Approved For Relse 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00%87R000400070031-9 question of what significance such phenomena might have for our interests--and this be can best/done only if related to the most realistic futurology projections of the intel- ligence community's (read, effectively, the nation's) needs/roles/resources/environ- ments in the next 5-to-15 and 15-to-25 years. Even if GNLLER can do what ne claims and even if he were a fully cleared staff officer, we would, I submit, be hard-pressed to use him appropriately at the present time. As noted, the question of utility is more complex than it appears on the surface and deserves early and serious thought. b. Transferability. If the phenomena exists, its utility for our purposes would be in direct proportion to the degree to which the skills could be learned or the powers acquired or developed by appropriate persons~--and the ddgree to which we could develo systems for identifying people with the essential attributes. In the hands of a GELLER, certainly, these powers can do us very little good--and possibly quite a bit of harm. IF the phenomena exist, they must be in some sense (though, perhaps, in a sense which eludes our current frame of reference) a function pf man's nature and his environment; that is, the potential must exist in some degree inallmen. Just as some men are born color~blind, it might be that some are genetically deprived of their 'psi' sense; and it might also be that the latent capacity is so attenuated in the vast majority as to be effectively useless. But the basic assumption must be that what some men can do other can do, The issue would be : how to identify the latent capacity and how to surface/ perfect/control it. For instance, 100% accuracy in ESPing numbers is impressive (eve: if we are 'only' witnessing hypersensitive voice-box readings) but can this facility be perfected to 'read' attitudes/intents/emotions? When I asked this question re GELLER the SRI response was 'yes' but they admit that they have not begun to investigate this phenomenon, These and other questions relating to identification and transferability have a direct bearing on the utility question. c. Control/Predictability/Motivation. Obviously, the phenomena will be useful “Ss for our purposes only if there,a certain minimal degree of reliability associated with A its functioning at our behest, in our environment and for our purposes. Here we get into the esoteric realm of the 'motivation' of the forces at work and it is diffocult to conceive of such 'forces' having parochial interests--though it is relatively easy to believe that their agents (GELLER et al_) might be psychologically inhibited by their own subjective attributions in this respect. Indeed, virtually all known mystics (in- cluding GELLER and SWANN) have claimed to be affected by motivational auras in theiApproveshror. Release 2000/P810dr nGl Ac RDE9G:007 S7RNO0ADN0K003 1-9 we must
Approved For Rel@4se 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00%87R000400070031-9 (assuming we come to accept the existence of the phenomena) crank this factor into the ‘utility’ equation, 6. DO we have incontrovertible evidence of the existence of LEGITIMATE (i,c., as-professed paranormal) phenomena ? There is no doubt that something happens but if we are merely confronted with highly skilled and ingenious practitioners of ‘normal! arts there is no broad significance in it for us--although, again, I can easily imagine practical operational uses on a case~by-case basis (and in the event of negative para~ normal conclusions this aspect might well deserve limited exploration with the operat- ional elements). In any case, I don't believe that even the SRI representatives would disagree with the statement that we DO NOT have such evidence at this time. Certainly there are highly suggestive indications, particularly in the ESP field (and some provo- cative possibilities in other fields), but there is no INCONTROVERTIBLE evidence, And, moreover, as matters now stand, we are not going to get such evidence from SRI, Even if appropriate individuals in the bureaucracy go on record as stating that they fully accept SRI's willingness and competence to institute new and iron-clad control and analysis procedures, the bureaucracy as a whole would not (properly, in my estimation) accept positive findings from them as definitive evidence in a matter of this magnitude. Ido not question their honesty but, being so closely identified with the experiments (historically, financially and emotionally), their findings would never, in the final analysis, be accepted as unbiased--however unbiassed they might, in fact, be. If we are serious about the effort we might as well syare ourselves the time and expense of another intermediary step. This doesn't mean that SRI should be cut out of the picture (even if they could be, which is doubtful) but, rather, that we reconsider the nature /mode/degree of our involvement. I see the purposes and options as follows--~ would and have some, reason to believe (though am far from sure) that SRL follow our lead if we doubled our current investment (ca 52K) in the next project year. a. Options. Basically, there are two functional options: we can (on an Agency- or community-wide basis) meticulously structure the laboratory controls, the specific nature and sequence of investigations and the precise statistical-analytical procedures and give them to SRI to comply with--with spot-monitoring by our representative(s); or we can, having done our homework, have the procedures carried out under the full-time supervision of our representative(s)--either in the SRI installation or (with the SRI representatives) in a more convenient installation of our choice. For the obvious reasoApproved Ret Release.2000/08/0/ teSA-RRBY G07 8,4RO904000 70031595. s, the
