August 8, 2004

from CoasToCoast Website

Date: August 08, 2004
Host: Art Bell
Guests: Steven Greer

Dr. Steven Greer, the founder of the Disclosure Project and CSETI updated the progress of his organizations as well as addressed the connections between energy paradigms and UFO technology.

Greer had recently received an intimidating phone message left on CSETI's answering machine, which Art played over the air.

 

A computerized voice warned:

"Stop prying into government matters or dire consequences will result."

Greer, who said he had gotten such calls in the past, noted that this message was unusual because the number was traced to a non-existent phone line in the Caribbean, which led him to conclude it was an "illegal rogue effort."

"We've been on a trajectory too long and need a course correction," he said, of our oil-based energy economy.

Greer believes the current polluting energy systems could be replaced by clean technology that is in part related to UFO propulsion systems and antigravity that the government is keeping secret.

 

He also discussed a "CE-5" expedition/experiment earlier that evening at Mount Shasta that he had attended with a group from CSETI.

 

They successfully made contact with three light objects which appeared high atop the mountain by flashing lasers at them, and at one point their electromagnetic detectors went off seemingly in response to the objects' activity, Greer declared.

Transcription

from DisclosureProject Website

Art Bell (AB): Dr. Greer has been at the front of the parade with regard to disclosure. Dr. Steven Greer has been the man putting his life on the line and trying to pull or drag from the government, or civilians, or pilots, or anybody he can, the information about what we're going through here on Earth with unidentified flying objects and one of the reasons - I think, one of the main motivations - though, he can speak with his own tongue on this issue is that, if they are there, that means they have a propulsion system that would free the world from the war for oil.

 

I mean, you know, basically folks, you can look at many reasons why we might be at war right now, but oil's got to be somewhere near the top of the list, equals energy equals if they've got it, we need it. And I think that's what he's chasing, but I don't know. I'd like to let Dr. Greer speak for himself.

 

Dr. Greer, you're an emergency room physician, for goodness sakes.

Steve Greer (SG): Right.
 

AB: Why are you doing what you're doing?

SG: Well, because we know that the information contained within this whole subject has the potential for transforming the direction of the human race right now at this critical time, that the covert programs running these sort of projects are not only illegal and rogue, but they're sitting on the solution to much of the world's problems and I think that we have to realize that until we demand, and not only demand but also organize ourselves to bring this information out, we're going to continue on the path we're on of increasing shortages of oil, oil wars, pollution, economic chaos, as well as environmental chaos and this is not necessary.

 

A lot of people see this as an inevitability when in reality it's a completely artificial situation which we have created and only we can fix. So, this is really key to this. But the other part of it of course is that if we are being visited by advanced civilizations from other realms and other worlds, which I'm quite certain we are, then we have to ask this very important almost existential question:

• Who speaks for 'Planet Earth'?

• Who is running the show on our behalf, and what are they doing?

As the Brigadier General Lovekin who is one of our Disclosure Project witnesses said, Eisenhower was very concerned about this in the late fifties and said,

"You know? This whole matter is not going to be in the best of hands, and so it has turned out to be" - and I'm quoting.

So it's a very important question at this time in our history that humanity step up to the plate and begin to understand that not only are we not alone, but that there are clandestine programs that have spent literally hundreds of billions of our tax dollars to develop advanced energy and propulsion systems and to study this whole area and yet we are not benefiting from it and this simply something that can't go on.
 

AB: All right, Doctor, let me be clear. Are you suggesting that these energy systems, whether we have back-engineered them from craft that have crashed, or we have engineered them on our own, either way, you're convinced that these energy systems, these propulsion systems - they're real.

SG: Yes.
 

AB: One way or the other.

SG: Yes, I have no doubt that they are real. We have people who have actually worked on these programs, we have people who have worked within the corporate aspect of the covert group dealing with this and have developed these energy and propulsion systems.

 

We know that by - you know that my mother's brother, my maternal uncle, was a senior project engineer at Grumman that designed the lunar module and by the time that thing landed on the moon, we were already test-flying electrogravitic and magnetogravitic, so-called "antigravity", propulsion systems that were up flying around. I have a photograph of one of these things maneuvering in 1964 over Provo, Utah, so - and this was not an extraterrestrial vehicle. This was one made by the good old U.S. of A.

 

So here we are still using fossil fuels when we don't need them. We're in Iraq, we're in the Middle East in places where we're not wanted. We have our sons and daughters dying on the battlefield and this is preventable. We need to realize how important this issue is. This is not just about "little green men" or something.

 

This is about the way we're living on Earth and what the future of the human race will be.
 

AB: That's right, that's exactly right. Now, over the years, you have encouraged by hook or crook one way or the other, a lot of people to come forward - military people, pilots, you know, credible witnesses, very credible witnesses, and you've been prepared to meet with Congress and have a gigantic disclosure. In other words, in essence, the smoking gun accumulation of evidence that would prove in court all of this is real. That's - in my view - that's always been, and I've discussed this with you many times, a somewhat dangerous occupation.

SG: Yes, it's interesting. You know, in 2001, we had the Disclosure Event at the National Press Club and that was the most watched press event in the history of the internet, by the way, and that summer a three-star general told one of our military witnesses that - he said,

"You know, this is going to upset some people. Dr. Greer should be checking under his car for bombs."

 

AB: That's right.

SG: And I laughed. I said, "Well, I'm not too worried about that." Because we have other systems in place, which I won't go into right now.
 

AB: Are you still laughing?

SG: Uh, yes - I'm not - only in the sense that we are not the kind of people who get intimidated by threats, and if I was I would have pulled out of this in 1992 when the former head of Army Intelligence and other people were trying to push me in that direction.
 

AB: Right.

SG: So, my view of it is that we have a responsibility to step up and do the right thing to get this information out and I have to remind people that, as recently as a couple of months ago, I was meeting with a member of Congress who is very good friends with John Kerry and discussing this whole matter, and in particular the energy issue as it relates to it, and they were... There was enormous interest within Congress. There was enormous interest in the Clinton Administration.

 

As you know, I met with very senior people in the Clinton Administration.
 

AB: I'm well aware, yes.

SG: And yet, the problem is that nobody wants to act. They're not acting because they're afraid. And we cannot give in to fear. And I have never given in to fear, and I will never give in to fear.
 

AB: Well...

SG: Although, those things have been attempted, and I think that - what I tell people is, that if you understand what's at stake - look, I'm an emergency doctor. I've taken care of people killed over 50 cent beers. This is more important than a 50 cent beer.
 

AB: It sure is.

