ETHICS IN C/RVIs anything secret (sacred) anymore?by Coleen MarenichSince my foray into the Remote Viewingindustry 8 short years ago, I’ve beenshocked to watch d<strong>is</strong>cussions involving‘the ethical use of C/RV’ within th<strong>is</strong> communityresult in fuming debates, insultingremarks, name calling, chast<strong>is</strong>ing,finger pointing and fervent d<strong>is</strong>agreementon what the term even really means.If we can’t even agree on what the ethicaluse of C/RV <strong>is</strong> and how it should beapplied in practice and professionally,then just how the heck do we plan totell everyone else what it <strong>is</strong> and that weadopt and follow its principles?Nowadays I can imagine people mustflinch at the mere thought of broachingth<strong>is</strong> controversial subject again insidethe private forums from which we gaugethe pulse of our community. I also k<strong>now</strong>the interest in it will have many leaningforward right about <strong>now</strong> to read everyword I’m going to write on th<strong>is</strong> topic.But don’t worry. Your secret’s safe withme. Or <strong>is</strong> it?On th<strong>is</strong> continent, at least, the initialmodern-day creators of the methods andprotocols of Controlled Remote Viewingtaught only the hand-picked members ofa secret military unit th<strong>is</strong> skill. The unitremained protected, intentionally burieddeep within several layers of departmentsin Defense and Intelligence duringits twenty-plus year lifespan. Howeversince its inception it would appear ourCRV community has been rife with ethical<strong>is</strong>sues.The unit members were trained andtasked to obtain highly secretive anddamaging intelligence information aboutand from U.S. enemy states and personnel.Shall we begin the ethical debatehere?Although the Stanford Research Institutewas funded to the tune of tens of millionsof dollars over almost two decadesof work developing the protocols forControlled Remote Viewing, the generalpublic never heard about their work orthe work of the unit members until awell organized d<strong>is</strong>-information campaignmade it public. Do we begin to questionthe ethics here?In the mid-1990’s, the American newsmedia began airing news stories about16 eight <strong>martin<strong>is</strong></strong> - <strong>is</strong>sue:1
the work done by the members of thesecret unit, scoffing publicly at the $20million spent on SRI’s contribution tothe whole collaboration – gleefully andwith great abandon spreading the cleverlyorchestrated d<strong>is</strong>-information to themasses. Should we start the ethical d<strong>is</strong>cussionshere?Just where does one find a place to starttalking about the ethical applicationof C/RV when ethical <strong>is</strong>sues are so intimatelyintertwined in its entire h<strong>is</strong>tory,beginning with the start up of the secretunit, the operational work undertakenby its members, the nature of the orderspassed down through the various chainsof command, and then the calamity ofthe d<strong>is</strong>-information campaign designedto d<strong>is</strong>credit everything that happened?Could we be so naive to think a d<strong>is</strong>cussionabout ethics in C/RV need only encompassth<strong>is</strong> short span of time? Sorry,but the story <strong>is</strong>n’t fin<strong>is</strong>hed yet!The tender pink underbelly of th<strong>is</strong> topic<strong>is</strong> the vulnerability of having everythingthere <strong>is</strong> ever to be k<strong>now</strong>n - k<strong>now</strong>n tothose of us who have been trained inC/RV. If we can tap into anything andeverything, that would lead any laypersonto these important questions - dowe individually, or as a group, or as anindustry, consider anything as secret (orsacred)? Have we ever drawn a ‘line inthe sand’ which we agree we will nevercross to get information? No? Why not?Because we can’t first agree on wherethe line should be drawn and what informationthat line represents. Oh, really?Well then, let’s try to figure th<strong>is</strong> outby starting with a few questions we canagree on.Truthfully speaking, have any of us beenunk<strong>now</strong>ing, unwitting pawns in someoneelse’s quest for information and indoing so innocently and unintentionallycrossed that line into what would normallybe considered sacred or secret?The answer <strong>is</strong> yes.Can we bring ourselves to admit that insome cases we have k<strong>now</strong>ingly participatedin these things in order to d<strong>is</strong>coversomething about a secret or sacredthings? For many of us, the answer <strong>is</strong>again - yes.And herein lies