Approved For Rel¥fse 2000/08/07 - GIA-RDP96-0087R000400070031-9 second option is so far preferable as to almost invalidate the 'option' concept. As for the choice of subjects, the project should be sufficiently flexible as to exploit any truly useful ones who become available---but the major programmed emphasis should be on SWANN. He is not only more readily accessible and available but he is aiso, evidently, much easier and more predictable to work with and appears to be genuinely interested, himself, in getting at the root of the phenomena; also, of especial signifi- cance for our purposes, his powers seem to have been deliberately cultivated in the recent past and are perhaps more amenable to analysis for that reason, (NOTE: Shoula SWANN become the focal point this wauld also provide a more acceptable rationale for SRI's, ostensibly, renting new facilities on the East coast since he resides in New York-~-and, although I'm not clear on this, the maintaining of such 'cover' vis a vis- SWANN may still be necessary.) GELLER is neither available (at least not predict- ably so) nor very cooperative--and his motivation seems clearly to be image-building and financial rather than scientific. Nonetheless, to the extent that he might be available, carefully thought-out procedures/controls/investigations should be structured in advance for him. Only a word or so about our representative(s): the need for well- qualified, wholly unbiassed and benignly (though hard-headedly) skeptical people is paramount--and it is likely that several representatives (all equally acceptable to their peers) should be used throughout the year on a random-repetitive basis. b. Purposes. Simply stated, they are to measure 'whether' and to theorize as to 'what'--and, obviously, the series of investigations should be designed so that the two are mutually supportive ina coherent continuum having the characteristics of progressive and rational elimination. Since the details of design would be the subject 10 nno Hf of exhaustive deliberation by the body which paragraphs, (below) recommends be formed, there is no point in trying to anticipate the substance at this time. But it should be made clear that, in addition to controls/investigation/analyses of the phenomena, a major purpose should alaoth be an exhaustive examination (medical/ psychiatric/behavioral/cognitive/philosophic/biographic) of the subject himself. This is another reason why SWANN is more appropriate fwr focus. 7. What are the mechanics or the dynamics of the force or natural law lying behind obviously the crux of the matter-~-for only with such understanding will we be able to assess transferability and control and begin to grapple with optimum utility. It might Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070031-9
oa Approved For Rel®ase 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-007%7R000400070031-9 be wiser to stop here, short of science-fiction speculation, but readership that has come thus far is presumably broad-minded enough to take the following in the spirit intended. Let me state simply that I, at the present time, neither believe nor dis- believe in the phenomena--although I must frankly admit that, like many others, J find myself essentially disposed (philosophically/emotionally) in favor of the proposition that what we have so far learned about the nature of man and his environment compares poorly (qualitatively, at least) with what we have yet tof@# learn. Probabilistically, then, I find it easier to believe that there might be phenomena in this general &6$ area which we do not understand than that there are not. Whether GELLER and SWANN et al are in control of such phenomena or whether they are even poihting at the right phen- omena, is another question. But if one views the long history of reported parapsychol- ogical pheno#mena (so greatly obscured by the cultists and charlatans who have tried to exploit it for both good and bad reasons) it becomes virtually impossible to deny that at least some people to some degree have or can develop and employ sensory and/or motor energies which are, effectively, paranormal insofaras the ‘normal! individual cannot or does not employ them. That this natural human propensity, the willingness to believe, is the bedrock of the magician's trade I don't deny for one mement--and lam quite prepared to accept the hypothesis that, in part at least, we are being victimized in this respect by GELLER. From the reported data I am inclined to think that this is less likely to be the case with SWANN. In any case I do believe that, if these or other phenomena $#@8$$S4$ withstand the rigors of competent scientific investigation, man is bound eventually to perceive that the reality lying behind them is wholly rational. This is not to say that they might not have great mystical or religious significance for mankind but, if so, it will come as a consequence of better understandin of the reality we now pwrceive--as well, perhaps, as the perception of new dimensions of reality. Should this come about, there will be an unprecedented upheaval in the values /affairs /attitudes /relationships of mankind-~-and, in a crassly parochial sense, those who are on the leading-edge of such new perceptions will be much better prepared to survive the turbalent transition to the new matrices of societal values and organiz- ation. Limited Impressions Concerning Current Community iInvolvment & Intentions 8. There probably are a number of other Agency or community elements enpaged (or, at least, with legitimate interests) in this area but my current understanding of the ine HOvsa FUT Reiedss 2000 /0dI07°: CIACRBP96-00787R000400070031-9 a. DDP/TSD_ has made the only substantial investment~-something on the order