SG: You can't worry about that. You take adequate precautions. I'm on the radio tonight with you as a precautionary move, quite frankly, and I think that the people listening, the millions of people listening to this right now, need to understand that they will not stand for this kind of intimidation, that the world deserves to know the truth and needs to know the truth, and we cannot let anyone intimidate us otherwise.
 

AB: All right, well here was an attempt at intimidation. This phone call came in when, Doctor?

SG: This came in about two or three weeks ago to the CSETI line outside D.C.
 

AB: Here it is, Listen carefully:

[Playing tape]

Recording of voice mail for CSETI number 301-249-3915 recorded message dated July 19, 2004. The time is 12:35 A.M.

"Stop prying into government matters or dire consequences will result"

[Voice Mail time]

July 19, 12:35 A.M.

(recorded message was repeated a few times)

The number on the Caller I.D. for this call was 649-486-3151 and, according to the Internet, a 649 number is in the Turks and Caicos Islands in the Caribbean. And when calling this number back, you get the message "Call cannot be completed as dialed, please check the number and dial again - WA001".
 

AB: That's it - Dr. Greer?

SG: Yes.
 

AB: All right, so, obviously this - you know, I would presume you've probably had a lot of threats over the years. Why did you choose to send the audio of this one along?

SG: The reason I chose to send the audio of this one along and to also - the key point to this is that when you call the number that the Caller: I.D. shows that it was coming from, it is a non-existent number.
 

AB: Right.

SG: It's an electronically altered voice, so is this a threat you take seriously? Yes. Is it something that alters anything we'll do? No. If anything, we will redouble our efforts. Now, the reason I think people need to know about this sort of thing is that it proves the point I made back in the '90s when we had briefed the CIA Director for President Clinton (first CIA Director), we had briefed the Head of Intelligence Joint Staff, the Head of the Defense Intelligence Agency...
 

AB: A lot of people, Doctor, a lot of people have no idea that was actually done, that the CIA Director was briefed.

SG: Yes, I know, and this is something we need to talk about, and why things are still going the way they are. The people were intimidated. What I'm saying to people is that our assessment was that this group, because we were given direct intelligence from the President of the United States and his CIA Director and his Secretary of Defense and pertinent members of the Senate Intelligence Committee and other senior members of Congress, that when they made directed inquiries into this matter, that they were denied access, or flat-out lied to.

 

This is illegal and, believe me, if this was a legitimate government operation instead of a rogue and illegal operation, you would not be getting phone calls like this threatening a civilian medical doctor to back down off of what he is doing, because we're about to pull more information out to the public in the next six months.
 

AB: Doctor, you're - I understand your reaction. What about those around you? What about the people who took the call? What about the people who heard about the call? How did the others at CSETI react?

SG: Well, I think that the woman's voice you hear on that tape is a trusted assistant and friend who is aware of the threat. She and others who work with me are aware that this is not a risk-free operation. I said for years, this is not for the faint-of-heart. But I also remind people that not a single Disclosure Project witness, and we have people who, even into the '90s, had top secret SCI (Special Compartmented Intelligence) clearances.

 

None of them have gotten a phone call saying "Be quiet and don't talk about this."

 

Now, I have continued to get these sort of things where it said, "Stop what you're doing." But we're simply not going to respond to that. Now let's say - you know, if you analyze this carefully, what you have to conclude is that the group that has phoned this in and have done other things cannot be operating under legal constitutional authority.
 

AB: No.

SG: If they wanted me to stop this, they could just slap an order on me.
 

AB: Why haven't they?

SG: Hey, John Ashcroft, or Dick Cheney can come and say, "Hey!" and they can issue and do an in-camera proceeding and muzzle me. Good luck! I'd go to jail first.
 

AB: But, Doctor, has it occurred to you that they understand you're a really good person to go to a witness, somebody who's really seen something or worked in their career, their government career in a sensitive area and really know something, they know you're a good person to get that information from people and maybe they know that there's - you know - there are some people yet out there who are about ready to start talking.

 

We're all getting a little older, Doctor.

SG: Yes, there are some people. We have 450 of these witnesses.
 

AB: Maybe they know you're about to get to one of them.

SG: Well, we have them. And there are some major media events as you know, that are being planned, some by outside media and some by our group, the Disclosure Project, and we intend to continue to move these things out into the public. I think the other thing is that we are very close to identifying some scientists who can reproduce the modus operandi of these so-called UFO's, including the antigravity effect.

 

So, one of the things that is inevitable is that the truth is going to be known. The only question is when and how. And I think the sooner the better, because the longer we wait, the longer we're going to cannibalize our planet and the longer we're going to plunge this planet into chaos and war and environmental damage.
 

AB: Been watching very carefully, have you, the environmental situation in the world right now? It's really beginning to get rather dire. So if it's depending on that, which it really is, you would think then based on that, we're getting close.

SG: Well, I think that anyone with an IQ over mud can look at the world around us and know that something is terribly wrong.
 

AB: Yes.

SG: They can't quite put their finger on it, and there are a lot of people active in a lot of different vineyards tilling away. The central thing that people don't understand is that we're fifty years living on borrowed time.

 

That a lot of people think that what we're doing is very visionary and futuristic, and I say,

"Oh. On the contrary! This is all information that should have come out before I was born in 1955, and in fact could have come out, including the energy and propulsion systems."

And so, we are living on a planet and as a civilization that has stayed on its current trajectory for half a century too long and we need a course correction. If we don't make it, it'll be made for us, because simply, the Earth cannot withstand six billion people living the way we do in the West with our cars and SUV's and air conditioning and coal-burning power plants.

 

This is not an option, and it cannot go on for that much longer.
 

AB: Do you think they are likely to let you break this open or do you think they're more likely to break you if you get too close? I mean, these kinds of warnings, the kind of thing we played tonight, that's got to be a little precautionary for you.

SG: Well, it is, but remember that we've been getting these for about twelve years and it's nothing that - the only reason I'm sharing it is to illustrate the rogue and illegal nature of this. You know, there's a constitutional attorney that I've worked with on this project who has said, "You know, what you're describing is the Mother of all RICO's" (The Racketeering Influence Corrupt Organization Act) where you're dealing with an illegal clandestine para-governmental group that's transnational, similar to what they portray in "The Manchurian Candidate", this movie.

 

On top of that, you have corporate and financial interests that have done absolutely illegal things, up to and including assassinations. Now, I want to talk about an assassination tonight that people may not want to hear, but it's very similar to what was portrayed in "The Manchurian Candidate" when this Senator is killed while he's out kayaking on the Chesapeake Bay.

 

I'm referring now to a very brave man, CIA Director Bill Colby, whose very dearest friend approached us in the mid-90s.

