MJ002

Aloha Kakou, Hui Ho’ike Mua o Hawaii..

Thanks, Banshee for your work and efforts. Looking forward to seeing the work on Fri…

Is it Miller time???

Ahui Hou,

Sita

Yes Sita, a celebration is definately in order!

Banshee

>

Aloha Kakou, Hui Ho’ike Mua o Hawaii..

Thanks, Banshee for your work and efforts. Looking forward to seeing the work on Fri…

Is it Miller time???

Ahui Hou, Sita

Greetings!

What exactly is the purpose of the manager?

For the Munich PLO terrorist target every input from the viewers, targeter, etc is clear and points to the target. I read and re-read the managers input. I’m not sure how it all ties in to the rest of the contributions.

On a side note, the managers input for the KAL target appears to be "on target". At least as far as the drawings go.

Aloha Jimmy, Sita and Wayne, Congratulations on your sucess with the recent Jig 2 target. I, being analyst this time, am doing my best to get all the reams of paperwork together and ready for presentation on our web site. You did a bang up job. It’s an honor to work with you. Thank you Glenn for the outstanding class on analysis. Peace Banshee

Was there a picture of a grenade in the target pool?

While the viewer’s diagram does indeed match the grenade diagram, and I admit that I am impressed…it just seems that the viewers diagram could be made to fit a lot of things, if the "assessor" or whatever they are called is pulling things out of thin air.

In other words, if there is a photo of a grenade, I’m impressed. Otherwise it’s like finding images in the clouds.

OR…did I miss something? My ISP connection is slow. Is it possible that the viewer wrote a comment that this diagram they drew "pops" or "explodes" or "causes damage"? Is that the answer? Did I miss a diagram?

Regards,

John

Aloha Jimmy, Sita and Wayne, Congratulations on your sucess with the recent Jig 2 target. I, being analyst this time, am doing my best to get all the reams of paperwork together and ready for presentation on our web site. You did a bang up job. It’s an honor to work with you. Thank you Glenn for the outstanding class on analysis. Peace Banshee

Aloha John,

When I viewed the terrorist target I did not know what the target was. We did not know ahead of time, we viewed the target "blind". Both Jig2 and Jig1 always view their operational targets blind.
I am a civilian, have never been in the military and had no for knowledge of what the heck a grenade, it’s schematic looks like. I blackboarded the target ID, I closd my eyes and looked, and that’s what I saw.
In that brutal event a grenade was used to blow up a helicopter full of Israeli athletes. It was a very important part of the event. This is called site memory. My "sub" went to target and brought back that information.
I was as astounded as anyone else to see I had drawn a schematic of a grenade. There is NO WAY I could have known that.I remote viewed it. And yes, in the S3 protocol I do describe the action of a grenade, "compression" and "explode" are two words that come to mind. Go back and see my session, check out the S3 protocol.
Thank you for your interest and your feedback.
Peace
Banshee

Was there a picture of a grenade in the target pool?

While the viewer’s diagram does indeed match the grenade diagram, and I admit that I am impressed…it just seems that the viewers diagram could be made to fit a lot of things, if the "assessor" or whatever they are called is pulling things out of thin air.

In other words, if there is a photo of a grenade, I’m impressed. Otherwise it’s like finding images in the clouds.

OR…did I miss something? My ISP connection is slow. Is it possible that the viewer wrote a comment that this diagram they drew "pops" or "explodes" or "causes damage"? Is that the answer? Did I miss a diagram?

Regards,

John

Aloha John,

If you click on either MJ002 or MJ001 button on our Homepage you will see a list of the 4 duties alternately worked by each Jig member. It will explain there what a Mission Manager is.
After all the memebers of the Jig, excluding the Analyst, works the target, the data is scrutinized by an analyst. Only data that is cooberated by 2 or more viewers makes it through the analysis. The analyst collects these congruent data points. From there the analyst establishes notes from which they acheive a Scenario. It’s like sifting for gold. So not all data gets through. It is a group effort to obtain as much congruent data as possible, no one viewer, at any time, has to "call" target. But when we do, as in "terrorist/Palestinian",well, you can’t wipe our smile off with a shovel. I hope this answers your questions.
Thank you for your inquiry.
Banshee

Greetings!

What exactly is the purpose of the manager?

For the Munich PLO terrorist target every input from the viewers, targeter, etc is clear and points to the target. I read and re-read the managers input. I’m not sure how it all ties in to the rest of the contributions.

On a side note, the managers input for the KAL target appears to be "on target". At least as far as the drawings go.

Banshee,

Thanks for taking the time to respond to both questions.

