm a designer so I spend a lot of time sat in front of the computer.
	So what I do now is I do a lot of yoga and walking and just try to fast two days a week as well because I find that helps.
	I can't say that it helps with my remote viewing, but I wouldn't say that it would hinder it.
	I would say that it probably would help it by being a healthier person.
	Okay.
	What about volcanic eruptions?
	Have you gotten much about that or have you remote viewed any of that?
	Someone is also asking about Yellowstone.
	No, nothing on that.
	Again, I've heard all the rumors about Yellowstone and it being a supervolcano and stuff.
	Again, I would love to...
	I've had that as a long-term project to try to see over a period of months or years what the activity would be, but I haven't been given it as a target yet.
	Okay.
	Sorry about this.
	If you see any questions, go ahead and grab them, but my other computer, the computer I watch for questions has just run out of juice, so I have to plug it in really quickly here.
	Someone asked about Antarctica.
	Have I reviewed that?
	Again, no, I haven't, but I've seen all the rumors for many years about the projects in the past with Admiral Byrd and all that kind of stuff with UFOs, so I would love to see if there's any underground facilities there, but I haven't been given that as a target either.
	Someone asked, who tasked me to RV stuff?
	Today it's from people I trust, people in the remote viewing community.
	A lot of them are ex-military remote viewers that I work for.
	Again, I've worked for the police.
	Through the police I've worked for the FBI, I've worked for the Canadian Mounted Police.
	I've also done a project for the American military working for a two-star general.
	But generally at the moment it's just from trusted people within the remote viewing community.
	Okay, so sorry about the coughing fit.
	I was wondering if we can change gears and, you know, I'm going to close this down soon because you've been with us for quite a while.
	I can go on for as long as you can.
	Not a problem.
	Oh, all right.
	Excellent.
	Well, what I'd like to know is if you can kind of change hats.
	I don't know if you're going to be willing to do this, but you said you have...
	Kind of split yourself into the remote viewer and the psychic, and you have done channeling as well.
	So can you talk about what kind of channeling you've done, what kind of beings you might be getting in touch with, and under what circumstances do you do that?
	Okay.
	Completely different from remote viewing, because I put remote viewing over here because it's scientific.
	My other side, the psychic side, for many years now I've been part of a psychic development circle group.
	So this is a group of four to six of us that meet in someone's home and we generally go off through some kind of psychic travel, through some kind of self-generated wormhole type thing we create and we meet other life forms, other beings to try to get information from them on On what it's like living in this universe.
	And during these travels, I've had many conversations with, and I can't prove any of this stuff.
	I might remember being which I can prove because I have feedback.
	This psychic stuff, I've had many conversations with all kinds of beings, in bodies and out of bodies, from other planets, from other dimensions, that try to pass this information because they can see us as a developing race of spiritual beings.
	Yeah, so it's all kinds of information from all kinds of creatures.
	I mean, the normal person wouldn't believe it, but the universe is teeming with life.
	Life is all around us.
	As beings on this planet, there's all different kinds of dimensional life flitting in and out of existence all around us.
	We're not the only life forms here.
	It's just that...
	A lot of people aren't in touch with their subtle self enough to notice these things around us.
	So it takes these quiet times where you go into these small meditations to quiet in your mind to pick up and then communicate with these beings, but they are there all around us.
	So was your mother or father or what members or all members of your family, are they psychic?
	Are they involved in this sort of thing?
	I get my skill from my mother.
	She passed two years ago now.
	She's a great influence on my life.
	From a very early age herself, she was into psychic stuff, and then she trained in being a healer, clairvoyant medium, and then she ran the local spiritualist church as the main person there for, I think, a decade or so.
	I got married in that church alone.
	She was the person that married me.
	It's a bit like the Jedi's from the Star Wars films.
	The force flows in my family.
	What you'll find within all intuition and remote viewing stuff is generally The biggest skill sets and talent flow and it goes back to the stories of witches and this kind of stuff.
	It flows through the female line of the generations for some reason.
	It's stronger and more psychics out there are female or more feminine in that kind of way than the male side of things.
