SSR preliminary analysis

PART ONE

DIA SUN STREAK Project CY8608 and the events of September 11, 2001

PROJECT CY8608 2 July 1986
WORKING PAPER

For actual clips from Project CY8608 see:

DIA WARNING OF AIR ATTACK AGAINST NYC AND WASHINGTON

Why did the DIA remote viewing 'sources' overshoot their intended target timeframe of Liberty Weekend in July of 1986, and produce descriptions of mental images that appear to foreshadow the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C.? Clues can be found in the SUN STREAK working paper dated July 2, 1986. 

"From 032030 July 1986 to 062300 July 1986 has been nicknamed "Liberty Weekend, the 100th Birthday Party", for the Statue of Liberty. Such events are thought to provide lucrative opportunities for hostile terrorist activities. If such activities do occur or can be thwarted, they would most likely be reported in the news media. As time passes, accurate/detailed reports concerning such events will be published for all to know."

This descriptive material, provided in sealed envelopes to the viewers, "front loads" information into the input of the "black box" that produces the output signal of future events.

The actual instructions to the viewers were given as:

"DESCRIBE THE LIBERTY WEEKEND EVENTS REPORTED IN THE FUTURE WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO KNOW NOW TO THWART ANY HOSTILE TERRORIST ACTIVITIES."

If one reduces the above to primitive elements, we obtain roughly:

"Liberty"

"Weekend"  "Future"

"Reported Events"

"Hostile terrorist activities"

We assume that this is the actual input provided the remote viewers "black box." "Weekend" and "future" are the temporal cues, and are too general to provide a coordinate in spacetime. Although the timeframe of "Liberty Weekend" is provided, the actual request asks for "events reported in the future". We also have a specific location, the Statue of Liberty (in general the New York City area) which provides a location for the target.

Given the primitive elements, and the general nature of the request, one might expect that the actual instructions would be interpreted as:

"Describe future hostile terrorist activities in the New York City area."

This is in fact strongly reinforced in the final tasking instructions, which follow later.

The 1986 working report continues:

"Responses to this latest tasking were inconclusive and failed to positively identify a target of possible terrorist activity within the US. An abbreviated edited listing of the key elements of these responses are as follows:

A strong impression that (the attack) was not directed .... at a specific site but at an activity/event. One aspect of the site involved (an) airfield (military or civilian) including jet aircraft and a strong impression of one particular "twin engined propeller aircraft". Two individuals...wearing flightsuits ... impression (they) are some sort of aviators."

We have in the above an interpretation of the raw imagery provided by multiple DIA sources.  The intelligence officer(s) looking at the data were able to ascertain several interesting facts from the viewers' reports.

The vagueness of the the site may have been due to the fact that at least four sites and aircraft were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Thus one coordinated conspiracy, involving four closely related events at four locations (targets being the two towers of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the White House and or the Capitol Building in Washington D.C.) are not named for an attack at a specific site but rather for the activity/events we call 9/11.  This is exactly correct.

The attacks were initiated when the terrorists boarded the planes at their respective airfields. In an interesting superposition of related information, there is the identification of the use by the terrorists of twin engine jet aircraft, and the training and practice flights using propeller aircraft. Note the very important identification that the terrorists were "some sort of aviators."

The report notes that:

"Further descriptive data on these two individuals indicated both men were altruistic, calculating and determined. A sense of "nefarious and extra legal" involvement (perhaps) "mercenaries". (These) individuals were involved with planning "routes","checklists", "checkpoints", "out-bound routes-and in-bound routes". (A) chronic low level danger or threat seemed present..."Can't trust anybody completely...", "secrecy/security/close-hold". US and non-US people and locations involved ..."

There is a description of those behind the plot:

"A very old city (with) hot, muggy air. Low white stucco buildings. White garments. Barren hills, flickering lights (perhaps) small fires ... An additional impression of a mustached man, dark/swarthy skin ... fist raised ... attempting to incite the people around him to join him in opposition to to the person they have been following ... Emotions of fear ... confusion and anger. A final impression is of a large room ... long wooden table ... 11 men seated and dressed in business suits and uniforms. Discussion on the area referenced in the first impression and on planning strategies. 10 (of the ) men are advisors to the 11th man. They are not concerned with moral implications but rather image and power."

Returning to the one of the target locations, there is a description bearing some resemblance to the World Trade Center location:

"A location (with) large, massive and impressive buildings ... Some kind of monument or public building ... An open space which has a tremendous jumbled component (comparable) to the disarray of unarranged tables and chairs in an outdoor restaurant. An impression of a meeting between two men, one waiting a long time for the other to appear. (One) is businesslike and unemotional.. (The other) is nervous (and) seems trapped into doing something he (is apprehensive) about doing. The event centers around the nervous man bringing an envelope to the first man. The envelope contains a folded sheet of paper with a small amount of typed material visible."

Another general set of locations is identified in the Washington, D.C. area:

"An impression of the White House as seen from outside the fence. There are cars dropping people off at the door in formal attire. (Further impressions) of a formal dinner'(and/or) a concert (in the White House). No impression of trauma. A second series of impressions of a large aircraft lifting off from a runway near a crowded city. The runway was next to water. The aircraft was somewhat misshapened (bulging) from the bottom. A (final) impression of National Airport in D.C. (SOURCE 101)"

What follows is very curious indeed, as if there would be a destructive event that would leave an enormous crater behind amidst the ruins of a building:

"Source 101 specifically referenced an identifiable facility, the White House, as well as other sites which may have been located in the greater D.C. complex, without actually indicating the nature of any traumatic event. On 30 June 1986, in an effort to force a clear perception, Source 101 was driven and walked throughout the main D.C. business and monument district. He was not told the reason why this was being conducted but he was told to note any perceptions which he might wish to add to his previous reports. Source had no "intuitive flashes" or cognitive perceptions at any site except the White House. At this point a rather unusual occurrence became evident. To fully explain this occurrence, it is necessary to provide the reader with some background data.