Regards,

John

Aloha John, If you click on either MJ002 or MJ001 button on our Homepage you will see a list of the 4 duties alternately worked by each Jig member. It will explain there what a Mission Manager is. After all the memebers of the Jig, excluding the Analyst, works the target, the data is scrutinized by an analyst. Only data that is cooberated by 2 or more viewers makes it through the analysis. The analyst collects these congruent data points. From there the analyst establishes notes from which they acheive a Scenario. It’s like sifting for gold. So not all data gets through. It is a group effort to obtain as much congruent data as possible, no one viewer, at any time, has to "call" target. But when we do, as in "terrorist/Palestinian",well, you can’t wipe our smile off with a shovel. I hope this answers your questions. Thank you for your inquiry. Banshee

Banshee mentioned how analysis is conducted.

I’m about halfway thru hours and hours and hours of analysis on one little old prediction experiment. I have been working all day with 8 student sessions worked by HRVG viewers. My eyes are crossed and my mind is numb. I have been sifting thru hundreds of bits of data.

If two viewers give me something I can say "maybe." If three or more viewers give the same information, I can say "The target IS…"

Then you get into the grey areas. Is "engine whir" the same as "high pitched whine?" (Maybe) Does "siren" corroborate "alarm?" (probably not). Does "burnt smell" match "melted plastic?" (who knows?) Its the analyst’s call. Now am I going to go on the internet and put my butt on the line? Hmmm.

But I have 32 things I feel confident I can declare about the target. A prediction has emerged. I will post what we call the "working notes" soon.

Do we stand behind it 100%? Hell no. Do we have an exact timeline? No- we (the students) don’t have the skills yet to even attempt an accurate timeline. Am I going to post what we have? Yes, I think so.

Dick

Post it!
Banshee

Banshee mentioned how analysis is conducted.

I’m about halfway thru hours and hours and hours of analysis on one little old prediction experiment. I have been working all day with 8 student sessions worked by HRVG viewers. My eyes are crossed and my mind is numb. I have been sifting thru hundreds of bits of data.

If two viewers give me something I can say "maybe." If three or more viewers give the same information, I can say "The target IS…"

Then you get into the grey areas. Is "engine whir" the same as "high pitched whine?" (Maybe) Does "siren" corroborate "alarm?" (probably not). Does "burnt smell" match "melted plastic?" (who knows?) Its the analyst’s call. Now am I going to go on the internet and put my butt on the line? Hmmm.

But I have 32 things I feel confident I can declare about the target. A prediction has emerged. I will post what we call the "working notes" soon.

Do we stand behind it 100%? Hell no. Do we have an exact timeline? No- we (the students) don’t have the skills yet to even attempt an accurate timeline. Am I going to post what we have? Yes, I think so.

Okay Banshee.

Recently a target was tasked to 9 viewers. 8 of them worked it blind. One worked it sort of frontload. (I saw something while working in theta with a biofeedback machine, and cued what I saw and sort of worked it backwards.) None of the other viewers was given any clue as to the nature of the target. None of the data produced by me is included in this analysis, unless it was corroborated by other viewers.

There is no timeline done on this target, so we can’t say WHEN it occurs.

I am posting a hastily assembled version of "working notes." We take data from all the sessions, break it down to a very basic gestalt. Nothing is stated about the target unless multiple viewers produce congruent data.

I am not releasing the target cue yet. We need to scan a lot of the sketches for a formal presentation. But here is what we have, for the record.

T1B1-D6C4 WORKING NOTES

An aspect of this target is airy, gaseous (or cloudy), and natural.

An aspect of this target is complex, hard, manmade, and dynamic.

The target may involve an aircraft.

An aspect of the target includes an angular structure.

There are humans at the target.

There are people seated in rows at this target.

There may be clouds or vapor at the target.

There is the sound of an engine whirring or whinning at this target.

A dull pop or soft bang is heard at the target.

A sound described as a boom is heard at this target.

There are screams and high pitched voices at this target.

A person speaks over a microphone which amplifies his voice at this target.

Crashing and screaching sounds are associated with this target.

The temperatures range from cool to hot.

An aspect of the target is gaseous.

The smell of fuel is present at this target.

There is smoke and fumes at the target.

Blood is present at the target.

Chemical smells and tastes are present.

Pilots may be present at the target.

This target may possibly be an aircraft.

There is an explosion, in the air, which occurs over water with land nearby.

The land is mountanous and near water.

There are sirens associated with this target.

There is fire at the target.

There are small particles (pieces) falling through the air.

There are burning things falling through the air.

There are things sparking at the target.

There is a sense of emergency associated with this target.

There is a sense of warning associated with this target.

There are radio transmissions at the target.

There is a rescue involved with this target.

I can release the target cue now, since all the sessions are in. It was:

Passenger Airliner Emergency / Hawaii / Near Future

I will be posting a presentation on the sessions later this week under a new heading ("Things To Come?") in our library section.

I will also have the working notes and a couple of the better sketches dated and notarized.