Fabian Rush July 18th 2026 Topic: Remote Viewing & Ingo Swann

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Good evening to my friends, and welcome to midnight frequency Radio.
Wherever this signal finds you tonight, whether you're crossing a
lonely stretch of highway with only your headlights cutting through
the darkness, sitting on a quiet porch beneath the sky
with stars, are lying awake while the rest of the
world sleeps. Thank you for letting me spend part of

(00:58):
your night with you. There is something different about the
hours after dark. The world grows quieter, the distractions fade,
and the questions that we've been taught to ignore begin
whispering a little louder. Questions about consciousness, about reality, about
the limits of the human mind, questions that don't neatly

(01:21):
fit into textbooks and don't disappear simply because they're inconvenient.
Or decades, governments denied they were interested in psychic phenomenon,
extrasensory perception, and remote viewing. Then the documents began to surface,
programs were declassified, names emerged, and one name stood out

(01:45):
above them. All Ingo Swan an artist, a visionary, a
man whose extraordinary abilities helped launch one of the most
controversial intelligence programs ever undertaken, who challenged everything we think
we know about the relationship between mind, space, and time,

(02:07):
and perhaps even reality itself. Tonight, we're going to follow
that trail. We'll venture into the classified world of remote viewing,
the CIA Stargate program, the astonishing successes, the unanswered questions,
and the mysteries that continue to surround one of the

(02:29):
strongest chapters in modern intelligence history. Was remote viewing merely
an unusual psychological experiment or did it reveal something profound
about human consciousness that we've only begin to understand. If
consciousness isn't confined to the brain, if the mind can

(02:49):
reach beyond distance, beyond time, then what else is possible.
These aren't just fascinating questions. They may be the most
important question humanity has ever asked. I'm Carl Richardson coming
to you live from the beautiful Ozark Foothills of northeast Arkansas,
and you're listening to midnight frequency Radio. My guest tonight

(03:14):
is a filmmaker, researcher, and consciousness explorer Fabian Rush, whose
work has carried him deep into the legacy of Ingo Swan,
remote viewing, and the hidden history of human potential. Together,
we're going to separate fact from fiction. Examine the evidence

(03:34):
and perhaps discover that the truth is far stranger than
either one. But first will pause for just a moment.
When we return, Fabian Rush joins us live, and together
will step beyond the boundaries of conventional thought into a
place where intelligence agencies, psychic spies, and untapped power of consciousness.

(04:00):
I'll intersect. So dim the lights, turn the volume up
just a little. Leave your skepticism at the door, but
bring your curiosity with you, because somewhere between what we
know and what we've been told is where the truth
has always been waiting. We'll be right back after this.

(04:33):
Looking for a portable radio, let us slip into your pocket,
take a look at the CC pocket AMFM nowhere whether
radio plus Alert with clock and sleep timer. We combine
needs of use, very good reception and sharp, well defined
audio together in this little jewel of a radio. You
can listen on the built in speaker or the included
high quality original C C Budd earphones, tune for superior

(04:56):
voice quality and music. It has five one touch memories,
tight buttons for each band, and stance upright when needed.
To get your CC pocket radio, you can call one
eight hundred five two two eight eight sixty three, or
visit us on the web at ccrane dot com. Once again,
that's c C R A n E dot.

Speaker 2 (05:17):
Com through the.

Speaker 1 (05:28):
Web, you know, dear with.

Speaker 3 (05:31):
You the night, this precious time when time is now all.

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Up to then to.

Speaker 4 (05:52):
Crushing into your speaker like an electronic shock. Midnight Frequency
Radio seeks to bring these stories of ghosts, bigfoot you have,
and conspiracy theories to you. Here is Carl Richardson on
Midnight Frequency Radio.

Speaker 1 (06:08):
Here I am, indeed, and our guest, Sabian Russia is
with us. Good evening, mister Russian. Welcome to Midnight Frequency Radio.

Speaker 5 (06:15):
Good evening, Carl. It's so good to be here and
talking with you.

Speaker 1 (06:20):
I guess the first place we should go tonight is
a little bit about you. What got you interested in
this subject? And I guess where did your journey begin?

Speaker 5 (06:32):
You know, I guess that's the perfect place to start.
It's funny a lot of people in my personal life
don't know me this way that, like you said in
the intro, I'm a filmmaker and I've done all these
other things. But what I have not talked about recently
is early experiences I had as a really young person

(06:53):
starting on when I was a really little kid, and
then I guess I can briefly say that as a
little kid, I started having what you would call like
the predecessor of out of body experiences, where I would
just imagine myself from different perspectives and things like that.

(07:14):
So I had a very active imagination. And then it
little things like that would happen where I would I
would just slip out of my body and play in
the yard or on a long drive. My parents would
drive us from Virginia to New York and that was
around eight hours, and I would slip out of my

(07:37):
body and fly above the car, fly off into the distance,
out of boredom, and then I would kind of phase
back in. But I thought all that was still just
my imagination. Then it was in high school in during
the nineties that I started to meditate, mostly because I

(08:02):
had anxiety issues on and off, and I thought, well,
let me try and get a hold of myself. I'm
having these mental health issues, so I hear meditations good
for that. So I started breathing exercises and I would
lie back on the couch in kind of this area
of my parents' house where everybody was going to bed already,

(08:25):
so it was just kind of me alone. So I
would lie back, I would relax, close my eyes, do
my breathing technique, and that is when I started slipping
out of my body again. And for a while I thought, oh, well,
this is my imagination running wild again. But there's my

(08:46):
body on the couch, and let me see if I
can just go in the backyard. So I would. I
would leave the house, go into the backyard, float around
a bit. And then now I was doing this metaation
every night for months at this time, and I found

(09:07):
I was able to go further and further away from
the house. And one night I witnessed a car accident
that was several miles from my home, and the next
day I found out that there had actually been a
car accident in that particular place that was far outside
of my earshot. So this is not something I could

(09:29):
have heard from my home, but I watched it happen,
And next day I found out that somebody had died
in that car accident, and that was the first time
I thought, Wow, I think that was really really out
of this world. I think I did something kind of

(09:49):
real there. So that those were my earliest experiences and
things definitely grew and became more intense.

Speaker 1 (10:01):
From there, was that the experience that completely changed your worldview?

Speaker 5 (10:06):
No, No, honestly, that was you know, at that point,
on some level, I was still saying, this isn't this
isn't real. This is just you know, I just have
a really good imagination, and maybe I got a little
lucky in terms of viewing something that I wasn't present for.

(10:31):
So the life changing thing I would see. I would
have visions of things, particularly in these outer body states.
One thing that I will say this was life changing.
I on one of these excursions, I saw some kind

(10:54):
of a very unusual entity, a whole bunch of beings
just kind of floating like these beautiful, luminous creatures. And
so the next day I started drawing them. And now

(11:14):
here I have to give a little bit of backstory.
I was raised in a very Catholic, a very religious household,
and these pictures were disturbing to my parents. So things went,
Things got a little uncomfortable for a while. So I

(11:35):
learned to stop talking about these experiences and certainly to
stop drawing the pictures of things that I was seeing.
And then a number of years later is when I
started to see things online. Now, of course, back in
the nineties, the internet was hardly something that was usable.

(11:56):
It was nothing like it is today. So recently, within
the last say ten years, I started seeing images of
Bible accurate angels. Are you familiar with those that kind
of imagery? Yes, yeah, Okay, well I started images of
these things that were shown in the Bible, as in

(12:20):
the Book of Ezekiel, these multi winged beings that those
are the things I was drawing. And what was crazy
to me is that I never would have thought it
was an angel, because as a kid, as a person
in high school, I thought that an angel was basically
a person with wings, and so I never would have

(12:41):
thought that I was seeing anything transcendent or unusual. I
just thought I was seeing really bizarre essentially combinations of
different animals but covered with wings, huge luminous wings all
over them. I'm talking like between eight and probably twelve wings.

(13:08):
It was this ridiculous looking so I thought, oh, well,
that's definitely my imagination. So I think one of the
life changing events was when I started seeing that imagery online.

Speaker 1 (13:18):
Later, when you first start an out of body experience,
do you hear or fill a vibration.

Speaker 5 (13:30):
Yes, definitely, I would say one of the first yeah,
right from the start, I would say, you know, I
told you that I would lie down on the couch
and do my breathing exercises I would be doing, and
it was just it wasn't any kind of special breathing.

(13:50):
It was just nice, deep, relaxing breaths. And then after
about maybe five minutes of breathing like that, my whole
body just started vibrating, almost out of control. But it
felt good. It wasn't It didn't feel like I was
having a seizure or anything. It just I just felt
this really pleasant vibration all over myself. And then on

(14:15):
my next exhale is when my perspective it was like
I exhaled myself and my perspective was almost from the
perspective of my exhaled breath, and then that became my
perspective for the remainder of the experience.

Speaker 1 (14:35):
I've spoken with others that have had out of body experience.
Have you ever had a situation real or hands would
reach up and try to grab your ankles and I
guess pull you into their domain. I guess within the
astro projection.

Speaker 5 (14:54):
That is a very funny question. You know, it's I
had not thought of it quite way you asked. I. So, yes,
I have experienced the hands, but it wasn't something I
saw coming. I've often thought of it as my imagination
was hijacked and that I was having. Now, this happened

(15:18):
after I was already out of my body. I'm just
floating around and I was flying, and then I felt
myself get grabbed or seized. And that's how I was
often shown things, just grabbed and then taken somewhere specific.

Speaker 1 (15:41):
Others have spoke about that. I've never had an out
of body experience, but I believe with that point that
would scare me back enough to snack me back. I've
had Marilyn hughes on and she's discussed that, and some
other people that have been involved with astro projection and

(16:02):
out of body experiences. Okay, were you always interested in
these topics?

Speaker 6 (16:09):
Well?

Speaker 1 (16:10):
Did skepticism kind of come first?