 

And the week that we were going to have a meeting - listen carefully - the week we were going to have a meeting with this former CIA Director who had been on the inside of these covert operations, where he was going to transfer to our group $50 million in funding...
 

AB: What?

SG: ...as well as existing extraterrestrial energy devices that were functional. They found him floating down the Potomac River. The colonel...
 

AB: Wait, wait wait...

SG: ...The colonel who set up this meeting came to the funeral of my right hand aide, Shari Adamiak, who died a few years ago, and said,

"We have both had grievous losses, but we can't look back. We've got to move forward."

And this was Bill Colby's best friend.
 

AB: Under what arrangement - how did, I mean, $50 million, for example - under what auspices, how was that going to happen?

SG: We never got that far, nor did Mr. Colby. My point is this, and I'm not saying this to disturb Bill Colby's family, but I've decided that the truth has got to come out on some of these things, including these illegal, rogue operations that would phone in a threat like this to a civilian medical doctor.
 

AB: Um Hmm

SG: I've never signed a national security oath, and those people who have who are listening, mark my words, go to our website, and contact me, because as far as I'm concerned, the actions taken by this group make them ineligible to cite the National Security Act of 1947 or any other constitutionally approved law because they are operating as an illegal, extra-constitutional entity.
 

AB: Got it. All right, Dr. Greer, hold tight. In the middle of the night, you're listening to Coast to Coast A.M. and I bet you had never heard any of this before from Dr. Greer.

[commercial break]

AB: Just to be sure that we all heard this correctly. Let's have Dr. Greer go over this one more time. A - uh- murder, Dr. Greer? You're saying a murder.

SG: Yes.
 

AB: Uh. And the set up to this was?

SG: Well, I'm - my group was approached by a colonel who I do not want to name, who was Bill Colby's (one of his very best) friends, and they had been following what we were doing in the early and mid nineties with what was then called Project Starlight, which then became Disclosure Project.

 

But this man approached a member of our Board of Directors, a very dear friend of mine, and said that there was this person who is very connected up and historically had been connected to these projects, who absolutely agreed that it was time to end the secrecy. He wanted to transfer to us the means to do so through some assets that he had access to and I was told specifically that there was a - he wanted to be sure that there was adequate funding to do it properly which was around $50 million (which is a rounding error on the $7 trillion oil economy) and that they had some devices and physical equipment that they wanted to also transfer so that we could get this disclosed and get it secured and out to the public.

 

So there was a "cell" if you want to look at it that way, that was headed up, that had some involvement from Mr. Colby that wanted to do this. So, the meeting was set up between a member of my Board and Bill Colby, and the week that that meeting was to be actuated, he was found floating down the Potomac River.

 

Now, what's interesting about the death of Bill Colby was that, even his wife got on CNN and said "Oh, this is very unlike Bill Colby." Because he was a very safe canoer. He left the house opened, he left the computer on, the coffee maker on, and all this.

 

This was actually publicly and very briefly stated, but then, of course, it was written off as an "accidental" drowning while he was out canoeing on the Potomac River.
 

AB: I recall.

SG: Now, in reality, it's very much like what's being portrayed where art now is imitating life in "The Manchurian Candidate", where there is a Senator who was going to blow the whistle on this transnational group that was running all this and he is murdered by this manchurian candidate in the Chesapeake Bay when he's out kayaking and it's made to look like a drowning accident and is reported out through the media shills (of course, most of the Big Media are shills for these kind of guys, or just extremely naïve), as an accidental drowning.

 

So what's interesting is that this is precisely what happened to Bill Colby, and I've said this to a number of people who are actually in the media. And when my wife and I were sitting there looking at this movie, "The Manchurian Candidate," we were stunned.

 

We looked at each other and went "Oh, my god!" because my wife, of course, knew in real time as this event happened and, of course, it was tragic and we were heartbroken, and of course, not long after that, my right hand assistant and best friend in all these efforts, Shari Adamiak was - uh, she died - and this colonel came to her wake that was held at her apartment in Denver and he just came up to me and he said,

"You know, of course, Bill Colby was killed trying to get the truth out on this to help us, and you guys have had your own losses, but we can't look back, we can't dwell on the negative. We can't look back. We have to move forward."

And that's my message to people, that's always how we have to -
 

AB: I know, but if you believe what you just told me, then -

SG: It's not a belief. I know it's true, I mean I know it...
 

AB: Okay, if you know it's true what you just told me, then that means they will kill to prevent any really serious damage. They will kill to stop any really serious damage. Therefore -

SG: If they can get away with it. Remember, those were the early days. We didn't have the systems we have in place today.
 

AB: Doctor, if they can get away with killing a former CIA director, they can sure get away with killing an emergency room doctor.

SG: Well, perhaps. But, except, I'm - he was doing this in a very clandestine way. I am not doing what I'm doing in a clandestine way.
 

AB: True enough.

SG: And, the other thing to remember is that we're much more sophisticated now than we were back in the mid 90s when this happened. We have enormous support within some of the groups that are running these covert projects who want to see this happen and I don't lose any sleep. I don't lose one minute of sleep over this, and none of the military witnesses working with me should.

 

Now, it's not to say it's risk-free. You know, one of the things I say to people is that my god, you know, when I leave here to go back to my hotel here at Mt. Shasta, I could be hit by a Mack truck out of control coming down the mountain and be killed. There are risks with everything we do. But you also have to look at the benefit.

 

If we're being visited by intelligent life out there, and if there are covert programs that are sitting on technologies that could give us an entirely sustainable, long-term civilization without the need for damaging the environment, without the need for 80% of the world's population living in abject poverty, is it not worth some risk? Well, it is!

 

Now, I mean, I hate to sound clinical about this like a doctor talking about the risk and benefit ratios, but in reality, that's what it really comes down to, isn't it? And if we're not willing to step up to the plate on something of this importance, then we're really not worth breathing the free air of Earth.
 

AB: I'm with you. I'm certainly with you.

SG: I mean, this is why you're so great for doing this kind of show and letting someone like me talk to millions of people about what's really going on.
 

AB: Well, I think I'm looking at the whole world situation. I look carefully, as you know, at the environment. I wrote with Whitley Strieber, "The Coming Global Super Storm," made it into a big movie, environmental impact type stuff. I see what's going on in the world and it seems to me that if our situation, which is becoming rather dire, in my opinion...

SG: You bet.
 

AB: ...is going to proceed exponentially quicker and quicker down the path we're going, if something doesn't intervene, we've got trouble really immediately ahead - big trouble.