the crux of the matter.When the topic of ethical use of C/RVcomes up, how can one debate or d<strong>is</strong>cussor agree on anything in such a d<strong>is</strong>cussionwhen the truth of the matter <strong>is</strong>that in many cases we have, in fact, alreadyparticipated in the unethical practicesof CRV - whether we knew it at thetime or not - whether innocently or purposefully.No wonder our emotions run high whenth<strong>is</strong> <strong>is</strong>sue <strong>is</strong> ra<strong>is</strong>ed, complete with theblaming, the sarcastic remarks, the bullyingcomments meant to silence thed<strong>is</strong>cussion. It has worked - and kept usfrom admitting th<strong>is</strong> truth, talking aboutth<strong>is</strong> guilt whether it be by association,unintentional or accidental. But the sillytruth of the entire matter <strong>is</strong> that we allk<strong>now</strong> th<strong>is</strong> about each other, ourselvesand our industry. It’s the worst kept secretwe have! We all k<strong>now</strong> about it andyet we’ve done a bloody good job of hidingit all these years by refusing to talkabout the real need for ethics in our industry.Why? Perhaps because doing soreinforces the guilt we feel for our owninvolvement in it. There’s no denying it -at least there’s no denying it with us - insideth<strong>is</strong> community. Because we k<strong>now</strong>better.So the first step forward into some freshthinking about all th<strong>is</strong> would mean werealize that by setting standards for ethicssome of us will see they may need tochange the manner in which they practiceC/RV slightly. And would that be abad thing?Secondly, for both practitioners and instructorsalike in th<strong>is</strong> industry, surely wecan agree that in terms of what we’re focusingon in the ethical practice of CRV,we’re speaking of that which would normallybe considered “sacred” or “secret”in our every day lives.Much like the ‘right to privacy’ for ordinarycitizens, we all k<strong>now</strong> and valueour ‘right to privacy’ and what ‘privacy’means to us personally. No one has todefine what that means. We demandth<strong>is</strong> right and respect others’ rights toprivacy in our normal daily life. And sowhat would be so different about th<strong>is</strong>right and that which <strong>is</strong> secret and sacredin terms of CRV? We should easily beable to transfer over the ‘right to privacy’to that which <strong>is</strong> normally consideredsecret - in terms of CRV, wouldn’t youthink? It’s not like we’ve been taskedwith reinventing the wheel here.I’m dumbfounded to find myself evenasking these types of question butrealize even these have been difficultto agree upon in past d<strong>is</strong>cussions aboutethics and C/RV. I also k<strong>now</strong> we are in anage where there are not and will not beany more secrets because of C/RV. Doesth<strong>is</strong> then assume we have the ‘right toview anything and everything’ regardlessof what we understand and value inour own ‘right to privacy’? Just becausewe can view anything and everything ,does that mean we should or should beencouraged to do so? From an ethicalperspective, the answer <strong>is</strong> real simple:No!I can’t imagine there would be anyd<strong>is</strong>agreement with that conclusion,but nonetheless if there <strong>is</strong> then pleaseimagine what it would be like if youhad no right to privacy while someoneinspected and passed judgment on allyour secrets, uncovered all your sacredthoughts and beliefs and commentedto others on them, ran through all yourmemories - both treasured and devastatingmaking a note of them so they canbe d<strong>is</strong>cussed with other people later on.Or that your efforts and plans in somethingyou’ve spent a year working on willbe revealed to someone who intends toruin you, your family, your children, yourcompany, your reputation at home, atwork, at church.The point <strong>is</strong> th<strong>is</strong>: highly driven, focused,unethical people will and can use theirC/RV abilities to pursue their own agenda.And highly driven, focused unethicalpeople will hire C/RVers to pursue theiragenda. I don’t think I am speaking directlyto any of these people here butjust the same, as an industry and as agroup of ethical practitioners, I believecoming together to put a set of ethicsin place <strong>is</strong> easier than we have come tobelieve and <strong>is</strong> needed more than ever.Establ<strong>is</strong>hing ethical standards that wecan adopt and pass on to those who willfollow in our footsteps will begin toIssue:1 eight <strong>martin<strong>is</strong></strong> 17
Change language