Speaker 5 (16:12):
Skepticism? It was always skepticism. Wow, you know, even when
I had these experiences, I think the skepticism came about
because I learned not to talk about these things so much.
People did not react to unusual stuff like what I
was experiencing well, so I thought, on one level, I thought,

(16:37):
maybe I'm crazy, And then on every other level, I said,
I have to be skeptical about this because I'm actually
more of a scientific minded person. I love science, and
though I was raised Catholic, I started to veer away
a bit from a religion a bit, mostly because of

(17:01):
some of the things that I had witnessed. They didn't
seem to line up with my understanding of religion at
that time. Now I think some of those things may
have changed a little bit, but for the most part, yes,
I was always skeptical until decades later, around twenty fifteen,

(17:21):
when I first learned about Ingo swan.

Speaker 1 (17:25):
All a religious aspect And you don't have to ask
answer this if you don't wish to, but were a
lot of the religious issues you had around the church leadership?

Speaker 5 (17:40):
That's a good question. The issues I suppose I had
issues of why am I supposed to be afraid of
this or that? Because I was I was given the
sensation that I was told, essentially that what I was

(18:01):
doing and the things I was seeing were kind of
related to witchcraft, and as a young person, I think
that sent me into a state of rebellion. So no,
I wouldn't blame church leadership necessarily. I would blame my
own perception of what I thought religion was supposed to mean.

(18:27):
And I thought things were so simple because it's you know,
when you go to church, it's taught on a very
simple level where everything just kind of is laid out
for you, and it all makes very good sense. But
when you start to witness things that people would call
religious experiences, there's nothing simple about it. And then suddenly

(18:50):
I found myself questioning everything because I was seeing things
out of the context that was laid out for me
in the religious world.

Speaker 1 (19:04):
Yeah, I've been exposed to a number of religions. I
was raised Southern Baptists, my mother got involved with Jehovah's Witnesses,
and my wife is Catholic, so we go to the
Catholic church. Okay, So I've seen so many different aspects
of it. I've seen some church leaders that seem to

(19:25):
relay their thoughts on how things should be besides what's
actually written into Bible. So I've had different perspectives in
front of me that makes me question things.

Speaker 5 (19:38):
You know what I'm saying, Yes, actually it sounds very
similar to what I was dealing with, because a lot
of people bring their own perspectives into religion, and that
can contort the message a lot of the time. And

(19:59):
what's in trusting in during out of body experiences. Now,
A lot of what I was learning in church, and
I guess this is probably a common experience in religion,
is that so much of it is human centric. And
what I was experiencing every time I would have an
out of body experience, the human experience would diminish along

(20:21):
with it, and I would become so distant from what
it means to be human that I don't know. This
is kind of strange. I almost don't know where I'm
going with this sentence, because there's something about being human
that becomes less important the further you are away from
your body. Does that make sense?

Speaker 1 (20:43):
Yeah, And if you look at any saying as earthly realm,
you have to understand religious was written for beyond that level. Yes, So, yes,
I agree with you. There a lot of what space
too much about humanity itself and not what's going on.

Speaker 5 (21:02):
Yes, i'd have that. I think that I think we've
come to an agreement. I think that's what I was
trying to say. That, yes, when when I'm not in
the human body, there's so much that does not apply
to what I then find myself to be, especially if
I leave the earth or or find myself amongst animals,

(21:23):
just outside of human civilizations like the city, Say I
find myself in a jungle or in an arctic region.
They're in those places you don't get a sense of right, wrong,
good and bad, sin, all those religious concepts.

Speaker 7 (21:42):
You're suddenly just being Yeah, you're not bombarded from every
direction with this this jargon. So yeah, who were some
of your biggest influences early.

Speaker 5 (21:56):
On in terms of what we're talking about? Well, you know, honestly,
my biggest influences were a filmmakers. I loved science fiction.
I've always been into things like Star Trek and so
I've always loved aliens things like that, so that was

(22:17):
always fun. So in general, my influences were science fiction directors, producers,
essentially Hollywood filmmakers. So I enjoyed that. But in terms
of more of the things that we're talking about, I'd
have to say, my only inspiration that I can really
think of right now is Ingo Swan, because once I

(22:42):
learned that other people experienced some of the same things
I did. It made me, It made my skepticism step
back a little bit, and then I was able to
revisit things that I forced myself to stop thinking about.
And it really came about as a justification for the

(23:05):
things that I experienced. When I read Penetration and learned
that he essentially astrally projected his consciousness to the Moon,
I thought, Wow, I've done things similar. I haven't gone
to the Moon, but I've been off planet. I've hovered
above the Earth, and I've done things like that. I

(23:28):
just hadn't thought about that in decades. What an amazing thing.
Oh and not only that, he was also studied and
funded by the US government. So then suddenly I learned
that the things I was keeping quiet about were things
that the government during the nineteen seventies studied very deeply,
and they took it very seriously. So there go my

(23:51):
inspirations right there.

Speaker 1 (23:54):
So how did you first discover and go? Was it
to his books? Are workshops or something?

Speaker 5 (24:01):
Actually I was watching one of those random documentaries on
UFO abductions and things like that, you know those videos
you can find on streaming networks and on YouTube. I
like watching that stuff. I was always fascinated by alien abduction.
And one of these it was a podcast or something

(24:24):
that happened to be on YouTube about extraterrestrial bases on
the Moon and that book that was written in the
seventies by I think it is George Leonard somebody Else's
on the Moon. And so I was watching that documentary
and then they mentioned a person who had sent their

(24:45):
consciousness there, and it immediately made me tune in to
what was being said, and they said, yes, well, this
psychic named Ingo Swan was prompted to send his consciousness
to the Moon to specific coordinates, and he was able

(25:07):
to do this, and he saw these structures up close
and there were people, and that really shocked me because
that right there was right in line with my younger experiences.
So that's that's really what did it.

Speaker 1 (25:25):
His rearing of these structures and things. Were they on
the dark side of the moon facing away from us?

Speaker 5 (25:30):
Are That's a good question you'd have to assume. So,
but as far as all the documentation goes that I've seen,
and I think that's publicly available, he was just giving
coordinates and not we don't know exactly what those coordinates
were or exactly on what side of the Moon. I

(25:53):
think people have guessed that these are in craters. Some
of the craters might be visible from our side, but
at that time that he was doing the viewing of
these places, he only had coordinates, and this is just
Moon coordinates, so you can't even really guess from the

(26:14):
Earth's perspective.

Speaker 1 (26:17):
I have a break coming up here and then we'll
be able to go for an hour. But I wanted
to ask you, are you familiar with the story of
Apollo twenty.

Speaker 5 (26:26):
I am? Is that the I believe that's one that
there was some video footage that was shown that was
released on YouTube. Is that correct? Yeah, yes, I've seen.

Speaker 1 (26:37):
That, and I think they went to the landing side
of Pollo nineteen that never returned and found a female
alien entity within the capsule that was I don't know
if she was in suspended animation type or was deceased.
But it's an interesting story, and a lot of people

(26:57):
have attempted to debunk it. Yes, but but you know
how that goes.

Speaker 5 (27:02):
One person, there will always be debunkers. But I've seen
that footage and I thought, you know, this is actually
very well done. As a filmmaker, I have to appreciate
if that was done on film, it had to have
a very good budget, so this was not a small

(27:25):
indie production. A great deal of research and money has
to go into creating something like that, even down to
that female alien that they found. So I can't say
it's I can prove it's real or otherwise. I know
people who have remote viewed that site, and from their perspective,

(27:46):
it did come across as real to them.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
I love seeing it. I've seen the cases where they've
tried to debunk it. I've seen the cases where they've
debunked the debunkers. So you know, you never know on
something like that. It's like the case with Jonathan Reid.
I know him personally, I believe his story, but there
are so many things out there that say it it

(28:10):
never happens. So you know, what can you do? Yeah,
all right, we'll take our first break and then we
won't have to take another one to the bottom of
the second hour. Is that good with you?

Speaker 5 (28:22):
Sounds great? Thank you?

Speaker 8 (28:24):
All right, We'll be right back.

Speaker 2 (28:48):
Last night, adjamp on something.

Speaker 9 (28:57):
So girl with HI.

Speaker 10 (29:18):
This is Dark Space's News. I'm Joshua Stark. A new
clinical trial is offering hope for patients with advanced stomach
and gastro esophageal junction cancers. Researchers tested an experimental cart
cell therapy called cytrus cell, a personalized treatment that reprograms

(29:40):
a patient's own immune cells to attack cancer carrying a
protein known as CLDN one point eight point two. The
phase two trial involved one hundred and fifty six patients
in China whose cancers had already stopped responding to standard treatment.

(30:01):
Participants receiving the car T cell therapy were compared with
others receiving their physician's choice of chemotherapy and targeted drugs.
The results were encouraging. Patients treated with satricell went significantly
longer before their cancer progressed, more than three months on average,

(30:22):
compared to less than two months for standard treatment. The
therapy also cut the risk of disease progression or death
by roughly sixty three percent. Tumors shrank in about thirty
percent of patients receiving the car T treatment. While responses
were far less common with conventional therapies, as expected with

(30:45):
car T cell treatments, side effects were common. Nearly all
patients experienced a cytokine release syndrome, an immune reaction that
was generally mild to moderate and manageable with medical care.
Serious blood related side effects also occurred, but were considered
consistent with this type of therapy. Catch up with us

(31:09):
at darkspacesnews dot com.

Speaker 11 (31:11):
What is HAMM radio. It's the most fun you can
have with the radio, talk to people around the world
or even orbiting the world, and you don't need a
two year contract or internet access to do it. Learn
about electronics and be of service to your community. AARRL,
the National Association for Amateur Radio, has over two thousand
clubs across the country, including this one in your area.

