pjrv : Messages : 2797-2844 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2797?)
2006/07/01 00:19:16

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2797
 	From: "pjgaenir" 
Date: Sun Mar 23, 2003 11:39 am
Subject: Joe's response on retasking 	pjgaenir
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

> I was told  Joe retasked his sessions up to 100 times himself
> reworking over and over. Do you know if he  did that as a general
> rule? If so perhaps that breaks down others abilities to RETASK .
> Or perhaps it's the reanalyzing your own sessions many times
> might help. Is it the last reanalysis or the most reanalysis??.

I sent this to Joe and asked him about it.  His response:

> That [is incorrect].

> The only time I ever said there were multiple targetings
> going on in the hundreds were with regard to the constantly
> changing situation in the Iran Hostage Scenario. That can
> be found in my book.

> I do re-task on the same target, but always double-blind,
> and prior to ever receiving any feedback on the target.
> Once I know what it is, it has to be re-targeted
> double-blind at a later date and time unknown to me.

PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2812
 	From: "smitty97006" 
Date: Sun Mar 23, 2003 5:57 pm
Subject: Re: Joe's response on retasking 	smitty97006
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hello PJ,

In this case Joe seems to be referring to doing mulitple sessions on
the same target or aspects of that same target.  Does Joe know
anything of the retasking that has been the topic of discussion
recently.  Namely that being taking an already completed session on a
target and in effect assigning a new target to it and getting viable
data from this session initially done on something else.

Gene Smith

---------------------------
Moderator's note: On the FARVIEW list, I just realized!, Bill wrote:
> I heard joe retasks his own sessions many many times.up to 100
> times..doing multiple analysis also.
And when I asked WHERE he'd heard that, as I certainly hadn't, he said:
> Ralph Burton told me
So I asked Joe if that were so.  After deleting only a small profanity LOL I
posted his response on the list.  I had thought this was the list with Bill's
comment, my mistake.
I haven't yet asked Joe about the retasking topic at hand.  The email I quoted
is actually in response to one I wrote some time ago.  He's not at his email
much lately so I haven't been sending him anything that didn't seem important or
about him specifically.  I'll ask him though.  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2843
 	From: Bill Pendragon 
Date: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Joe's response on retasking...take No. 2 	docsavagebill
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi PJ,

It seemed actually that Joe agreed with what I heard
from Ralph.. he had done 100's of taskings at least
one time ( the Tehran hostage issue) ... and did
retask at least a few times as a common rule.. (not
the kind of REtasking of a single session to new
targets that Pru implied)  so out of curiosity why the
explative?

Did he feel misquoted somehow ..  . or was he urked
that  "Grand Oberperson " Ralph told me what he
said??..G

Bill

-----------------------
Moderator's note: Bill, YOU have made the mess out of this loop, LOL.  I posted
a humorous comment on Eva's list that maybe I should retask (in the
assign-new-target-to-existing-session-sense) the SAME target on myself 30 times,
like to get 30x the result in the session. Just a joke.  You then posted that
Joe had said (as told by Ralph) that he retasked things hundreds of times.  Joe
was responding that he was not doing what I had posted about, that you chose to
mention that comment about him in response to, but did proper, NORMAL retasking,
about which I will paste in a comment he made to me:

Joe: Almost without exception, the viewer and the monitor are "not shown"
feedback until after tasking has been completed. If there is a genuine
belief that there might be more than one tasking on a target, then they
should not be given feedback of any kind until after the taskings (however
many there might be) are completed in total. There are times however, when
that information can't be known. In such a case, a tasking may be made and
the monitor and remote viewer have been given feedback. If they are
retargeted on the same target with a different intent or expectation, then
it shouldn't matter - given the conditionals I've already stated above, and
the viewer and tasker remain and/or kept totally blind to the target. If
you are asking will the second targeting have an affect on the outcome of
the first targeting or vice versa, then the answer is no. One outcome will
not modify the next, unless the monitor and viewer have recognized the
target and have chosen to lie or cheat and not bring the matter to early
closure because they have. [end]

Reply | Forward
	
#2844
 	From: Bill Pendragon 
Date: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:05 pm
Subject: Re: Joe's response ...two kinds of Retasking confused issue? 	docsavagebill
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi PJ,

  Thanks for asking Joe and posting his reply!..but
unfortunately, your  question to Joe mixed two issues.
1) the issue of REtasking a single  session to a
different target ( Pru's idea)..and old fashioned
"retasking" which means  doing multiple sessions on
one target.Joe only replied to the latter older
concept.

  It would really be interesting to hear if Joe
believed it possible to    REtask  the same session to
a different target  as implied by PRU.. or not? He
doesn't really speak to that in this reply.?

Best Regards,

Bill

---------------------
Moderator's note: I was not TRYING to ask him about that.  But I did, it's in
another post. -- PJ