SG: You bet we do, and there's a wonderful Chinese saying that I often like to quote that says,

"Unless we change directions, we're likely to end up where we're going." Everyone laughs and I say, "You need to look at where we're going. You have to take the pulse of things."

And yet what I say to people is that the Earth is going to be here, and humanity is going to be here. The question is, are we willing to manifest the courage and exercise our free will? I mean, speaking sort of metaphysically, if you will, this is the sphere of free will and we can use it for good or for ill.

 

It's time for the good people to step up to the plate. I want to tell you a story, and maybe I'm talking out of turn and it's late and I'm jet-lagged and everything, but I was with Clayborne Pell (and everyone knows Senator Pell by the Pell Grants that they went to college on and, if you were poor like I was and didn't have the money to go to college) and I had the opportunity to meet this great man once out here in California when I was doing a briefing for a Board of Directors of a think tank out here and Clayborne Pell came out just for this meeting and I was briefing all this - this whole group on the whole extraterrestrial and covert program area. It was out here in the Bay Area where I am now in Northern California.

 

Well, interestingly, we were right next to George Lucas' ranch (who did Star Wars) and I was at this fabulous estate out there, and I'm sitting with this Senator who had been on every committee and he said,

"Dr. Greer, will you brief my staff on what you've found? Because I have made inquiries for years and I have never gotten an official briefing on this subject even though I've been on every relevant committee. I've been in the Congress since (I think he said 1953) when Jack Kennedy first came in."

And I said,

"Yes, Sir, and you know it's a crying shame because here you are, the Chairman (at the time) of the Senate Foreign Relations issue." And we're out under the stars here, and I pointed up to the stars and I said, "You know, you have been deprived of dealing with the ultimate foreign relations issue."

He looked through his horn-rimmed glasses (you know he wore these dark horn-rimmed glasses) and blinked and said,

"Well, Dr. Greer. I'm afraid you might be right." I said, "Well, I am! Here you are, a man who sort of epitomizes Nobless Oblige",

...and sort of this wonderful figure, who was Chairman of Senate Foreign Relations who could never find out what was going on on the ultimate foreign relations issue, and this is the sort of thing that should change, because we can do better than this.
 

AB: Do you really think he was leveling with you?

SG: Oh, I know he was. Absolutely.
 

AB: You know, part of it - you said Big Media a little while ago. Well, you know, tonight we've got ABC here and, if (I swear to God) if I had another microphone, I'd open the dammed thing up and I'd put my friend from ABC on here and we'd both grill them. We'd turn the tables. [both laugh]

SG: Well, look. Here's my attitude about that. I am always cautiously optimistic. You cannot judge the future by the past. Anyone who tries to - you can be informed of trends from the past, you can learn from history, but the future is always a new creation. Every moment is a new creation.

 

So when I look at this, I go okay, maybe the news media...
 

AB: Maybe.

SG: ...has the ability to tell the story right, because what I'm willing to give ABC News, or any other news entity - any news entity - are the names, addresses and phone numbers of dozens and dozens and dozens of top secret insiders so they can tell this story right. Now, they may want to do a "fluff" piece and they may do a hatchet job...
 

AB: No, I don't think so.

SG: ...but if they do a real story, they can have the - they can win more Emmys.
 

AB: And I could be wrong.

SG: They can tell this story to the world the way it should be told because we have enough people lined up ready to tell the truth, and these are not people who are going to be filmed...if you go to our web site DisclosureProject.org, you will see people, name, rank, serial number. These are not anonymous sources, you know, like the New York Times quote. These are actual, on-the-record people who carried our nuclear weapons...
 

AB: Oh yes.

SG: ...who - and these are highly credible people who had top secret clearances - so...
 

AB: Well, it's my understanding that -

SG: ...why should those people be -
 

AB: I know. It's my understanding that we're dealing here with a two-to-three hour special that's going to be airing on ABC in February of 2005. That's a pretty serious look. I mean in two to three hours, they're not going to do a "fluff" piece. Maybe they'll give a little bit of - you know, a little something in that area, but I think mostly, they're after a serious piece here.

SG: Well, there's a lot of serious material to cover.
 

AB: Let's put it this way. I got that impression that they want to do this for real, so it's quite an opportunity.

SG: It is. And I think we should see. We should provide the absolute best evidence. You know, this whole concept of the Best Available Evidence was a title that I formed in the '90s when I was getting information to the Clinton Science Advisor and these people, and we need to give the very best that we can. It's true that I can't put out on a table an actual extraterrestrial life form.

 

However, we have literally thousands of pages of government documents. We have hundreds of government insiders. These are not people who just stumbled out of a bar someplace and said they saw something. These are people who are ferrying around our nuclear arsenal and people who were at the National Military Command Authority and all these sort of places, so every agency is represented in the people we have identified, and which anyone who wants to read it can see it at DisclosureProject.org.

 

They can - there's a book with sixty-nine of these witnesses, called Disclosure, with transcripts of sixty-nine of the witnesses in it. It's there, and what's interesting is that since 2001, in the last three years, we have doubled the number of people who are interested in coming forward.
 

AB: Doctor, if you look at the current state of affairs in this country with homeland security, terrorism, all the rest of it - we know, you and I both know these things are in our skies. They've been tracked by every authority you can name. Now, we're watching our skies very carefully.

SG: You bet.
 

AB: The investigation of UFO's ostensibly ended with Blue Book, right? And there hasn't been really anything "official" since. No ongoing program, which means either they know or they don't care, or they know and they can't talk about it because they can't control it. Which of those?

SG: It's none of those. They know, and they're trying to control it because once they figured out the modus operandi of these objects, they knew that they couldn't talk about it.

 

Look, anyone worth a grain of salt in the scientific world who has disclosed to them the fact that these things are operating, are going to say, "Well, how much have you learned about how they're operating?" and when that question is asked, we have people who will answer it; and when they answer it, it's the end of the oil economy. It's the end of the centralized economy we have today that has impoverished the world, and we're talking about what I call a "kleptocracy" that has kept the world burning for decades past the time it should have.

 

Let me tell you - I'm going to tell you something here that I maybe shouldn't mention, but I'm going to.
 

AB: Good.

SG: A very good friend of the Bush family, a very close friend of the Bush family, (and I'm working with at lest one or two friends or advisors to every living president right now.) Now this man told me in February of '03, listen very carefully - in February of '03 - that we would find no weapons of mass destruction, that we had to go in there and free up the second largest proven oil reserve in the world because with China industrializing at ten to fifteen percent a year, and with India industrializing at close to that, there was simply not enough fossil fuel to go around and we were headed toward a catastrophic shortage within the next two to ten years if we didn't maximize the output of these oil producing areas and that this is totally what we were going into Iraq for.