In a formal RV session with Source 101 conducted on 20 June 1986, Source targeted against a totally unrelated site (Target "Other-C, a military complex). During the session, Source was seemingly unable to acquire the proper site although he did describe in exacting detail a, "large hole in the ground near a multistory building. The building is surrounded by a fence and a curved road leads to the door. The entire site was well guarded and access was strictly controlled. Repeated references were made to a "operational area" akin to an early warning center or military "Watch Office". Located in the deep hole near the building was a "device" which appeared to be out of place in the hole...

As stated above, Source 101 was led through the monument area of D.C. and became introspective and somber only at the White House. He was very hesitant to leave this area and stated he wished to walk all the way around the White House Grounds so that he could view the actual site from all angles. The wish is impossible due to the larger rear area used to land AF-1 helicopters and the adjacent Executive Offices. On this day (30 June 1986) it was even more impossible to actually view all the angles of the White House due to heavy construction on Executive Avenue, (between the White House and the Treasury Building). This construction is being completed as a park/walking mall project and as a result Executive Avenue has been blocked to pedestrian traffic. A casual observation of the site revealed the existence of two large excavations ("holes"), approximately 30 meters in diameter and 20 meters deep. That portion of the excavations visible from an open gate, revealed interlaced steel reinforcing mesh and support pylons. Pedestrians are not permitted to view directly into the excavation. Guards in the area would state only that the purposes of the holes were restricted to a "need to know basis". Source 101 was drawn to the excavation site but could not objectify his concern and a sense of tragedy associated with his perceptions of the White House at that moment..."

In order to clarify the vast amount of information, and the various locations described by the sources, they were tasked once again with new instructions:

"As a final effort to more positively identify the potential target(s) referenced above, all Sources were provided an additional sealed envelope on 30 June 1986 and told to report on their perceptions on 2 July 1986. The Sources were cautioned that they may have already surmised the exact nature of this and the previous targeting. but they were to try to work through any pre-conceptions and "front-loading of data". They were, however, tasked to report on any and all of these pre-conceptions and/or AOL's (analytical overlays) when submitting their report. Inside the envelope was the following instructions:

Use your previous data as a basis. In the previous two exercises, you have provided information concerning your perceptions of "Liberty Weekend".

The actual tasking instructions were as follows.  Note the general nature of the target.

"IF A TERRORIST INCIDENT IS GOING TO OCCUR WHICH MAY BE PREVENTED OR BLUNTED,
DESCRIBE THE TARGET."

The intelligence officer(s) arrived at the following interpretation:

"Responses to the above cited instructions were much more concise and ominous in nature.

There is, however, a distinct risk of skewed results. This skewing of the reported data can be caused by a number of technical problems generated by the somewhat unusual procedures utilized in this project, e.g., repeated tasking of essentially the same target by the Sources using a variety of techniques, the possibility of certain psychic phenomena (noise) caused by the military and para-military preparations for the security procedures of the events of Liberty Weekend and the possibility of pre-conceptions on the part of the interviewers being reported through psychic channels by the Sources. Other more complex problems occur when dealing in future perceptions which may have confused the data received by the Sources. These final responses, edited for clarity, are provided in their entirety, to permit independent-appraisal of the responses given to the interviewers:

NYC (New York City) will be the target of an unexpected terrorist attack, by air and ground, of ...suicide-forces..."

In fact the World Trade Center was attacked first by ground, in the 1993 garage bombing, followed by the massive air attack on September 11, 2001.

If one removes the obvious 1986 temporal overlay and the biased reference to al Khadaffi and then President Ronald Reagan, and instead makes the identification with al Qaeda, the remaining details are strikingly accurate:

"Because of the number of people in attendance, American and foreign, and the televised coverage, there will be international repercussions...Reagan will survive. Washington will also be a target, simultaneously with (the) primary targets (being) the White House...(and the) Pentagon...This one (attack) is more to disrupt rather that retaliate with (destruction)."

In the above, we excised any interpretive details identifying President Reagan, cold war era relations, and Khadaffi. What remains is the correct identification of the 9/11 targets.

This is further reinforced by what follows:

"(SOURCE 021) NOTE: This particular Source commented later that these perceptions were so strong and clear that she attempted to flag down a member of the interviewer staff on the highway to report her on-going perceptions. The Source further became somewhat anxious by her unusually clear perceptions due to two personal agendas - a spouse who is assigned to the Pentagon and a sister who is intending to participate in the NYC ceremonies. She went so far as to request guidance from the interviewer staff on what actions, if any she should take, to insure the safety of her relatives, bearing in mind that as of yet, she has not been told the nature of the questions or the entire project."

STARstream Research

Telephone

(763) 424-4426

Postal address

P.O. Box 1144 Maple Grove, MN 55311

Electronic mail

General Information:

 contact@starstreamresearch.com
Consultation:

 gsb@starstreamresearch.com

Our Mission:  STAR Reports survey exotic physics and consciousness concepts related to the survival or otherwise of the human race. The Starstream material will from time to time appear as the Spacetime Threat Assessment Report, targeted to various select contacts in the defense and intelligence community.