	So it generally flows down the female line and that's where I get mine from.
	My mother and then my mother's mother.
	Okay.
	Do you have any brothers and sisters that also are psychic or no?
	I do.
	And they in the past have also, like many of us, had spontaneous instances of psychic stuff, but they haven't decided to investigate it to the levels that I have.
	They kind of...
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	So when you've communicated with beings, and this is actually true of remote viewing as well, have you ever had a situation where you encountered a being during a remote viewing session and or seen a being, like, become, you know, sort of, attain a certain degree of physicality or that sort of thing?
	Within remote viewing, Because again, it's separate from the other stuff.
	I've only encountered being...
	Well, no.
	I've encountered being...
	When we did the Phoenix Lions, I encountered something then.
	When we did the Giza one, pyramids, I think I encountered something then as well, when we tried to find out who helped build the pyramid, the Great Pyramid.
	There was some kind of being then that travelled from a great distance.
	But the biggest, most impactful one for me was someone set me the target of Area 51 as a facility.
	And as I was going through some corridors, remote viewing-wise, at Area 51, I came across An alien great being led on a table at a 45 degree angle.
	I psychically went over to this alien creature.
	Bear in mind I wasn't physically there because it was remote viewing.
	And the being woke up and leapt at me predatory style from the table which then forced me to come out into remote viewing because it scared me so much.
	So that was the biggest fun reading.
	Okay, very interesting.
	Was it restrained, physically restrained at the time?
	No, it was just at the table, it looked like about a 45 degree angle.
	Being was led on it.
	I thought it was under a light from a distance.
	I thought it was dead or asleep or something.
	And as I psychically approached it, it sensed and knew I was there psychically, looked up at me, And bear in mind, I've done lots of study on this in the past, so I know about what the greys look like, how they move and all this kind of stuff.
	But this didn't move like any kind of grey I've ever heard describe.
	It kind of leapt off the table onto all fours, cat-like, very fast, very predatory.
	The whole motion of it was very much like a lion in predatory action.
	And then it leapt towards me in a really aggressive manner, which then caused me to break all contact.
	And then I think, you know, I was just, because it was scary.
	So I just bugged out of there kind of thing.
	Fascinating.
	In terms of the Great Pyramid, I myself had a psychic viewing of it on 2012, or prior to 2012, I guess it was, in which I saw Toth with some tablets at the very, very top part of the pyramid doing something.
	Can you describe the being that you saw there?
	I didn't see anything like that because the project, if I remember correctly, was to describe how the Great Pyramid was constructed.
	And in that, and it's again, I think it's online for free this one, right?
	Both Dick and I described, I think I described in DC Harbour, again it was a blind project, but I described about how blocks of stone were being levitated and moved by, I think, sound waves into place in a structure.
	And the beings that taught the other beings how to move this, my description were that they came from a very vast distance away and they were traveling in metal ships that traveled on waves.
	Now I can't say if this were water waves or if it were gravitational waves, but it felt like a very advanced higher civilization and very advanced beings that taught this lower set of beings how to levitate stones and build these great structures.
	Okay, so, but you didn't actually see the beings themselves, you just were aware of them, or you said a being, there was a being.
	There were more than one.
	I can't, I know I should remember, but I can't, it's on the video and it's on the paper sessions there for download, but I can't, I can't from the life of me remember how I described them.
	I think I did physically describe them, but I can't remember what I said.
	Alright.
	But it's all online if someone wants to, I think it's on YouTube.
	Right.
	Yeah, good.
	Well, let's just briefly touch on the Phoenix Lights, and then, well, I'll see if there's more questions in the chat.
	So, in terms of the Phoenix Lights, there was supposedly an encounter with a cat being, and there were some other beings.
	I saw a being, but I didn't see a cat being.
	Okay, so do you remember that, and can you describe that being?
	Vaguely, again, it's quite a few years ago, but I do remember that it was, I think it was a taller being.
	If I remember correctly, I think mine were more human-looking, with long blonde hair, you know, the Pleiadian-type beings.