 

Now, I almost laughed out loud because here's a guy who's a close associate of the Bush family telling me this personally. And it has turned out to be the case.

 

There are no weapons of mass destruction, there was no Al Qaeda presence in Iraq. This was totally about, and I don't care how anyone wants to spin it, we have got to - and from their point of view, if you want to keep these other technologies secret, and you're looking at a world industrializing as rapidly as China and other countries are, you have got to find other sources of fossil fuel, and that's what this was about.

 

Yet it's so tragic because we're sitting in another parallel program in these black boxes, the means to take us completely off the fossil fuel economy, and this is one of the greatest crimes against humanity in the history of the human race.
 

AB: Well, I'm in agreement with you on the oil thing. I don't know about weapons of mass destruction, it's oil. It's got to be oil, but even, Doctor, if we control that oil, all that does is change the date. It doesn't cure the problem it changes the date when the crisis occurs. That's all it does.

SG: Of course! Everyone knows this is temporizing, you know, but remember, one of the guys that I worked with back in the '90s who had been on Ronald Reagan's National Security Council staff told me, "You know, long term planning at the National Security Council was six months" - I mean, it's pathetic, you know?
 

AB: Yeah.

SG: We're not talking about - we're dealing with apparatchiks here who are trying to function from quarter to quarter, or short-term from term to term. We have a serious problem on this planet and the solutions are there. The question is, are we going to allow the solutions to come out? And we need to make this decision, yes we are. We need to say yes to a good future, and make this course correction. I'm convinced that humanity is ready for this. I think there are very few people who would not benefit from this.

 

There's a very tiny, what I call "kleptocracy" that have been ripping off the world through these centralized energy and economic systems that need to understand that that is a way of the past, that we need to move on to a new way of functioning. And it's a difficult transition. I don't make light of it.

 

We're talking about the biggest change since the industrial revolution.
 

AB: Yes we are. How convinced are you that extraterrestrials somewhere are indeed involved in the mix of this? Are you 100% sure? 90% sure?

SG: Well, I'm 100% sure that there are extraterrestrial civilizations observing our planet. I don't think at all that they're involved in any sort of keeping of this secret. There are many people who would like to think so. I think that frankly, the extraterrestrial civilizations out there are waiting for us to get out of this sort of dysfunctional phase of adolescence collectively we are in as a race, as humanity, and move into a state of maturity.

 

That's the sort of transition humanity is in right now. We're not in infancy, we're in adolescence, and it's a very reckless and dangerous time. We're in the early stages of adulthood and late adolescence.

 

We need to make this transition to a functional civilization on this planet, and there are extraterrestrial civilizations that are quite aware of that and are waiting for that moment to arrive.
 

AB: Do you believe that the energy source that our government knows about - possesses - came through, or as a result of contact with extraterrestrial beings and/or back-engineered craft, or whatever? Is that how it happened?

SG: I think it's not that simple. I think that if you look all the way back to the twenties with the work of T. Townsend-Brown, if you look at some of the work that was reported that the genius Tesla, Nikola Tesla, had done, there were some amazing breakthroughs. Even if you go back to the time of Faraday, actually, and read some of the early work that was done there, where there was this ability to perturb what we now call the quantum vacuum, or the zero point energy field and get this enormous amount of energy from the space around an electromagnetic device.

 

I think that this work was actually being developed by humans. I think it was then greatly potentiated, frankly, by our discovery and retrieval of extraterrestrial vehicles back in the thirties and forties.
 

AB: All right, hold it right there, and that's kind of where we'll pick up because I thought that that's what you believed, and if it is, then we have a very great deal to talk about, indeed. In other words, what would happen with that kind of disclosure. And, oh, ladies and gentlemen, a great deal would happen.

 

I'm Art Bell...

[commercial break]

AB: Actually, how can you not be listening tonight? My guest is Dr. Steven Greer. He's head of the 'parade for disclosure' and I agree with him regarding these objects in our skies. I really do.

 

There's not much that I believe in this world, short of proof, but you know I've seen one, maybe 2 of these things, one for sure close close close encounter, and having seen a ship defy gravity, I just know that there exists antigravity and, if there exists antigravity and drive and propulsion systems to get from here to there, which is no minor statement, then there exists the energy to run our world at a time when we're running out.

 

Well, this is no trivial matter, as Dr. Greer has been explaining to you. However, the revelation of this - if it is so, and I believe A to be so - so, you are forced then to consider B. In this case, B for Brookings. And, that is exactly what we're going to do in a moment.

[commercial break]

AB: By the way, once again, as you know, ABC is here filming tonight and earlier tonight while they were setting up I turned the camera on them. I figured you all would want to see what it's like. Now, I have a relatively small broadcasting studio and they have a relatively great deal of equipment [laughs].

 

So I snapped a photograph - actually, I've got several - I'll share some more with you, but one's up on my web cam right now on the web site - coasttocoastam.com - and you can see their high definition camera. One of the first things of this sort that, I understand, that ABC has shot in high definition. So that's pretty cool. And I was kind of happy to see all of their stuff.

 

Anyway, there's a picture of their camera there. Pretty cool.
 

AB: Anyway, in a moment, back to Dr. Greer and the question which really cannot be ignored. I know it can kind of be tossed off about Brookings, but not all that easily. So let's talk to Dr. Greer about that.

 

Doctor, I mean, there is the Brookings Report and its implications are basically that if we were to discover there are others, and if in some way it, for example, would affect our religious views, or what we conventionally believe about science, this would have without question an effect on so many institutions and people in careers that - I don't know, is it a shock we could really absorb, do you think?

SG: Yes, I think this - remember, this is 2004, not 1954.
 

AB: True.

SG: Fifty years later, forty years later, thirty years later, there are very few people who don't believe that there's potential for life in the universe. I think the numbers are up 60% to 70%. In some polls, the majority of Americans believe UFOs are real and the government is lying, more than the number of people who voted for any recent past U.S. president.

 

So the point I make is this: There's this sort of patriarchal condescension that the masses can't take it, when in reality that's only cover for them keeping it secret for completely old-fashioned reasons.
 

AB: Well, look, though. I talked to people like... the head of CSETI [meaning SETI] who says two things: One,

"Look, Art. If we get a signal from ninety or a hundred light years away, I think that information would be absorbed quite readily by the American people. There would be lot's of debate and shock and surprise and happiness and sadness and all of that, but we'd absorb it because they're ninety or a hundred million light years away."

That's one scenario. Another scenario is they decide to land.

SG: Right.
 