Speaker 10 (31:41):
Reports of bigfoot are once again making headlines in Ohio,
where a recent wave of alleged sightings has reignited one
of America's longest running mysteries. The latest report comes from
a wetlands preserve near Ashland, where a college profer us
says he and his wife discovered a series of large

(32:03):
bearfoot human like tracks measuring up to sixteen inches long.
The witness also reported hearing loud knocking sounds in the
woods before photographing the prints. The claim follows a surge
of reported encounters across northeast Ohio. Over the past several weeks,

(32:24):
witnesses have described tall, dark, hairy creatures walking upright, along
with strange vocalizations, heavy footsteps, and an overpowering musky odor.
Bigfoot researchers save the concentration of reports is unusual enough
to qualify as a Bigfoot flap, a period when multiple

(32:47):
sightings occur in the same region over a short time,
but despite the growing number of eyewitness accounts, there is
still no verified physical evidence. Wildlife experts note that black
bears can sometimes stand or walk briefly on their hind
legs and may be mistaken for something more mysterious, especially
in poor lighting or dense forest. Whether the reports point

(33:11):
to misidentified wildlife, visited imagination, or something still unexplained, the
latest sightings have once again put Ohio at the center
of the Bigfoot debate, and the legends shows no signs
of disappearing. Catch up with dark spaces News on the
dark spaces News Facebook page and darkspacesnews dot Com. From Memphis, Tennessee,

(33:33):
I'm Joshua.

Speaker 12 (33:34):
Stark, somebil and Morning winners straight.

Speaker 5 (34:11):
I'm gonna.

Speaker 9 (34:14):
Ammuging and maybe tell you thatout Ladra.

Speaker 4 (34:26):
Want to take a journey into the unknown from the
Ozark Foothills of Arkansas. This is Midnight Frequency Radio with
Carl Richardson, exclusively on the night Watch Digital Network. Now
here's Carl.

Speaker 1 (34:43):
We're back with Fabian Rush. Fabian, Who do you feel
Ingle Swan was beyond the well? Beyond the person? I
guess we should say, wow.

Speaker 5 (34:55):
You know that is a wonderful question. Did you say,
who do I feel he was?

Speaker 1 (35:00):
Yes?

Speaker 5 (35:01):
Yeah, you know. I'm I'll tell you this. I've been
working on a documentary series with Ellie Flippin, Ingo's niece
for a few years now, and my mind has been
blown over and over again. For a while, it was

(35:23):
being blown every single week as I would learn additional
aspects of him. So I'd say, there's the public version
of Ingo that everybody knows in you know, if you're
interested in UFOs and if you're interested in remote viewing,
you know of him as the person who would go

(35:44):
to the conferences and then do a talk about the
things he's seen and done, and it's all very professional
and neat, and he's in this lovely suit. But the
Ingo that I've come to know over the years is
a party animal of what an amazing character. It's so funny.

(36:08):
Ellie gave me hundreds of his personal pictures and effects.
So I have all these things sitting in my in
my office now that I'm going through while working on
this documentary and trying to learn about him. And he

(36:29):
used to have these wonderful wild dinner parties. He would
go to Studio fifty four and in the seventies and.

Speaker 1 (36:39):
Yeah, big disco man.

Speaker 5 (36:44):
Just the people don't know how human and how fun
he was. And that is what has been one of
my better, my greater pleasures over the last few years
is getting to know him. Now. He passed away in
twenty thirteen, so sadly I never got to meet him

(37:05):
in person. I didn't learn about him until after he
was gone. So Ellie has been wonderful to kind of
introduce me to him in the same way that she
knew him. So I have an inside scoop on him.
And you know she gave Now I say she gave

(37:25):
me these pictures. It's alone so that once I'm finished
with these, I can take it and add it to
his archive at the University of West Georgia. And so
for now I'm scanning these images in I'm going over
his military service record on all these different things, and

(37:48):
so yes, I knowing that I can't possibly be the
first filmmaker to take interest in Ingo, I had to
ask Ellie, like, wow, Ellie, of everyone, why is it
that you trust me with all of this information, this
personal information about Ingo? And it was funny. She just

(38:14):
said to me, because you're a lot like him, You
have his same energy. You guys both do a lot
of the same things, and you share a lot of
the same experiences. It blew my mind when she told
me that, But then as I got to know him more,
I started to see more and more of the similarities

(38:34):
between our lives.

Speaker 1 (38:36):
Yeah, that's an honor in itself.

Speaker 5 (38:39):
Yes, I think that's how I got the job, and
it has just been a wild ride ever since. But yes,
the Ingo I've come to know was a deeply thoughtful person.
Yes he could party. Oh the man could drink, and
yes he loved cigars. But at the same time, he

(39:02):
also questioned absolutely everything, even his own experiences. He would say, now,
I was told to travel to the moon, but I
was probably off. I'm not one hundred percent accurate. He
was always wanting to make sure that things were as

(39:24):
he wanted everything to be testable, and he didn't like
information that could not be proven and respected. And he
really invited criticism and he wanted that peer review. So
he is not a psychic that was going off and
making blind claims. He was somebody who was rigorously tested

(39:49):
in laboratory settings by physicists. And that is the person
that has become famous now. So we know about Ingo
because of that rigor and the millions of government spending
that went directly into his program.

Speaker 1 (40:08):
My next guest question was what was what do you
feel made himself unique? But I think you just answered
that and everything you previous previously said. So how did
he become involved with government research? Did they approach him
or did he volunteer.

Speaker 5 (40:27):
Or well, now here this is there's a fun backstory
to a lot of this. I mentioned his parties. When
he was in New York, he would have a lot
of a lot of dinner parties and and he was
invited to a lot. In particular, he went to uh
the these parties with a woman named Zelda Sepli, and

(40:51):
they would have Virgo parties. And at these Virgo parties,
a lot of uh very interesting people would attend, so
members of the CIA, various other personnel in government. She
was highly connected and some people believe that she was
in intelligence herself. So there were a lot of interesting

(41:15):
people coming to these parties, including physicists as well. And
Ellie and I uncovered that even though it was called
a virgo party, a lot of the people in attendance
were not virgos. We have the theory that these high
ranking people were attending these parties specifically to meet Ingo,

(41:41):
and now that is a bold claim, but he and
Zelda were the only two virgos at these parties, so
it made us question a lot of things. But yes,
a lot of the government testings started with people who
were attending these parties, the first of which one of

(42:03):
the big ones was doctor Gertrude Smidler, who was She
worked at one of the universities I want to say
it was one of the universities in New York. The
name is slipping my mind right at the moment. But
she ran a experiment with him where he was manipulating

(42:25):
the temperature using his mind inside of thermisters that she
had set up. So she is one of these scientists
who had equipment with a desire to test things that
she had heard about him and things that she had
possibly even witnessed at some of these parties. So it

(42:47):
started off small, with parties where he would do unusual
things that seemed very peculiar or mystical. Almost he was
getting the attention of scientists. I mentioned Gertrude Schmidler, and so, yes,

(43:07):
it I think it really mostly started with her. I
also mentioned her in the documentary because it was her
work with Ingo that eventually caught the attention of the
physicists at Stanford Research Institute. That's how put Off and

(43:27):
Russell targ So it kind of blew up from there.
But it started with the little parties.

Speaker 1 (43:32):
So Gertrude was probably the first to recognize his abilities.

Speaker 5 (43:37):
I would say she was among the first. Okay, definitely
among the first. There were several people psychologists at the
same time that that would have been at these parties
to see this and actually, gosh, this is rough. You know,
It's it's late at night here here in my time zone.

(43:58):
It's almost eleven PM, so strangely, strangely, I can't believe
I'm forgetting the name of the plant guy, the guy
who ran experiments on plants and tested their ability to
communicate with one another.

Speaker 1 (44:15):
I know who you're talking about. What I'm the same
with you. I can't remember his name.

Speaker 5 (44:20):
I am googling him right now to try and find him.
This is what an unusual thing, because I never I
never forget this, and I almost hope you can cut
this out even while I do a quick search here.

Speaker 1 (44:35):
Oh, I can do that in editing. But go ahead,
it's no problem. You can look stuff up.

Speaker 5 (44:40):
Okay, yeah, let me just take a quick look here,
because I can't believe that my mind is given up
on me here.

Speaker 1 (44:45):
At my age, mine gives up on me often.

Speaker 5 (44:47):
So here we go. All right, I'm ready to resume
the scientist's name. Now, this was a former CIA interrogation
specialist names Cleve Baxter.

Speaker 1 (45:00):
Oh yeah, yeah, So.

Speaker 5 (45:02):
Cleve Baxter also met NGO at one of these parties.
So the interesting thing here is how many of the
big scientists that everybody's heard of that met him specifically
at parties and then went on to work with him.

Speaker 1 (45:17):
What roles did Russell Targan Harold Pietroth's play.

Speaker 5 (45:22):
Well, they were both I think they were specializing at
Stanford Research Institute in laser physics, just doing various experiments
at the university, and they kind of backed into psychic research.
Neither of them were focused on that at the time,
but how put Off was curious about the way information

(45:47):
can travel, and he was doing research on several aspects
of this, and he sent a letter to Cleeve Baxter
because he knew about the plant experiments where Cleve essentially
had attached electrodes to the leaves of plants, and he
discovered that if he were to say something kind of

(46:10):
threatening to a plant, then then then the plant would
register something on his measurement devices. And of course he
was an interrogation specialist, so he was used to, you know,
using light detector equipment, and so when the plants were

(46:31):
being monitored by these light detectors, it picks up on
micro jumps in various frequencies that biological systems give off.
So when Cleave would say certain things or threaten to
burn a leaf on a plant, for example, the plants

(46:52):
their frequencies would change as if in response to what
he was doing. Now, he published this and how put
Off saw that publication and saw where he could learn
some information. He wanted to work specifically with Cleve Baxter
to learn a little bit more about how that worked.
And Cleve Baxter was busy at the time, and he said, well,

(47:16):
you know what about talking with this subject that I'm
working with. Ingo Swan comes into the office to do
little psychic experiments with the plants, and those psychic experiments
are registering on this same equipment that they're using. So

(47:36):
here he is, why don't why don't you guys hook up?
So that was how that connection was made, or at
least a very brief description of it. I've heard how
put Off tell the story and he goes into much
more detail. It's funny because how put Off was not
looking into psychic anything. That was not his goal. That

(47:59):
was just kind of thrust upon him. And then when
Ingle later flew out flew out to the university to
work with him and Russell. This happened to be during
the Cold War era, at a time when the CIA
was very nervous about a lot of things, and when
it came to light that these psychic abilities seemed to

(48:22):
be real, that's when they came in with funding for
SRI to do these experiments and eventually developed remote viewing.

Speaker 1 (48:32):
What do you think convinced intelligence agencies this deserved serious attention.