	It's what I saw that I had to dialogue with.
	Yeah, both of us had dialogues with some kind of, seemed to be an alien being.
	You know, if I say that Bear in mind, I've done lots of UFO research as well, so I know a lot about the Phoenix Lights before I did that target, even though it was blind.
	So when I got the feedback, it was quite a shock to me to actually see that it looked like it was an alien being there, because if you would have asked me before that, I would have said that in most probability the Phoenix Lights would have been some kind of military craft.
	But after doing the remote viewing, my whole viewpoint changed, and I have to say that I'm now convinced that it was most definitely a Alien or interdimensional type craft.
	Right.
	Because the technology involved was just, and the way these beings were feeling and interacting with us is so more advanced than us because a huge, huge parts of the population of the Earth is, we are aggressive as a race.
	We are predatory, angry type beings and the beings I encounter just I just had none of those feelings in them at all.
	Other than the one that jumped at you.
	Yeah, but that was the Area 51 type being.
	That wasn't this tall, long-haired, human-looking.
	Okay, sure.
	So you say you have had a dialogue with this being while you were talking.
	I mean, I know I'm asking you to go back, but it seems rather significant, that particular, you know, interaction.
	Can you describe your interaction with the being?
	If you say it's a Nordic, it was a Nordic.
	Can you, like, your sense of them, your sense of their intelligence, your sense of any senses of them that came through that contributed to you feeling that they were alien as opposed to humans?
	It's the biggest thing.
	I mean, obviously there's physical because it looked going to be about, you know, well, taller, seven feet tall and really sparkly, good looking, almost translucent, white kind of skin type thing, if I remember correctly.
	Bear in mind, I'm trying to remember about quite a few years here.
	But it's more of the mindset, really.
	Remote viewing is just an awesome tool because there are no limitations.
	We can go into the mind and the consciousness of anyone or anything at any point in history and time.
	So when we do these targets and Courtney says, you know, or we say to ourselves, let's go into the mind of this being and interact with them.
	We are actually physically connected with our mind.
	Yeah, you could just see that there was just no aggressive thoughts in there at all.
	There was no intent of harm.
	It was just all about progression, but progression in a way that was trying not to damage us with giving us too much too fast.
	Okay.
	Cool.
	So, I know that...
	Let's see...
	I'm trying to see if there's any other...
	Somebody is...
	Look, some of these questions, again, you guys may be joined late.
	We've already talked about the September events.
	I'm going to move on from that.
	Let's see.
	Yeah, he's talked about the difference between using a whiteboard.
	Yeah, a whiteboard's better, I'm finding.
	Oh really?
	This is amazing, I've been thinking about this, Courtney has actually stumbled on something here with the whiteboard technology.
	I think Ingo Swann initially came up with a similar concept, because stage six of remote viewing, a remote viewer sits down and they have modeling clay and bits of pipe cleaner and all that kind of stuff, and you're essentially meant to sit there and model the target in 3D. But most of us don't really have time or the tools to do that kind of thing, so we tend to skip that stage.
	But what that stage is meant to do is it's meant to involve the entire body in a process of moving so that the entire body starts to, as you're moving, it starts to pick up more data about the target.
	But what I'm finding with the whiteboard technique is, because I'm stood up instead of sat down, and because my hands are moving all over the place and I'm trying to think about the video camera and all this kind of stuff, it's almost acting in the same way as the modeling, in that my body is involved in the entire sequence so that the whiteboard data seems to be that much more Sparkly,
	flowing, accurate, I can't put the right words to it, but it feels cleaner, better, and more significant.
	So I think it's a bit of an accidental discovery, but yeah, the whiteboard seems, I would say, as future progresses, the whiteboard and maybe even other techniques where people write on tablets or use virtual reality or something, I think that can only make remote viewing ten times better than it is today.
	Yeah, I think that's true, actually, when I watch you guys.
	I think that the fluidity of the whiteboard and the kind of, you know, the marker kind of thing, the way it slides really quickly and easily, it's even better than like a pen or pencil that has a better kind of sense.