AB: Now you've got a whole different story on your hands.

SG: It depends on how you "spin it". If you spin it in a 'threat matrix' - in other words, if you say "Look, they're here and it's a threat to us",...
 

AB: Yes.

SG: ...yes this would disturb people. And I think that that is stupid to do that. On the other hand, if you say,

"Look, they're here, there's no evidence of a threat, and we need to figure out how to interface with them in a way that redounds to the benefit of humanity."

This is something that is possible. We can do this. CSETI is doing it. Let me tell you what happened tonight on Mount Shasta...
 

AB: Unless - okay, in a moment - but, unless it really is a threat. There are those in our community - UFOlogy - who believe that they are not warm fuzzy guys. That they may be a threat, and that should be addressed. I mean, most of these abduction stories, and the rest of it, don't sound too damn friendly, so that's at least got to be a 50 percent possibility, doesn't it?

SG: Well, no. It isn't a 50 percent possibility. It's an infinitesimally small possibility.
 

AB: Why?

SG: Because, the fact that you and I are still breathing the free air of Earth is abundant testimony to the fact that these civilizations are not hostile. Because, given the fact that we have been targeting and attempting to strike these objects militarily for decades, if they were seriously hostile, they would have 'cleaned our clock' years ago.
 

AB: But, most ...

SG: The fact of the matter is, is that are not. And I'll say something else about this. A lot of the frightening stuff that is put out there on this subject...
 

AB: Yes

SG: ...is counterintelligence information. I have multiple first-hand insiders who have been on special operations where they have quote "abducted" humans, to make it look like an alien encounter, and it's completely false. So, there's an enormous amount of disinformation out there. The psychological warfare dimension of this subject is enormous and sophisticated.
 

AB: But, most ants buzzing around on their little anthill working away, they're just happy as can be until the shoe falls.

SG: Well perhaps, but this is sort of a paranoid view of the cosmology. My point is this... One of the wonderful things - on DisclosureProject.org, there is an interview in the book "Disclosure" with Monsignor Balducci. He's a senior theologian at the Vatican, and this is no sort of a new age left liberal. I mean, he's a conservative...
 

AB: That's right.

SG: ...Vatican insider, and I've got this wonderful interview with him, and I'll say something here that I've never said publicly. I'm saying a few things here I've never said publicly.
 

AB: Good.

SG: Alright, when I was at his apartment overlooking St. Peters in the Vatican he gave me this interview, and one of the things he said is that,

"obviously there are extraterrestrial civilizations visiting us. It's clear that they're not hostile. It's clear that we should not have a military approach to this problem."

And that what CSETI is doing, where we go out and try to make peaceful contact with them...
 

AB: Yes.

SG: ...is exactly what we should be... Now, off camera, he pulled me aside and we were out on his balcony, and Paola Harris was there, and he said you know, "I couldn't be saying this unless "Papa" [meaning the Pope] wanted me to say this." I don't believe any mainstream theologian is going to have a problem with the fact that we're not alone in the universe.

 

One of the very, almost funny, things that Monsignor Balducci said was that if we are not alone - if humanity is the only intelligent life in the universe, then God made a big mistake. [laughs]

 

You know, and he puts it in this perspective that certainly the universe is filled with intelligent life and one of the problems with the SETI project - not CSETI, my group, but the SETI project listening to signals, is that they think that the civilizations advanced enough to get here would be using 20th century or 21st century Earth technologies.
 

AB: Yes.

SG: Well, this is a very anthropocentric and foolish perspective which anyone can deconstruct very quickly.
 

AB: There are many secrets hidden under the Vatican. Did you broach that subject with him?

SG: Yes, and I met with one of the Knights of Malta (which does exist) and we discussed this because he was concerned about what I was doing with the Clinton Administration at the time, and we - in this discussion, we went through this whole issue of some of the things that are in the so-called secret Vatican Library on this matter, which is quite extensive by the way.

 

And that of course, this is something that should come out. But they don't see it particularly as their role to do it. They would have part of the role, and this is true of a lot of the religious groups who know about this issue.
 

AB: How could they not bury it, and keep it buried? Or is that - I guess they are!

SG: Because they're preparing to be able to discuss this in a way that affirms the universality of God. Now look, we can get into a metaphysical discussion, but I'm on the same page, I think, with Billy Graham and certainly with Monsignor Balducci on this because, if there is a supreme being, it is a divine, infinite being for all people, for all worlds, for all intelligent life. It is the creator of all that there is.

 

So the fact that there are these other intelligent life forms out there in no way negates any of the rational, sane teachings of any religion.

 

Now, there may be some misinterpretations that it would negate, and there may be some upheavals in that area, but the central knowledge of the existence of a supreme being in no way is diminished...
 

AB: Perhaps...

SG: ...by the realization that we're not alone in the universe. On the contrary, it redounds to the glory of God to recognize that the universe is filled with intelligent beings capable of knowing that being.
 

AB: Yes, did Jesus walk on the other intelligent worlds? [laughs]

SG: ... That's a good question. My opinion of that is probably yes.
 

AB: How much do you think the church knows? How much do you think the church really knows? Do they have...

SG: I think very few people... Remember, the Vatican is very much like the U.S. Government. 99.9% of the people there don't know anything. You know, I often joke about this. When I dealt with people at the CIA, most of those people couldn't find their ass in a well-lighted room with the lights on! So, excuse my "French".
 

AB: I didn't say that.

SG: Okay, I did, and it's true, particularly when it comes to this stuff. But the Vatican is a highly compartmented operation as well. Now, are there compartmented operations within, for example Opus Dei that is sitting on this? Yes. Does that mean the Pope has full knowledge or access? No!

 

I mean this is the myth that the media has propelled out to the public, even about the U.S. president. If you're the U.S. president, it doesn't mean that you know all things as some omniscient ruler.

 

You only know what people are willing to tell you, and if you're dealing with an Unacknowledged Special Access Project, which is the proper term for these super-secret black projects, they're not going to tell the President if they don't want to. They're not going to tell the Secretary of Defense, if they don't want to.
 

AB: Okay. So that sounds just like the Vatican is structured exactly the way our government is...

SG: Correct.
 

AB: ...in that, not even the President, or some presidents might know and other presidents might not.

SG: Right. Correct. It depends on whether you're willing to go along with the game. You know, when I was meeting with Lord Hill-Norton (God rest his soul - he's recently passed away) and I was at his cottage in Hampshire, and here's a five-star Admiral and a Sea Lord, and he, of course had been head of the Ministry of Defense since the early '90's on this issue.