Speaker 5 (48:37):
There were several things. I think what started the nervousness
with the CIA.

Speaker 1 (48:43):
They're always nervous.

Speaker 5 (48:45):
Oh yes, they.

Speaker 4 (48:48):
Exactly.

Speaker 5 (48:49):
All you have to do is mention something to them
and they will be you know, they've got to be
right on it. So what was happening during the nineteen
six these actually at this point was that the CIA
had gotten intelligence that Russian spies and there were essentially

(49:11):
Russians that were able to psychically spy on operations. The
USSR was putting a lot of money into the research
and development of psychic capabilities, mind to mind, intelligence gathering
and all that stuff, and we knew they were doing experiments.

(49:33):
So the CIA looked at that, saw the amount of
money going into and thought, whoa, they're taking it seriously.
I wonder if we need to do that too, And
so it was introduced to the CIA that way. But
then the CIA caught wind through Clevebaxter as well as

(49:54):
some of the experiments at SRI that there was something
to all thispcially when Ingo and another one of the
test subjects, Pat Price, were given the task of psychically
viewing an unknown position in the woods. This was a

(50:18):
position that was given to them by an interusted party.
It turned out that this was a log cabin that
this person was, that this person owned, and Ingo and
Pat Price essentially mentally traveled to this cabin. They were

(50:38):
able to view it, and they thought, well, this can't
be the target. This is too boring. I don't want
to turn in this information because it's probably wrong. Let's
look around the area and see if there's something else.
So they looked around and they found this facility right
nearby that was hidden amongst the trees. They entered this

(51:01):
facility mentally. Of course, they started to sketch out the
interior layout of this facility, and Pat Price was actually
able to kind of stick his head into the files
and read some of the names on the files. And
so they turned in all this data to to how

(51:25):
put off and rustle in and that it turned out
that facility was a top secret facility. It was not
intended that they would view that target, but they found
it anyway, and so that horrified members of the CIA.
So next thing you know, these CIA people are showing
up at SRI demanding answers as to how they got

(51:49):
a hold of this information. And how had to tell
them that, oh, no, we were just doing psychic experiments.
They just they were just reporting data. And the next thing,
you know, the CIA, for as far as they're concerned,
it was confirmed. And so they said, all right, we're
going to need you to look into this, keep experiment

(52:10):
and keep developing this. Here's some money, So they started
funding SRI to run this program, which would eventually become
known as Stargate. Yeah, this was all under the mk
Ultra umbrella.

Speaker 1 (52:24):
You just answered two of my questions. So let's let
me skip to sure sure what kind of missions were
remote viewing assigned? Was it like this or did it
eventually go to where they were reviewing Russian agents or
Russian military to try to determine what their moves were becoming.

Speaker 5 (52:45):
Well, it had to start, simply, it had to start
with things that were easy to test and prove, so
over and over again, they had to do really boring tests,
like like they'll have a picture of something abstract, for example,
and then they would put that in another room or

(53:05):
in a sealed envelope and then have Ingo describe what
that thing was. So Ingo had no idea. This is
called a blind target. So Ingo had no idea what
they were hiding from him. They just said, give us
your impressions, tell us what you think this thing is.
So at the time before remote viewing was developed, this

(53:30):
was more of an out of body technique. So Ingo
would essentially leave his body, he would go into the
other room or he would float up into whatever basket
would be hidden on the ceiling from him. He would
view what this target was and then he would draw it,
and over time he became more and more accurate. So

(53:53):
those were the early experiments to kind of get a
baseline of the kind of information that you could expect
from this sort of intelligence gathering. And then later with
Project Stargate, places like the Monroe Institute came into play
where they were beginning to train military army personnel on

(54:16):
how to leave their bodies and go to sites, specifically
flying out to places and I say flying flying in
the out of body state over to the Soviet Union.
So yes, they were starting to spy on targets in
the Soviet Union. Joseph mcmonagall is the he's considered remote

(54:39):
viewer zero zero one, So he was kind of the
star of that early Russian program that was established a
few years after the successful projects established by Ingo at SRI.

Speaker 1 (54:57):
I know they were used during the Cold War. Did
they ever locate missing aircraft or hostages?

Speaker 5 (55:02):
Absolutely? That was actually one of the very things that
was done at Ingo Hella Hammered. At least the two
of them were tasked. A plane had gone down. I
assume you asked me that question because you've heard of
that particular target.

Speaker 4 (55:20):
Is that right?

Speaker 5 (55:21):
Yes, okay, yes that was a target. So, yes, a
plane had gone down, and from our satellites we could
not find it. I honestly can't even remember what country
that it went down in. Was that Africa or South America?
Somewhere in a jungle, this plane went down, and the

(55:41):
jungle was so thick the satellites could not penetrate and
find it. So they brought in remote viewers and they
were actually accurately able to say this is where the
plane went down. Within a three mile radius. They were
able to they were able to make the recovery.

Speaker 1 (56:03):
Do you think the Soviet psychic program was ahead of ours?

Speaker 5 (56:08):
I think they probably got a jump start on it.
I think they started before us, but I think we
caught up very quickly. And you know, toward the end
of the remote viewing programs, Americans and Soviets, well Russians
at the time were starting to get together to compare notes.

(56:29):
So you know, there's a lot of chaos going on,
and sometimes enemies aren't as as deeply enemies as you
would have thought, because yes, there were times when Soviets
and Americans would be in the same classroom discussing how
these psychic abilities worked. Of course, that came much later.

Speaker 1 (56:51):
Did China ever conduct similar research.

Speaker 5 (56:54):
I'm sure they did. Now I don't know much about that.
I have not followed. My thoughts on where China stand
in all this is that everything we're talking about in
the world of remote viewing and all this stuff, this
is all Western world stuff that we as Westerners are

(57:16):
kind of late to the party on. Whereas the Eastern world,
and I'm talking about China and India and those places,
they've been talking about the nature of consciousness for thousands
of years and they've kept detailed records and we essentially
learn meditation from them. So in the world of out

(57:41):
of body understanding and the nature of consciousness, I would
say the Eastern world is way ahead. They've been ahead
of the Western world by thousands of years, because you've
got to remember the Western world experienced the Dark Ages
where where books, uh, you know, we lost the Library

(58:03):
of Alexandria. Books were burned over and over again, we
had witchcraft trials, We had all these times where knowledge
was destroyed, and it was knowledge. A lot of that
knowledge was specifically pertaining to human abilities. And one of
the areas where such records were not destroyed would have

(58:26):
been various places in China. So my thoughts are that
we are really late to the party, and I'm sure
Chinese intelligence has has stuff that the world would never know.

Speaker 1 (58:38):
Why is the Western governments and everything else? Why are they?
Are they afraid of the capability of the human mind
to destroy information like that?

Speaker 5 (58:50):
Well you said destroy information? That that that kind of
that's kind of two questions almost the one I it's
a good question like do are they destroying information because
they're afraid of the truth of what the the natural

(59:11):
human abilities are? Is it a cover up? And that
so that's a very good question. It might very well
be a cover up. And then there's the other. All
the other alternative I consider is that when somebody knew
is coming to power and they just want to erase
what came before them for one reason or another. Be

(59:31):
it a king in England who was really furious with
with say some kind of a pagan group in Ireland.
So they go in and they destroy everything. Uh, in
that situation, it might not be a cover up. It
might just be we want to erase you people, and

(59:52):
so so it it's probably a mix of different situations
that that led to that destruction of destruction of information?

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
Why do you think stargate was officially shut down? And
the next question asked a bet would be was it
really shut down?

Speaker 5 (01:00:11):
The name Stargate was shut down, and that specific program
was probably I do this in air quotes, probably shut down.
You know, you just change the name of a program
to something else. So why was it shut down? I've
heard how put Off talk about this a little bit.

(01:00:33):
That there was a change of administration with the people
that were funding Stargate. So there's that the new administration
did not see the value of it because they were
not present during the Cold War. And so also the
information that comes from remote viewing can now I don't

(01:00:55):
know if you've seen examples of the remote viewing data,
but sometimes it can be or sometimes you really need
to know how to read it. And if certain questions
can arise where somebody would say, well, what's this a
picture of I don't understand what this is supposed to be.
You really need proper feedback to prove that what you're

(01:01:17):
viewing is accurate. So there were a number of factors
that would lead to Stargate being shut down. Also, of
course MK Ultra was a very controversial program to begin with,
so there were certain things that were being shut down

(01:01:37):
shut down, and you know a lot of the MK
Ultra documents have been burned now that includes a lot
of documentation on Ingo. When Ellie was trying to find
additional military service records for me to organize with the
rest of his work, she had contacted his army unit

(01:01:58):
and all that stuff, and it turned out that at
the warehouse where a lot of his information was stored
burned down magically. So it just burned down.

Speaker 1 (01:02:09):
It just was an accident. Somebody dropped cigarettes.

Speaker 5 (01:02:12):
Exactly exactly, and of course it happened. You know, this
is mk It's funny how flammable MK Ultra documents are. There.
If there's one document that's going to burn, it's going
to be one of.

Speaker 1 (01:02:26):
Those so they soap their their paper and alcohol or.

Speaker 5 (01:02:29):
Something exactly exactly. So, so yeah, it's it's funny what
information is removed from from everywhere. But the second part
of your question about if the program continued on, well,
I'm pretty certain it has. I'm happy that in the

(01:02:49):
mid nineties Stargate was declassified because it really opened up
a lot of information to a world of people that
think like you and me, that are interested in this stuff.
And then finally something amazing was declassified about human capability.

(01:03:11):
So this is not new information. It's been in the
public sphere since the mid nineties I think about ninety
five actually, So that was the declassification of one remote
viewing program. I would imagine that sure many programs sparked

(01:03:33):
after that that were just not under necessarily under the
mk Ultra umbrella. But if it's a useful tool, use it.
And I know people that work with the police department,
essentially psychics that work with the police department, particularly when
finding missing persons or bodies. So there is an unspoken

(01:03:58):
yet official use psychic people in a lot of countries
in official capacities.

Speaker 1 (01:04:05):
I'm going to ask you a question on your impression
of major Ed Dames. Now, if you would prefer not
to go there, I understand.

