Lehal Library

The secrecy was never really very good. Various major media waves of the 1970s and early 1980s rather forthrightly exposed the players in such places as THE WASHINGTON POST and TIME magazine, etc. The arch-digger of secretive information, Jack Anderson, often appeared to be given deliberate and quite accurate leaks which he joyfully exposed in his syndicated columns. Many supposed that the leaks were engineered to frighten the Soviets and the KGB of the Cold War era with the fact that the United States was indeed developing competent "psychic spies." In any event, if secrecy means totally black projects maintained completely invisible, the research and development of remote viewing and who sponsored it never enjoyed anything of the kind. Yet, the pall of secrecy overhung the real story of remote viewing, at least as far as its insiders were concerned, and so none of them wished to step forward. As any secrecy specialist knows, secrecy can have unpredictable outcomes and clay feet. In the case of remote viewing, with the real story of it unavailable, the media and the public had nothing to judge against when latter-day distortions of its decomposition blazoned forth with media attention. It would then be natural to make the mistake of assuming that the distortions were factually representative not only of remote viewing itself, but of what the sponsors originally funded for research and development. The concepts and story of remote viewing are now twenty-five years old. But that story is not just the story of remote viewing. It is also, and more importantly so, the real story which has involved hundreds of people who worked to research and develop the concepts in good faith and because they were told that it was important for the security of the nation to do so.