 

What was fascinating was that he was sitting there with this little notepad, very piously taking notes, interviewing me - but at some point, he said... he said to me,

"Well, Dr. Greer, why didn't they tell me anything about this matter when I was head of the Ministry of Defense?" and I answered him with a question - and listen very carefully - I said, "Look. What would you have done if you had found out that there was a transnational group that was highly centered in the corporate and financial domain that had committed assassination, had withheld from U.S. presidents, and your prime ministers, and you, the information that not only that we weren't alone in the world - in the universe - but that there were technologies that could have completely replaced, by the 1950's and '60's all polluting sources of energy and propulsion on this planet."

He looked at me and said,

"I wouldn't have stood for it for a bloody minute!"

You could hear him - he was in a rage!

 

And I said,

"Yes, and that's exactly why they never told you, because you're a stand-up guy, and you would not have stood by where the largest racketeering influence corrupt organization on the planet ran us over Niagara Falls not even in a barrel to keep this stuff secret so that they could maintain their death grip on the oil-based energy economy."

And I said,

"That is why they never told you. That's why they haven't told select people because they knew that if they did tell you, they would have to do with you what they did to John F. Kennedy."

AB: Let's suppose for a second that the very worst occurs and we don't find out about it until the virtual last drop of usable oil is extracted from the ground, we should be able to perhaps look ahead and know when that date roughly might be. In other words, we'll see the pressure increasing toward what date, do you suppose, Doctor. Any guesses?

SG: Well, you know, it's not the last drop because before we burn up the last drop, we'll have already melted both polar ice caps.
 

AB: Right. I'm with you.

SG: [chuckles] Look, this is - part of this isn't a rational discussion and here's why. You have people in this policy group, and there are two or three hundred people in it (some people call it the MJ-12 group, it's not called that anymore) and I know a number of these people in it.
 

AB: Do you think it really was once called that?

SG: Yes.
 

AB: Okay.

SG: What's interesting is that there is a hardcore center of it that are eschatologists. Okay? These are people who fantasize about how the world is going to end. So if that is your belief system, and you think, oh well, you know, the world's going come to an end and there's going to be this big event, you don't worry if you're melting both polar ice caps.

 

Now, of course, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy based on misinterpretation of many things, including most of the scriptures.

 

My point is, is that if that is what is causing people to create policy - and I remind people that this is historical fact that James Watt who was the Interior Secretary during the Reagan years was an eschatologist, and he stated to the public that we didn't need to - well, he said it when the mike was open, he didn't mean it to be recorded - but he said,

"You know, we don't need to worry about the environment and all this, because the world's going to come to an end, and then there's going to be the return of Christ, and since the world's going to be destroyed anyway, we might as well just go ahead and let it be destroyed."

So there's this bizarre sort of - not spirituality, but a weird religiosity that informs this stuff.
 

AB: It is weird, but let me tell you a little story.

SG: It's very weird.
 

AB: I want to tell you a story. I had a lady call me who's - we were talking about the end of the world and she called and said, "Hey, Art. You know, since you're talking about how the world might end, I called... (and she named, I forget, Visa, MasterCard, you know, one of the big card companies)"

SG: Right.
 

AB: And she said, "Do you all have a policy with regard to, say, if an asteroid was headed to Earth that would destroy the Earth? Destroy all human life?" and they actually took her seriously enough to put her on hold. She went through several chains of people, the hierarchy and, damned if they didn't answer her question.

 

They said,

"Actually, yes, we do have a policy and it's that we would allow everybody to run their cards right up to the limit, no problem. That would be our policy, and the reason is obvious - if the asteroid hits and we all die, so what?"

SG: Exactly! [laughing]
 

AB: "But, what if the asteroid misses?" That's a pretty honest answer.

SG: Yeah, well, there's all kinds of bizarre things you can get into here. But here's the central point, as I see it is this: The world view that people have informs their policy and it directs their policy.
 

AB: Of course.

SG: And this is true. The paradigm you live through, but I think that most people know that the Earth is going to be in her orbit. Humanity will be here, and we don't need to wait 'til we've burned the last drop of oil. Now here's the problem. I was having a discussion a number of years ago. We set up a briefing for the Senate Environment and Energy Committee and Doctor and Colonel Tom Bearden was there amongst other people who are luminaries in the area of New Energy - and I consider him one of the true greats in this area, he's a genuine genius - and we were discussing this and ...he is actually one of the people who is on the DisclosureProject.org website and in the book.

 

He says, "You know, we need to have these energy systems out by 2004 or thereabouts."

 

Now remember, this was a briefing in the fall of 2000, for the Senate Intelligence... I mean, Energy Committee and Environment Committee. And my science advisor, Dr. Loder of the University of Hew Hampshire, had facilitated this briefing and he [Bearden] said,

"But if we don't do that, the lead time between announcing these technologies and getting them into every car and every home is such that it's a ten or twenty year lag period."

You're not going to wave a magic wand like Peter Pan and suddenly everyone is going to have these new energy systems.

 

So we needed to bring these out now, because if you extrapolate it out ten or twenty years, that's about how much time we had using the fossil fuel system. So it's obvious to people who want to see the human race continue to evolve and grow here, that this is a change that is long overdue, and we're really at the point where it has to happen now.
 

AB: Well, that was my question, a rough 'crunch' date.

SG: Well, of course, I think that we are at a point where, between now and 2020 we're going to have to make this transition fully, and I don't mean in a small way. We're talking about the "mother of all martial plans", energetically and environmentally, to get this entire planet off the use of fossil fuels.

 

It can be done. I mean human will can make this happen.
 

AB: If our government came to you and said, "Dr. Greer, all right. You know what? We're going to do it and we're going to do it through you." Would you be interested?

SG: Sure, if they were honestly wanting to do that.
 

AB: Really?

SG: Sure. I don't care who it's through. It needs to happen. You know, a lot of people say [ask] why am I still doing this? I gave up my medical career. Here I am, an emergency doctor...
 

AB: And you gave it all up.

SG: And I gave it all up.
 

AB: Hold on, we'll pick up right - that's a good place to pick up. Dr. Steven Greer, who indeed was an emergency room physician, quite a career to chuck away to pursue ufology, if that's what this really is, and I guess it is, it's ufology. But it's all becoming about energy - their energy, our energy, the energy.

 

Probably the energy would be more correct. From the high desert in the midst of the night, I'm Art Bell.

[commercial break]

[Plays the threat message again]

AB: Once again, Dr. Steven Greer... It seems like in the beginning, Dr. Greer, it was more about UFOs, more about what's in our skies, but now it seems like it's more about energy, clear-cut energy.