Speaker 5 (01:04:15):
But understandable you you can ask me, and I will
I will carefully answer.

Speaker 1 (01:04:21):
Well, his predictions on the kill shot, solar eruptions and
stuff kind of never took place, or or his dates
were off and it yet to transpire. But what is correct?
What are your thoughts on that?

Speaker 5 (01:04:37):
Well, I have My thoughts are all just a combination
of what I've heard from other people. Now, I've heard
from some of his classmates under under Ingo Swan when
it because he was one of Ed Dames was one
of Ingo's direct students. And what I heard from some

(01:05:02):
of the others that happened to be in that same
class receiving the remote viewing training is that often Ed
would say something in quotes, he would say something stupid,
Ingo would apparently yell at him, and then everybody else
got to just kind of relax while Ingo was dealing
with Ed. So now that is something I heard from

(01:05:26):
somebody who was in the unit. So I'll leave that
one alone personally, though, and I'll come back around to
the kill shot in a moment here, I was watching
a back when I had a gaya subscription the Gaya Network,
the TV network. I saw ed a major ed Dames

(01:05:47):
in an interview on one of their shows talking about
how early on in the programs they used out of
body techniques to try and do this psychic spying and
that it was less it was less useful than the
remote viewing techniques that were developed later where you did

(01:06:08):
not have to leave your body. And he mentioned that
because of how distractable people become when they're out of
their body, how you could not get very useful information.
And I will tell you directly in my own personal
experience that I, unfortunately I do have to agree with

(01:06:31):
that statement, because there have been several occasions that I've
tried to do a remote viewing out of my body
and the amount of stuff that will distract you, just
the excitement of first of all, being out of your
body and looking at your body laying there on the couch.
A lot of people don't get past that part. I

(01:06:53):
was already used to it, so when I was trained
in remote viewing in the particular brand of it where
you do leave your body, I would leave my body
and then my distraction would come in that I would
lose interest in the target sometimes I would make it
to the target. Other times I would just flutter off

(01:07:15):
somewhere else and either leave the Earth altogether, or slip
into some other realm of Earth, or travel slightly into
the past or slightly into the future, or or find
somebody walking down the street really drunk and follow them
for a while because they're flailing and I'm becoming concerned

(01:07:38):
about them. So Ed Dames said things that were valuable,
and then he also allowed himself to lose objectivity in
my opinion, And now this is all just my opinion
on the kill shot. Now, when you have a future prediction,

(01:08:03):
one thing you have to acknowledge is that the future
might not necessarily be set all on one timeline, and
that as there are different choices presented to you every day,
each of those choices has a whole universe of possibilities
connected to it. So the idea of a kill shot, sure,

(01:08:28):
something like that might happen. I think often he was
making reference to something that the Sun would do, like
that the Sun would send out some kind of a horrible,
massive electromagnetic wave that would disrupt things or possibly even
become harmful to life on Earth. So yes, there's that,

(01:08:52):
But as a remote viewer, you have not, in the
words of somebody like Ingo, have not really done remote
viewing until you've gotten feedback, and it does have to
be blind. So to make predictions like a kill shot
is something that I would not I would not myself

(01:09:15):
put much stock into. That's just my opinion because I
choose not to live every day in the fear of
something out of control coming my way as an attack.
So that might That was a very opinionated answer, and
I guess I was not necessarily careful with it. If
I was sitting here with Ed right now, if he

(01:09:37):
if he was alive and I was talking to him,
I would have sent said that more gently, but I
would I would have challenged him, and I would have said,
you know, if you keep talking about the kill shot
and you assign dates to it, and those dates come
and go, it's not okay to then keep talking about

(01:09:59):
it and say that the date is unknown, because then
you're just kind of dragging out something and people will
start to question it more and more, and it damages
the words remote viewing, the whole concept, and it brings
those things into questions. So that's the long drawn out,
not safe answer that I had promised.

Speaker 1 (01:10:21):
Well, yeah, that's okay, I was. I agree with your
statement to it could have been something he was remote,
we weren't from an alternate timeline, yeah, Or it could
have been a misinterpretation where instead of a like solar
flare or coronal mass ejection or something to that effect,
it could have been more of an EMP type situation

(01:10:44):
which could have took out all communications and power lines
and everything else on Earth. Because there's so many different
forms of a so called kill shock, different things that
it could affect without actually destroying the earth of the
people exactly.

Speaker 5 (01:10:59):
It's a very up in the air concept and I've
heard that over and over again for many years, and
I just I chose to not focus on it, and
so I kind of stepped back, and I figured, if
the sun does something, and it is something that disrupts
our technology, how long will the disruption be. If it

(01:11:25):
turns out it was for a few hours, a few days,
or a few weeks, then you know, we'll get over it.
We just lived through COVID.

Speaker 1 (01:11:34):
Yeah, yeah, that was roughless in itself. Of course. Now
we have the lettuce that's causing explosive diarrhea. That's a subject.

Speaker 5 (01:11:46):
Exactly. I don't know how many remote viewers foresaw the
diarrhea lettuce coming.

Speaker 1 (01:11:52):
I haven't heard any yet, but somebody.

Speaker 8 (01:11:55):
Had to us.

Speaker 5 (01:11:56):
Sure, sure, probably Can you.

Speaker 1 (01:11:58):
Give your exact definition of what remote viewing is?

Speaker 5 (01:12:03):
There are several There are several and me give a
moment of thought to this because of those several possible definitions.
Now there are those that would focus on the you
leave your body and remote view and then there's what

(01:12:25):
I've come to kind of see. So I'll say that
remote viewing I'll start by saying it referring specifically to
what Ango Swan gave us and what came out of
Stanford Research Institute, I would say it's a trainable protocol
that is designed to acquire information about a hidden target

(01:12:51):
without the use of your ordinary senses. And when I
say without the use of your ordinary senses, I'm definitely
referring to psychic abilities innate to the human being and
probably other animals. But yes, an ability that we can
tap into. So remote and I'll have to say this

(01:13:16):
above many other things. So that's a basic definition of
remote viewing. But in terms of the kind of remote
viewing that the government is willing to pay for. It
has to be blind. The viewer cannot know what the
target is, anything about the target. They can't be front

(01:13:37):
loaded with information. Like back in the CIA days of
the Soviet Union, you really didn't want to tell the
remote viewers that they're going to Russia to view this
specific site because then they can make up whatever they
want about that site and then hope they're right. And
based on the information, it could be fifty to fifty

(01:14:00):
are their bombs at this site? Is there a submarine
at this site?

Speaker 1 (01:14:03):
Yes?

Speaker 5 (01:14:03):
Or no? So true remote viewing is when the viewer
does not know what they're being asked to give their
impressions about. And that's a very important thing right now
because there are a lot of YouTubers that are saying
they remote viewed a particular event, and what they're really

(01:14:25):
doing is saying that they left their body, they had
an out of body experience, they traveled to this site
and then they saw it happened firsthand. But they knew
ahead of time what they were going to do, and
so that immediately, in my mind, negates their remote viewing terminology.

(01:14:47):
And it's great for YouTube, but it destroys the name
and any credibility that comes along with what Stargate gave us.

Speaker 1 (01:14:56):
Remote viewing is different than psychic into wish correct, Yes,
can anyone learn it?

Speaker 5 (01:15:06):
I think so. I think anybody who's interested people, you know,
I've had to think about that a lot. Actually, I
used to say anyone can do this. I personally think
anybody has the ability to have an out of body experience.
Anybody has the ability to remote view. And then I

(01:15:29):
learned about how diverse people are. There are so many
people if you ask them to sit for ten minutes
and meditate, they absolutely cannot do it. If I personally,
I'm not a sporty person, I will never make it
to the Olympics. So there's a massive diversity in what

(01:15:50):
people can and cannot do. So what comes easy to somebody,
say a psychic ability, will come innately to a lot
of people, and they might downplay it. They might not
realize that it's a psychic ability. They might just think
it's you know, they'll call it their gut feeling, when

(01:16:12):
really it is something on a psychic level. So instead
of saying anybody can do it, I'd say anybody who
knows how to focus, relax their minds and temporarily turn
off their mental filters, the filter that says, oh, this
can't be done. Those are the people who will be

(01:16:37):
able to remote view and tap into these abilities.

Speaker 1 (01:16:40):
I brought this up last week with Augi Nas. But
if you go to a Walmart at four am in
the morning, nobody in there looks like they have the
abilities to remote view.

Speaker 5 (01:16:54):
So it's you know, it's funny you never know by
looking at somebody for like when you when I think
about myself, this stupid. Now, I've made some stupid movies,
you know I'm into. I used to make horror films
and really low budget, B grade junk movies, mostly for

(01:17:18):
fun with my friends. And I got lucky for some
of these things to get distribution. But if you were
to look at who I am on a day to
day basis the goofy stuff I've gotten into. I'm also
in a hard rock band. Like all the things I do,
you would never think.

Speaker 4 (01:17:36):
I was.

Speaker 5 (01:17:38):
Well, a lot of the people in my regular life
would not think I had any sort of ability. And
you go to a place like Walmart, and yeah, you
might not see it. And yet you never really know
how many people are innately using incredible abilities without even

(01:18:00):
their own knowledge. Now, remote viewing, of course, is specific.
You sit down with a paper and pen and set
out to remote view as a target practice. But if
you're speaking more broadly about something like an out of
body experience or a lucid dream, then suddenly you're opening

(01:18:21):
up to a much larger population that goes beyond any
sort of cultural or ethnic or in terms of the
Walmart thing, where you might be talking about people of
different classes. Financially, there's no boundary there.

Speaker 1 (01:18:42):
Well, hey, I've been to walmarted for a so I'm
sure I stand out just like the others.

Speaker 5 (01:18:49):
I've done it too. Every now and then I need
a late night snack, and I'm a chocolate fiend, so
I will be found in Walmarts from time to time.

Speaker 1 (01:19:00):
How long do you think it takes to become proficient
in remote viewing?

Speaker 8 (01:19:05):
Oh?

Speaker 1 (01:19:05):
Wow, yours?