	Yes, I believe that too, yeah.
	Somebody wants to know, have you RV'd who created humans?
	I'm just trying to think back.
	No, I don't think I have, but that would be an awesome target to do.
	Okay, and someone wants to know, have you...
	Actually, this is a good question about viewing Google Maps.
	If you remote view, in other words, do you ever look at Google Maps or try to use Google Maps as a tool within remote viewing to track your target?
	Yeah, yeah.
	I've used that quite a lot when...
	When doing the police work, because what essentially happened was, I would get an email saying, okay, we have a missing target, a missing person, would you do it?
	And I'd say yes, and they'd say, okay, here's your number, and they'd give me a random number, which would be like a project number for me to focus in on.
	I would do my remote viewing, and then send it to the case master, and he'd come back to me, and if he'd want me to do more, he'd say so.
	If not, he'd say, okay, that's the end of it.
	Here's who you were looking at.
	And they'd give me a file and it would say the name of the person, maybe a photograph, and it would say, this is where that person went missing from.
	But in my data that I would give him beforehand, I would do as a separate station.
	This isn't part of remote viewing in general.
	This is something I came out with.
	Whereas on a sheet of paper, I would say, okay, this is me here.
	If I'm looking north, from which direction is the person from me and at distance?
	And then I'd do a quick sketch and say, okay, he's southwest and he's 10 miles.
	And then I'd have all my data in my session saying, you know, it would be hilly and all this kind of stuff.
	So then I'd go back to the information that I'm given, saying this is the person last word missing from X. I'd go to X on Google Maps, and then I'd then go south-west from where my data said, and I'd go to the distance of 10 miles, and then I'd see if that data matched my, on Google Maps, matched my remote viewing data.
	If it would, I would then put a pin on it and say, okay, police, I think the missing person is at this GPS coordinate.
	I'd put a pin in the Google Maps, give the police the GPS coordinate, and then they would go look.
	I haven't been wholly accurate at that, but on one occasion, as I said, I was within 100 meters.
	And the only reason I was slightly off with the 100 meters was because I knew the person was in a river.
	And from Google Maps, I couldn't tell which direction the river was flowing.
	So I accidentally put them upstream when they would have been flowing downstream because the river would have taken them.
	Okay.
	So yes, we have to use that.
	But again, with time, money, and more expertise, we could use that to even more advantage.
	Yeah, for sure.
	Okay, so if you're looking at a target and you...
	Have you ever had...
	And I asked Courtney this question.
	I'm not going to tell you what he said, but have you ever had any interference from other remote viewers remote viewing you while you're remote viewing a target and or encountered other remote viewers at a target And at the same time, any, let's say, dark magicians trying to interfere with your ability to view a target.
	Those things.
	I've never ever seen any remote viewers or had any interference from remote viewers.
	I was given a blind target once, which I was describing as a black magic sexual orgy in the basement of a house.
	And as I was watching this kind of black magic orgy unfold, and bearing in mind I was looking, and this is where it blows my mind if it just gets so strange, And I didn't know this until afterwards, but the target I was looking at was quite a few years before.
	So I was actually going back in time, looking at an event and seeing an event and describing it on paper live as it was happening.
	So I was writing down it.
	It's black magic, there's an orgy, they're in a basement, there's all these people having sex and it's ritualistic.
	But as I was doing this...
	Every single person in the room turned around, then looked up at me, and it freaked me right out.
	I was like, whoa, I've never had this before.
	So I had to stop.
	I was like, I'm not doing this again.
	This is just wrong.
	And then afterwards, I found out that the target was actually looking at a house where it was alleged that Alistair Crowdy held some of his magic thing out.
	Oh, very interesting.
	So that was the only time, and that completely freaked me out.
	So the only time, yeah, that I've ever seen anything, or been seen, as far as I'm concerned, was people into the dark arts, and it was Anastasia priority type people.
	Okay.
	I read it in the 80s and Area 51 that saw me as well.
	Right.
	Well, okay, what about, have you ever had any sense that you're being remote viewed by someone?