Speaker 5 (01:19:07):
Well, the remote viewing, if you're really serious about it,
it takes a lot of practice. I've been trained in
two remote viewing protocols now, that's the out of body
protocol that the Monroe Institute teaches, which is extended remote viewing,
as well as CRV controlled remote viewing, which is what

(01:19:31):
Ingo Swan developed I've been trained in both of those,
and you might have some beginner's luck, but you might
be working at becoming truly proficient for years. And it's
something that you really have to stick with, and I'll

(01:19:52):
tell you why. When you first start, you sit down
in a room by yourself. All you know are the
target numbers or target coordinates. You sit down with that paper,
and you immediately one start doubting yourself. You start thinking, oh,
this can't be real. Even if you have heard about

(01:20:12):
remote viewing working. There's a part of your brain that
kicks in immediately and says, oh, I can't do this.
I'm not the kind of person who's going to be
able to do this. So there goes your first filter.
You have to undo that training, and that could take
weeks in and of itself. And then you also have
to learn how to and this is the harder part.

(01:20:33):
When you do start properly remote viewing, you have to
learn how to shut off your thinking brain and allow
the information to come to you through your subconscious and
that learning to communicate with your subconscious is such a
challenge because all people are trained to think, and we

(01:20:58):
all go to school and we're all all taught how
to think consciously, so allowing impressions to come to you
can be so difficult. Like right now, you know I'm
gonna this is gonna be a weird thing, and it's
about to happen live. I suppose are you willing to

(01:21:18):
experience something real quick? Right now?

Speaker 1 (01:21:21):
Sure?

Speaker 5 (01:21:22):
Okay, all right, I just take a moment, take a
nice deep breath, let it out. It does not matter
if you're right or wrong. Right now, I'm looking at
something very specific in my office. So this is one

(01:21:43):
of the stages of remote viewing. I'm looking at something
very specific in my office. You do not know what
it is. I haven't told you during any commercial break.
This is our first real conversation. What if I were
to ask you for your first there's three impressions about
what I'm looking at. Just take a moment and just

(01:22:08):
give me the first three things that pop into your mind.

Speaker 1 (01:22:12):
I would say either a book, a lamp. Okay, I'm
not really seeing any third object, but I would say
book or a lamp.

Speaker 5 (01:22:22):
Okay, all right, So you have just touched already on
one of the challenges in remote viewing. In remote viewing,
the first thing that a lot of people want to
do is call out the names of specific objects. A
book is a very specific object, and a lamp is
also very specific. And what people do not expect is

(01:22:46):
that is not the way impressions come in. Your first
impressions in remote viewing will always be something like smooth, sharp, textured,
a little bit bumpy, kinda, this is kind of soft,
Oh it's squishy. It's always little little things. You'd never

(01:23:09):
really get a full picture right early on. So the
first stages of remote viewing all involved writing down things
like that, and that can go on for pages and pages,
just writing down tiny impressions that you're getting. And then
if you do have the impression of something like a book,

(01:23:33):
then you write that down as something that your imagination,
that your thinking brain told you to say, but you
want to.

Speaker 1 (01:23:45):
Because I was thinking, well, what's in an office?

Speaker 10 (01:23:49):
M hm?

Speaker 5 (01:23:50):
So I also front loaded you. So you see that
was a rough test I gave you just now, but
you know, I figured we are in an office, so
it's okay to front load you. Little front loading is
okay during training. So your first lesson is to not
try to name things outright, because often those first things

(01:24:11):
will be incorrect. Now, if you had described what a
book is, if you had said that it is a
flat object that is usually rectangular and has a smooth surfaces,
then you would have already been on the right track,
because I was not actually looking at a book. I

(01:24:35):
was looking at a one of those cardboard Dubai chocolate wrappers.
So I'm looking at this little case of chocolate in
my room. But if you had started out by describing
rectangular shape and then you had said, okay, it could

(01:24:56):
be a book, but I'm not going to call it
a book yet. Let me write book off to the side.

Speaker 1 (01:25:01):
As Saylor said, some square and red before before you
describe what you were actually looking at.

Speaker 5 (01:25:09):
Now that's good. Now to say to throw a color
out is very good. If you see, if you sense
a color, you write that down. If you sense a square.
Those basic, basic, little pieces of data are really powerful.
So as you write down these pieces of data, you're

(01:25:33):
essentially building a bigger picture that you can later look
back on and say, Okay, I had twenty pieces of
useful data that all worked great. They actually described the target,
but the target was not a book, so you could accidentally,

(01:25:54):
you know, throughout the word book, and that's Okay, you
write that down in its own area, but your data
was all correct. So going back to your original question,
people have to get used to writing down all this
tedious data and you have to kind of stick with
that for a very long time, and you'll get used

(01:26:18):
to how you'll write down a whole lot of data.
And then once the person that you're working with gives
you the target, they show you the target image and
it's no longer hidden from you. You'll go, ah, I
said book, but it's actually a cardboard container. Gosh, I'm sad,
I got that wrong. But then when you look at

(01:26:40):
your data you'll write down, you'll see that you actually
described the target very well, but you mislabeled it. So
becoming patient with the way you communicate with your subconscious
can take months, and it's one of the things that

(01:27:00):
makes people stop practicing remote viewing because they it's not
as easy as calling out something that you think you're witnessing.
But you can get little hints, and I hope that's helpful.
I'd have to be showing you a lot of this
in an actual training session and a training class, kind

(01:27:21):
of walking you through how the protocol works.

Speaker 1 (01:27:24):
What do you feel the biggest misconception among beginners is.

Speaker 5 (01:27:29):
I think it's actually just what we've been talking about,
is that when you sit down to do remote viewing,
I think the biggest misconception is that people will think
that they close their eyes and that an image is
suddenly painted in their mind of what the target is,

(01:27:49):
and then they can just write it down and then
that will be it. It is much more complicated than
that because that it does not seem to be how
the information travels to our psychic the psychic parts of
our mind. So that in and of itself is one

(01:28:13):
of the big confusing factors that a lot of remote
viewers come in and then they get a little confused
as to why. If the target was the Statue of Liberty,
for example, and I always love to use the target
the Statue of Liberty as an example, you won't immediately
see the structure of this giant woman with New York

(01:28:36):
and the backdrop. That's not what remote viewers see. They
might say, oh, okay, I'm sensing a structure. It's tall,
it's I'm gonna.

Speaker 6 (01:28:46):
Say it's green, maybe blue, maybe there's a little bit
of bronze here, Okay, feeling more around this, Okay, the
structure is definitely tall. It seems to be I'm also sensing.

Speaker 5 (01:29:04):
Water, so they're gonna start feeling around the target, but
they're not gonna see anything. So I think that's where
that's where misconceptions might come through. It's not an instantly
seeing Statue of Liberty. It's feeling the area and slowly
describing everything in enough detail that eventually, when you look

(01:29:27):
at the Statue of Liberty, you could you can say, ah, okay,
well I guess that it is a structure. And yes,
I did say I sensed a sense of a female figure,
but I didn't think it was the statue of Liberty.
I thought it was a woman posing. So that happens
a lot. A lot of people will describe things that
are accurate but not quite on the nose.

Speaker 1 (01:29:52):
I have a question from a listener, but when that's
the bottom of the second hour, I need to run
that break and then right after that come back and
I'll ask you the question and we can continue onward.

Speaker 5 (01:30:04):
Sounds great.

Speaker 2 (01:30:05):
Yeah, you was friends mine.

Speaker 1 (01:30:41):
And you can say long his heart and ever.

Speaker 10 (01:30:47):
And this is Dark Spaces News. I'm Joshua Stark, a
Florida startup is testing a new way to power spacecraft
that could one day reduce their dependence on solar panels.

(01:31:12):
City Labs has launched its bore Cube sat aboard a
SpaceX Falcon nine rideshare mission to demonstrate its nanotritium nuclear
battery technology in orbit for the first time. Instead of
generating electricity from sunlight, the system captures energy from the

(01:31:32):
natural radioactive decay of tritium, providing a continuous source of
power that could last four years. The CubeSat itself still
relies on solar panels for normal operations, but the mission
is focused on proving the nuclear battery can operate safely
and reliably in space. This is dark Space's news.

Speaker 13 (01:31:57):
Before time, there was only love. From that love came light, sound,
and the three great Dominions that formed reality itself. Across
countless ages, the mighty Angeliums learned the secrets of creation
and traveled the stars as servants of the mysterious Guardian

(01:32:18):
of Dominions. But peace never lasts forever. When Commander Yasawa
Christos awakened stranded on a primitive world after five centuries
of isolation, he discovers that everything he once knew has changed.
Ancient technologies lie buried beneath forgotten temples, Hidden forces move

(01:32:39):
behind the affairs of worlds, and far beyond the stars.
A threat is emerging that could shatter the foundations of
the universe itself. Joined by a young villager named Ada, Yasawa,
begins a journey that will carry them from abandoned outposts
and lost civilizations to interstell armordyrs, alien worlds, parallel dominions,

(01:33:04):
and the deepest mysteries of existence. At the center of
it all lies a question older than time, What is
the true force that binds reality together? Written by David
John Oates, founder of Reverse Speech, the Angelium Saga combines
epic space opera, first contact adventure, spiritual mystery, and visionary

(01:33:27):
science fiction into a sweeping tale spanning galaxies, dimensions, and millennia,
featuring ancient prophecies, hidden meanings, cosmic warfare, and the search
for humanity's deepest purpose. The Angelium Saga is perfect for
readers who enjoy the grand imagination of Asimov, Clark, Herbert,

(01:33:49):
and star Trek while exploring profound questions about consciousness, truth,
and the unseen forces that shape our lives. The journey
begins here Welcome to the War in Heaven, available at
Amazon dot com. Order your copy today.

Speaker 9 (01:34:25):
Too many bookle, lots of bonding, then the river, too.

Speaker 1 (01:34:30):
Many long sides of trivit.

Speaker 9 (01:34:32):
I have to see you lay your beds and then
you pay the price. It pens with you.

Speaker 1 (01:34:43):
We're back with Fabian Rush. And the question one of
my viewers wanted me to ask is, if someone is
thinking to you or at you about an object, is
it easier to see what it is?

Speaker 5 (01:34:58):
Yes, that is an excellent question, I'll tell you. I am.
I've worked as a remote viewing project manager and tasker,
so I have created targets to send off to people
who were learning remote viewing and practicing. And I always
found that when I had a target, if I sat

(01:35:23):
with the target, be it an image or a little
statue or something like that, and I meditated while holding
it or while looking at it and thought deeply about
it while I was creating this target for the viewer,
it improved their ability to visualize it. So, yes, that

(01:35:47):
is something I've definitely had some experience with. Yeah, but
it is not fully necessary. I have done that on occasion,
which perhaps strengthens the signal line. But there are many.
You know, most remote viewers also work in a double

(01:36:07):
blind scenario where even the target of the tasker does
not know what the target is. A third party might know.
So it can be done in many different ways. But yes,
I personally have seen where target data comes in stronger
when I meditate on the target while preparing it.

Speaker 1 (01:36:28):
Ten emotions interfere with the remote viewing.

Speaker 5 (01:36:31):
Definitely one of the first things that you're supposed to
do in this. In this at least the controlled remote
viewing protocol is to write down anything that might affect
your session. So if you've had a bad day, if
you've had a if you have a headache, if you're hungry,

(01:36:52):
if you've eaten too much already, if you've had a drink,
or anything like that, you write all of those things
down on a declaration section at the top of your
remote viewing page. Anything that might affect your abilities.

Speaker 1 (01:37:08):
Does belief matter? I mean I couldn't imagine anyone wanting
to get into remote viewing. Yes, I didn't believe in
it to begin with a kind of answer my old questions.

Speaker 5 (01:37:16):
A belief, I'll say this, A belief in yourself and
your remote viewing does have an effect confidence is very
important if you are if you don't feel that you
can do it, it probably will make it a slower

(01:37:37):
process for you to become proficient with. So that's one
aspect of belief, an entirely different aspect. Another way of
answering your question is that if you have a specific
belief in something and then you do a remote viewing
target on that something and then you witness something that

(01:38:00):
runs counter to your belief, it can affect what you believe.
And I've seen examples of that.

Speaker 1 (01:38:07):
So the people that have really gotten good at it
is distance meaningless.

Speaker 5 (01:38:13):
Yes, distance is meaningless and time is meaningless, and that
there's definitely you know. I answered that very briefly. I
am going to be giving a presentation next month on
the scientific nature of how it seems that remote viewing

(01:38:37):
works what people are tapping into, and it is heavily
based on the research of doctor Michael Persinger. This is
a neuroscientist who worked directly with Ingo Swan and he,
among other scientists, began to develop a working theory of

(01:38:57):
how remote viewing works. And it is a system that
does bypass time and space. So distance does not matter
and time does not matter. You can remote view things
in the past and in the future. And of course
this comes back to the issue of the kill shot
what was mentioned. But rather than let the kill shot

(01:39:24):
become the whole subject of this, you could say you
have to wait for the feedback to come in, and
you can, and you have to take it with a
grain of salt. When you're looking at the future, you
really want proof and you want evidence of things that
will support your claim. But yes, distance does seem to

(01:39:44):
be an illusion that the human mind can overcome.

Speaker 1 (01:39:49):
One of our listeners, Starshine, asked, Jesus, I thought remote
ing was defunded. Who does the guests work for? Are
trying and others for?

Speaker 5 (01:40:01):
Well, that's a couple questions. The official government program, yes,
was defunded. Of course, that's the one that has been declassified.
There may be other government programs. But then moving on
to other things, that is a good question. I currently
do not work for anyone. I'm not doing remote viewing

(01:40:23):
work in any official capacity. When I learned about remote viewing,
I began to pursue it on my own. I wanted
to talk to known remote viewers who had been in
the field for a number of years, and I wanted
them to remote view for me to prove it to

(01:40:43):
me because I thought, Okay, well this sounds like a
lot of hearsay. And for anyone that is skeptical, and
I do encourage skepticism here, anybody who's listening that is
skeptical about remote viewing, the best way to the best
thing you can possibly do is either learn remote viewing yourself,

(01:41:07):
or find a remote viewer and give them a target
and then have your mind blown when they come back
to you with information about what you're looking for. So, yes,
I'm not working for anybody specifically. I became a project
tasker online. I formed a Facebook group called an International

(01:41:31):
Facebook Group called Future Applications for Remote Viewing, and this
was in twenty eighteen, maybe twenty yeah, twenty eighteen, and
I would ask people to view blind targets once a week,
and I would open this up to an entire Facebook community.
People would then do their own sessions at home, blind

(01:41:57):
to what I had created, and then they would admit
that information to me and I would actually pay them.
I actually used to pay them if they had correctly
described the target, and I had to stop paying because
I was running out of money. I yes, just seven

(01:42:18):
hundred dollars after just two or three targets to these people,
and they were blowing my mind, Like I would come
up with a target right now, I'll save the Statue
of Liberty. Even I never give that as a target.
It's always something I use as an example. And then
people would come back describing in undeniable language the target

(01:42:43):
I had created for them. So yes, it's a mind blower.
You just have to find a group of people. You
can find a friend to practice this stuff with. The
best thing, the best way to overcome any kind of
doubt you might have is just to do it yourself,
or find somebody you can trust to do this with,

(01:43:03):
and you'll find that it's quite amazing how this can happen,
and you can do it on your own. You don't
have to be working with anybody in any official capacity.

Speaker 1 (01:43:15):
Have you found that most remote viewers have ethical boundaries?

Speaker 4 (01:43:21):
Yes?

Speaker 5 (01:43:22):
Yes, Now, ethics within remote viewing is a very big issue.
You do not want to work for a tasker or
a project manager that you don't know, and you don't
want to just be doing remote viewing for random people.
So yes, this is an entire conversation. I've sat in

(01:43:49):
lectures about this that can go on for hours, that yes,
somebody can ask you to remote view and find a
missing person, when really this person might be a stalker
looking for an ex girlfriend or something. So you need
to know there are ethical boundaries. You want to be

(01:44:12):
working for people you know and people who have some
sort of accreditation so that you're not feeding information to
somebody with nefarious ideas.

Speaker 1 (01:44:22):
Can remote viewing even be dangerous?

Speaker 5 (01:44:24):
I would think yes. I would think yes, there's anything
that any person can do. There's always somebody who can
take advantage of this situation, like the example I just
gave you with stalking. Yes, remote viewing can be used
that way. One of the problems that one of the

(01:44:46):
fears the government had is that there are no secrets.
When you have a remote viewer who has been sticking
with it and has become proficient with it over the
course of however long it suddenly that person can access something.
They can access secrets, be that key personal information about

(01:45:11):
an individual or so on. Use your imagination. It's essentially
like how we need cybersecurity for computer protection. With enough
proficient remote viewers, I would imagine you would need some
sort of security to protect against that. And actually I

(01:45:32):
have heard about security systems in the government that are
designed to keep remote viewers out. Remote viewers have entered
certain facilities and then gotten headaches. This is known as
psychic headaches by government agencies and deep black agencies and

(01:45:53):
programs that need to protect very sensitive material, and their
way of keeping remote viewer out is to have psychics
on their side that are able to identify when they're
being remote viewed, and then they cause resonant headaches in
whoever's doing the viewing.

Speaker 1 (01:46:12):
What is your definition of consciousness? Does the brain create
it or just receive it?

Speaker 5 (01:46:18):
The brain, From what I've learned from the neuroscientists that
worked with Ingo Swan specifically, and from what I'm seeing
from many of the researchers that worked with the CIA,
and I could quote from CIA documents that have been declassified,

(01:46:43):
the brain. The human brain works as a transmitter and receiver,
and consciousness is not produced in the human brain period.
I'm just going to say that, because if consciousness was
limited to the human brain, then things like remote viewing
would not be possible. Consciousness extends beyond the brain. In fact,

(01:47:09):
my understanding is that we are submerged in a field.
We are immersed in a field of consciousness, and that
field is filled with information, and that is what we
can draw on for remote viewing and other psychic abilities. So, yes,

(01:47:31):
the brain itself that piece of computing ability that's in
our brain. I think of our brain as our personal computer,
with its own hard drive storage for our memories and
experiences and information about our personalities. But the Internet is

(01:47:55):
something not in the computer. It's something that the computer accesses.
The Internet in this situation would be consciousness. So that's
the comparison I like to draw, is that the brain
is a computer, the Internet is consciousness.

Speaker 1 (01:48:10):
I know what's getting light where you are, So I'm
gonna ask a few more questions and then I'm gonna
let you give all your contact and website and YouTube's
channel information. But sure, can you tell us some about
Swan's famous Jupiter session.

Speaker 5 (01:48:27):
Absolutely his. You know, I actually have a video on
this that I should send you a link to so
that you're so that your listeners can check it out.
Swan was Ingo was getting pretty bored of all the
experiments he was doing with SRI, all these these boring

(01:48:47):
tests that they had to keep giving him to prove
that he could see what's in an envelope or what's
in the next room. So he said, why don't we
do something really interesting? You know, we're about to send
the was this the Pioneer probe to Jupiter during the
this point in the seventies, this is early seventies. I

(01:49:08):
think it was Pioneer that they were sending out there.

Speaker 1 (01:49:11):
I believe.

Speaker 5 (01:49:12):
Yeah, he said, why don't we see if I can
project my consciousness out there before the consciousness before the
Pioneer probe arrives, and then I will report back what
what's actually on Jupiter. And so, begrudgingly, how put off

(01:49:32):
and Russell targ agreed to run this experiment. And people
at JPL with with NASA, they said, okay, sure, we're
going to be We're curious to see what you're going
to say about this, And so Ingo sat one day.
Of the fun part of this story is that he

(01:49:53):
actually was so stressed out about this that he went
out for a drink the night before and he was
he was terribly hungover when he did this experiment. That
everyone's heard of this experiment, but no one knows how
hungover he was. This This is part of the fun
of me getting to learn about who Ingo was. So

(01:50:13):
he went into the into Sri terribly hungover. He sits down,
he had his out of body experience and it took
him eight minutes to project his consciousness to Jupiter, and
he wrote a detailed report of what he witnessed there,

(01:50:35):
and then he returned to his body. He went home,
took some aspirin, and he went to bed for the
rest of the day. And so, of course the Pioneer
probe did not arrive until I think it was months later,
and it came back with some information, but it was
not until I think it was Voyager. The Voyager mission

(01:50:58):
went out that all a bunch of the things that
Ingo reported years before. The Voyager probe is the one
that confirmed all those things. It was incredible. Even like
no one knew that Jupiter has a ring. Ingo was
the one who discovered that Jupiter had a ring around it,

(01:51:21):
and it wasn't until the Voyager probe went out that
that was confirmed. And so that was an incredible story.
And I have and there's more detail about that that
I can send you a video link.