	Not within viewing.
	How about looked at by just a person?
	Yeah, in my everyday, you know, just going about my life, like most of us, we've had a feeling at some point that someone's kind of behind you, watching you kind of thing.
	I've had that once or twice where I felt that someone might have been straying into my kind of sphere of influence and, yeah, trying to influence me and look at me.
	Okay.
	But only a couple of times.
	Okay.
	Someone wants to know if the psychic gene is mitochondrial DNA, if that's what you think.
	Uh...
	I think science doesn't know enough about DNA and it holds quite a lot.
	In fact, I'm reading a book at the moment where science seems to come to the conclusion that photons of light interact with DNA and hold information that we don't know too much about.
	So, yeah, I believe there's stuff out there that In DNA and inherent with us all as well, because I believe that remote viewing all comes from the holographic universe, you know, quantum mechanics, that we're all interconnected.
	I believe that every single one of us can get this information because there is no distance between you and me.
	We are connected at some kind of level of what we're all made up of, which is, you know, protons and all kinds of stuff like that.
	And all these bits that we're made of exist in more than one place at any one time.
	Yeah, I think that's where it all comes from, really.
	We're just big clouds of matter, you know, we're not actually physical when it comes down to it.
	Yes.
	Okay, very good.
	Okay, let's see.
	Scanning this.
	I think we're going to have to close this down pretty quickly because, to be honest, what happens when I record an interview this past two hours, people, you know, they just don't watch the whole thing because they don't have the attention span.
	Now there are a few...
	Wonderful, dedicated peoples that do.
	But, you know, that's the trouble.
	So I don't want to go too much longer.
	Someone keeps asking a question about the kill shot.
	I know Ed Daines keeps going on for many years about the kill shot.
	Yes.
	I've never been tested, but I've never come across it.
	But all I have to say to people is if you just look at the history of Ed Daines for the last 20 odd years, He's continuously, one after another, one after another, come up with these scenarios where something's going to destroy the planet.
	And I'm not saying something won't, because we are on a path to destruction somewhere or another, but he makes a lot of money from sending people videos about the kill shot and then sending them predictions on where best for them to travel to stay away from the kill shot.
	That's all I can say on it.
	It hasn't been right yet.
	Now, there are people that think we have been targeted by solar flares, but they...
	Have gone very conveniently not direct hits.
	So whether he's been accurate and always prevented or inaccurate and seeing something in the future or on another timeline that simply doesn't happen on this one or it hasn't happened yet.
	So there's a variety of explanations.
	It's just that, I mean, you know, In the early days, in 98, I think, he started off with predictions of pregnant aliens in the Mexico desert that were going to destroy the planet.
	Then it was going to be a virus, it was going to wipe things out.
	You know, I've just seen, I've been into this a lot of years, I've seen him predict a lot of things that have never come true.
	And I've had people come to me as a remote viewer in emails, crying in emails, Because he's palleted them so much, and they're offering me their life savings to tell them where to go.
	Yeah, I'm sorry to laugh, but Camelot gets this as well.
	So what he's doing is kind of unethical, really.
	Well, it again gets into...
	Maybe it gets back to where we were talking in the beginning, you know.
	And the trouble with predicting the future is that it's very easy to be wrong.
	And I do have an issue, not naming any names, but there are a lot of people out there that like to make predictions about the future that absolutely do not happen and have not happened, at least on this timeline.
	And I think if you're going to be good at remote viewing, period, and you think you can remote view the future, then you need to be accurate as to the timeline.
	Otherwise, you shouldn't put it public because your responsibility is to be You know, accurate if you think you're accurate.
	And the fact is, nobody has been accurate about these things a lot of times.
	And especially large events in our future of humanity.
	Almost without fail, people are wrong.
	And the other thing that really annoys me is that they never come forward and admit they're wrong.
	And I will say most recently, Cameron Faley, who is somebody who, you know, All good, you know, with his full heart and wanting to tell the truth came forward.
	And I don't know if you ever encountered him or saw my video interviews with him, but very interesting guy.