Speaker 1 (01:51:31):
For Okay, if you send it after the show, I'll
get it up on the site because I leave your
information up for until about midweek. Sure thing, Yeah, what
about the alleged moon observations, but you kind of covered
that earlier.

Speaker 5 (01:51:47):
We talked a little bit about that, and there is
some controversy there. There is some controversy there that could
lead into a much longer story. What Ingo wrote in
Penetration about remote viewing the Moon, we know that he
had to speak carefully because what he's talking about in

(01:52:08):
his books, some of these were classified operations, and some
of them are still classified operations. So, for example, anybody
who's read his book Penetration knows that the name Axelrod,
the person that told him that wanted him to remote
view the moon, Axelrod, is not the actual name of

(01:52:29):
this person. That is a pseudonym to protect the person
that was in this particular black program. So when it
comes to Ngo talking about the Moon, there's a lot
of safe talk just so he does not you know,
when when people break oaths and things, they have to

(01:52:51):
be careful about how they talk about things.

Speaker 1 (01:52:53):
He's kind of left clues instead of.

Speaker 5 (01:52:56):
Answers yes exactly. So a lot of what he writes
are actually coded memoirs. So some of what he talks
about on the moon, and I can't even go too
deeply into this. There are just certain things that I've
been made privy to that are not in the public
sphere that, yeah, he had to be really careful, and

(01:53:23):
so yes, there are some things about the moon, and
then there are some things that he described as being
on the moon because he had to kind of consolidate
a message into something that people would understand that would
also keep him out of jail.

Speaker 1 (01:53:41):
The government securities frustrat.

Speaker 5 (01:53:43):
Him, Yes, very frustrating. It's very difficult to talk about
a lot of these topics when you know something but
you're not allowed to go the extra step. Luckily, things
are being declassified now and one of the big D
classifications that has come out in book form, I think

(01:54:05):
just this past year is Project eighty two hundred. I
think that's the name of the book. So if your
listeners want to hear one of the big D classifications
that has come out of the remote viewing program the
early days regarding et bases here on Earth, that is

(01:54:27):
the nature of what that book is about. And some
of that same information is touched on in Penetration, but
ingo is not allowed to talk about it in more
specific terms.

Speaker 1 (01:54:40):
One final question, if Ingo were alive today, what do
you think would surprise him most?

Speaker 5 (01:54:46):
Oh boy, Okay, I actually do have an answer for this.
It's not the most pleasant answer, but I'm going to
answer that honestly, because I've seen hours upon ours of
interview footage with Ingo, and that includes footage of him
when he didn't know the camera was rolling, and footage

(01:55:09):
of him becoming frustrated, And from what I've gathered from him,
I think he would be frustrated by how short attention
spans are, how little interest people have in human ability.
There were so many things that he wanted to teach

(01:55:31):
people about their own abilities, about we all live in
these tiny boxes that we create for ourselves, or where
we want to fit into society in a certain way.
And I think one of Ingo's great frustrations, certainly toward
the end of his life, is that he uncovered so

(01:55:53):
much about human potential and so many people glossed over
it and they just didn't care enough to learn more
about what they're capable of. So, Yes, if he was
alive today, I think he would be tired of challenging

(01:56:15):
people to think harder about what we could do and
what we could improve for the human race as a whole.

Speaker 1 (01:56:25):
I'll ask you now, you want to give your YouTube
site where people could view your your movies and documentaries.

Speaker 5 (01:56:35):
Yes, I'll give you a link. My YouTube page is
just Fabian rush Films. I think that's just Fabian. That's
YouTube dot com slash Fabian Rush Films, and I have
a lot of random stuff on there, stuff from my
band as well. But there is a specific portion of
that YouTube page that's devoted to the Ingo Swan documentary

(01:56:59):
that I'm working on, which is called Into the Void
or N two V, so I can give you a
link directly to that. There's also the Facebook page for
future Applications for Remote Viewing, which I think is just Fabian. Sorry,
it's just Facebook dot com slash project fa r V

(01:57:26):
and I guess those would be the most relevant web pages.
There's also a web page for the documentary itself, which
is currently being built out, and I'll give you the
link to that as well. So I think those are
the most relevant for your listeners here.

Speaker 1 (01:57:42):
All right, Do you have an actual website or you
haven't developed one yet?

Speaker 5 (01:57:46):
No, I'm not. I tend to stay out of the
stream of things. I'm more of an experimental person than
I am a spokesperson that usually goes out and and
does many interviews, So this has been a lot of
fun for me actually talking with you. Usually I'm the

(01:58:07):
one interviewing people. I've interviewed. I had a wonderful conversation
with Russell targ and I've interviewed other people who knew Ingo,
So I'm usually on the other side of this, and
I'll put out documentaries. But no, I've not consolidated everything
to one web page because I guess I don't want

(01:58:32):
to be too caught up in social media as I'm
trying to produce things that'll be released elsewhere, and I'm
trying to be on more the experimental front. And then
once I've had breakthroughs with various experiments, that's when I
would focus more on getting the word out well.

Speaker 1 (01:58:52):
Saby, And it has been an honor having you here,
and I want to have you back. Would you be
interested sometime around late September are during the month of October.

Speaker 5 (01:59:02):
Absolutely. This has been so much fun and I don't
get to have this conversation very often, so I'd love to.
It's been a pleasure talking with you, so I'd love
to come back.

Speaker 1 (01:59:13):
Well, thank you, sir. I have some other questions I'd
like to ask you about UFOs and consciousness and the
disclosure situation. Our lack of disclosure is what I call it.

Speaker 5 (01:59:25):
Yes, it's a comedic lack of disclosure. But it's a start.
It's a very introductory, low grade start.

Speaker 1 (01:59:35):
Well, hopefully it'll accelerate. We'll see, but I will contact
you about having you back. And once again, I appreciate
you being on, and I thank you for your time
this evening. I know it's getting like where you're located.

Speaker 5 (01:59:49):
Well, thank you so much for having me. And I'm
all pumped up now so I'm probably going to bed
extra late anyway. But it's been such a pleasure talking
with you.

Speaker 1 (01:59:58):
Thank you, sir. And and I'll start the closing of.

Speaker 4 (02:00:03):
The program, joined host Carl Richardson as he interviews top
guests in various fields of study, now airing live every
Saturday night from nine to eleven Central Time and ten
pm to midnight Eastern.

Speaker 1 (02:00:16):
Well, my friends, we've come to the end of another
remarkable journey. Tonight, Fabian rush helpless venture into one of
the most fascinating frontiers known to humanity, the unexplored landscape
of consciousness. We've traveled through the remarkable life and work
of ingel Swan. We've examined the government's remote viewing program,

(02:00:39):
questioned the very nature of reality, and considered the possibility
that the greatest mystery in the universe isn't somewhere out
among the stars, it may be inside each and every
one of us. Whether you're convinced that remote viewing represents
an untapped human ability, while you're still weighing the evident,

(02:01:01):
I hope tonight has inspired you to ask questions, because
that's what midnight frequency radio is all about, not telling
you what to believe, but encouraging you to think, to question,
to explore, because history has taught us that today's impossibilities

(02:01:21):
often become tomorrow's accepted facts. A heartfelt thank you to
Fabian Rush for spending the evening with us and sharing
his knowledge and his passion for uncovering the mysteries that
continue to challenge our understanding of reality. And to all
of you listening across America and around the world are

(02:01:44):
wherever this signal found you tonight, thank you for spending
part of your evening with us. Without your curiosity, your questions,
and your willingness to explore the unknown, none of this
would be possible now. If your thoughts night scratched the
boundaries of what's possible, just wait until next Saturday. Joining

(02:02:06):
me here on midnight Frequency Radio will be award winning filmmaker, researcher,
media entrepreneur, and one of the most respected voices in
today's disclosure movement, Ron James. Ron serves as the media
relations director for MUFON, sits on the board of directors

(02:02:26):
of the Hollywood Disclosure Alliance, and has become one of
the leading voices documenting the rapidly changing landscape of up disclosure.
We'll be taking a hard look at the true state
of disclosure, not the headlines, not the rumors, but where
we actually stand. After years of congressional hearings, whistleblower testimony,

(02:02:50):
military videos, and official government acknowledgments as disclosure truly began,
what are governments still withholding? Why are so many intelligence officials,
military personnel and scientists now speaking publicly, And perhaps the
biggest question of all, are we witnessing the greatest revolution

(02:03:12):
in human history? Or are we just seeing the very
first chapter. We'll also be discussing Ron's latest award winning documentary,
Accidental Truth next, the follow up of the internationally acclaim
Accidental Truth UFO revelations, This new film explores where the

(02:03:35):
disclosure movement is heading next, featuring new evidence, new witnesses,
and a deeper examination of one of the most important
stories unfolding in our lifetime. If you've been following recent
developments in the world of ups, non human intelligence, congressional investigation,

(02:03:57):
and government transparency, I want to miss this conversation that's
next Saturday night, right here on Midnight Frequency Radio. Until then,
keep looking up, keep asking the difficult questions, never stop
searching for the truth, no matter where it leads. From

(02:04:18):
the beautiful Ozark Foothills of northeast Arkansas, I'm Carl Richardson.

Speaker 4 (02:04:24):
Good Night, Everyone

Speaker 2 (02:05:03):
Complaints,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Crime Junkie

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Fabian Rush July 18th 2026 Topic: Remote Viewing & Ingo Swann

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Crime Junkie

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Fabian Rush July 18th 2026 Topic: Remote Viewing & Ingo Swann

Stuff You Should Know