	He believed, he thought what he called was, in essence, Nibiru or the return of Nibiru.
	Was coming and that it was going to happen in June of this June and major, you know, things happening and then August and so on.
	Well, of course, he's been wrong.
	He's been proven wrong now.
	Now, you could say he...
	First of all, he's gone to ground, as they say, in this field or gone black.
	He's basically no longer in touch with me.
	He's not communicating.
	So I can't tell you the status on...
	Where he's at, what he thinks, the fact that he was wrong.
	I know he was under attack.
	I know that he disappeared, in essence, from the public eye.
	So that's where things stand.
	Now, even he admitted that there was a good possibility he could be wrong.
	I mean, anyone with intelligence knows there's a possibility.
	Yes.
	Now, is he gonna be wrong about the time and right about the event?
	Will it happen a year from now?
	Or is he completely wrong, period?
	Yes.
	Et cetera, et cetera.
	We just don't know.
	And it's very hard to tell.
	So, you know, this does go on.
	We interview people.
	That's why we're viewing so good, you see.
	Because I have a track record.
	Because Dick has a track record going back decades.
	And it's all database as well.
	You know, you can tell my accuracy going back 10 years.
	And you know what things I'm good at and what things I'm bad at.
	And you know, because I'm doing it all blind as well, you can absolutely know, not 100%, but you can know to a very good percentage on if the information is going to be reliable or on which bits are reliable.
	You know, for example, everyone knows that targets me that because I, in my early life, had a fear of water, anything that involves quite a lot of water targets, I'm not very good at.
	Interesting.
	And that's database over many years.
	So that's why remote viewings has that kind of, you know, I'd say with this guy, do we know whether he gets his information blind or does he know a bit upfront which then clouds his judgment?
	Well, one of the things is he's what we call Illuminati whistleblower.
	In other words, he worked for the City of London bankers for ages and ages building software programs in the financial sector.
	His family was a consultant also to Iraq and other governments in the Middle East, etc., etc.
	He handled huge amounts of money for the elite.
	That was his background, among other things.
	And, you know, you can watch his interviews to see more.
	At this time, we're going to have to kind of close this down.
	Do you want to say some parting remarks?
	All I want to say is, you know, This is definitely real, and anyone can do this.
	It's a kundalini clearing of the throat chakra, so this happens periodically to me.
	And it'll pass.
	But at any rate, you know, and I've actually run out of water, so...
	So, onward and upward, you're no longer part of the Courtney Brown remote viewing staff, so to speak, so you won't be on those projects.
	Is it possible you might do one-offs with him in the future, or are you just going to go in a different direction?
	I'll see what he comes up with, really.
	I'm only leaving this one because I have conflicts with him on it, and I don't believe in faking being part of something I don't truly believe in.
	Okay, and you've written some books.
	Can you recommend some of your books and why you might say that somebody ought to take a look?
	To be honest, the books are very technical, and unless you're hardcore interested in remote viewing, they probably...
	Won't be best for anyone to read.
	But the magazines, for example, I have 14 issues of the magazine called Eight Martinis.
	And you can get that from eightmartinis.com.
	And I try to do that twice a year.
	And that magazine is packed with all the latest articles, interviews, and every issue.
	We try to do as many examples of remote viewing as we can.
	And they're all free as well.
	So people can have all three of those for free and they can download them online as many as they want.
	Okay, great.
	Good to know.
	So, thank you so much for coming on the show.
	This has been, you know, a lot of fun, and I think the audience has really gotten into it.
	The questions are just coming non-stop, constantly, as you can see.
	Excellent.
	So, again, thank you so much, and thanks, everyone, for listening.
	Again, tomorrow at this time, I'll be talking to Ole Domogard about New evidence regarding Martin Luther King and we'll look forward to seeing how accurate your September event viewing was or is.
	Obviously September's not over and so we do want to see what happens there and so that will be very interesting.
	Thanks, and take care, Daz, and hope to see you again soon and have you back on the show.
	Yeah, nice to see you all.
	All right.

▲