 

That's - in other words, the whole thing is pointing more toward energy than it is whether or not they exist, is that right?

SG: Well, actually, no, because if you go all the way back to 1991, I was talking to people like Bruce DePalma and Dr. Brian O'Leary and others about the energy issue.

 

To be honest with you, I was expecting other people to deal with the energy issue while we disclosed the existence of life in outer space that was here, and the need to make a change from a militaristic approach to that phenomenon to a diplomatic and peaceful approach to it.

 

But, what I found was that people were not attending to that problem adequately and that it was all part of the same crisis. It's a crisis in vision...
 

AB: Sure.

SG: It's a crisis in the way our society is being controlled and managed, and so, basically, if you understand that the secrecy around these advanced energy and propulsion systems even the ones that are manmade, and the secrecy around the UFO issue are identical, and they're managed by essentially the same group, then you understand that you have an integrated problem that needs to be resolved and that's really our approach to this now.

 

It's a very comprehensive approach. We had that knowledge back in '90 and '91 and '92, but I was expecting other people to resolve the energy part of it. What I found is that they really can't and won't because the secrecy issues and the complex nature of the secrecy attendant to one is identical to the other.

 

So, the UFO secrecy and the energy secrecy are really identical.
 

AB: Yeah. All right, I know you're doing something at Mt. Shasta now. You've got some sort of training. Are they classes going on? Or what are you doing there?

SG: What are we doing on Mt. Shasta? Well, we have thirty-three people here, and we go up to this beautiful site on the side of Mt. Shasta. Let me tell you what happened tonight. I wish so much we had been on the air and I'd had a sat-phone [satellite phone] to talk to you when this was happening.

 

We were in this clearing up at about 5,000 feet and we were sitting there doing our observation of the night sky (and it's a beautiful, crystal clear night here at Mt. Shasta) and suddenly at about 13,000 feet on the side of this huge volcano (which is what Mt. Shasta is) this beautiful light illuminated and then there were three of them, and we took our lasers out (we have these very high-powered lasers) and we started signaling to it and they started flashing back.

 

This went on for fifty minutes and the only reason that it ended was that I had to come here for this interview!

 

But, you know, it was one of these things, and then suddenly we have all these electromagnetic detection devices with us. One of them is a battery operated, state-of-the-art radar detector that has a laser band on it, and suddenly as all this was going on and we're seeing these objects on the side of this absolutely vertical cliff where it's a glacier up there, signaling to us, the electromagnetic detectors we had there started beeping and going off, and we're way out in the wilderness.

 

There's no source for electromagnetic pollution or radiation to do this. So this was going on up to literally within minutes of me leaving to come here for this interview.
 

AB: Wow!

SG: So we take groups out to areas - and of course, this is a very important thing (I've talked to the people at ABC News about this) is that we're bypassing this whole debate in a sense of "Are they out there?" We've concluded they are, and we know they are. So, what we're saying, okay, here's an existential question. If we're not alone in the universe, and if they're here visiting Earth, what should we be doing to reach out to them?

 

Instead of being passive, we've decided we should do something called the CE-5 initiative (which is the Close Encounter of the Fifth Kind Initiative) where we basically go out and say,

"Okay, if you're out there, we're willing to vector you in using these radio signals and all this other stuff we're using, and see if you can interact with us."

Well, tonight, here were these objects way up on Mt. Shasta, and then of course, this strange electromagnetic pulse came down around the group that started setting off all our electromagnetic detectors.

 

What I say to people is that there is the ability of humans, even if we're not senior diplomats to the State Department or the United Nations to go out to areas and say,

"Look. We're here and we're conscious, sentient beings. You're out there and you're conscious, sentient beings. Let's see how far we can take that experience."

AB: All right.

SG: That's part of what the whole CSETI experience is about. We've been doing this since 1990.
 

AB: But - but, Doctor. Here you are at Mt. Shasta. Probably at some level active. Certainly, lots of minerals contained in one place. I mean, it is a volcano after all and UFO's have been associated with volcanoes for years in reports we've had, so that's not unusual. I don't know what kind of connection you imagine they have but... how do you know, for example that you're not dealing with something metaphysical?

 

That you're not dealing - you may well be dealing with something metaphysical. I mean, a presence obviously was there and was trying - or had some form of communication with you.

SG: Of course, it was specifically doing that, but you use the word "metaphysical", and I would say, "Let's look at what Walt Whitman said [in] "Leaves of Grass," Isn't everything metaphysical? Isn't - truly, what does the word "metaphysical" mean? Let's look at this very carefully. In reality, if you're dealing with civilizations capable of interstellar travel...
 

AB: Yes.

SG:...you're also dealing with civilizations who've discovered the nexus between light, matter, space, time, awakeness or consciousness, thought; and this is a very important thing to realize.

 

It's a very advanced area of science to look at where the interplay is, or the interface is, between what people would call metaphysics, and I would postulate that metaphysics, or a miracle, is simply something that can be understood scientifically that isn't yet understood scientifically, and so they call it "metaphysical" or a miracle.

 

Look, if you went back a few thousand years, or a few hundred years and gave someone a cell phone...
 

AB: Let me try and -

SG: ...they would say it was something interdimensional. They would say it was something metaphysical.
 

AB: Yes, of course they would, but let me be more clear, if I can. When I say metaphysical I mean, how do you know you're not dealing with a spirit, for example?

SG: Spirits don't have actual physical lights that lift up off the mountain and fly around and signal back and forth, I mean, this is not -
 

AB: They might - they might! I mean, look, I deal in other things on this program. Ghosts, what are called Shadow People, things that we truly can't explain, but millions of people are seeing, and there may be a wall between this life and there may be another life and there may be artifacts of that life, or maybe there are shadows of artifacts of this life, but...

SG: But, I don't think the compartments are as clear as you're presenting. I think there is actually a perfect continuum between all of that phenomena and us and life in outer space, and this is the whole point. There is a - paradigm crisis.

 

There is a worldview crisis where science and, if you want to call it, spirituality is sort of trying to figure out how it brings itself together. It can be brought together. But the point is, that to put them into separate compartments is to miss the point entirely, that there is a continuation (or a continuum) that crosses from things that are faster than the speed of light. You know, I wrote an article years ago called "The Crossing Point".

 

If you see a car driving around that has XINGPT on it, I'm in it. It means crossing point, and what it refers to is everything that is resonating faster than the speed of light. But, when you go through the light barrier, and it's a quantum, it's not a gradual thing, it's a quantum event, you're dealing with everything that some people would call metaphysical; but you're dealing with sciences, and there are very specific sciences - some of them are in the area of scalar electromagnetic systems - but you're dealing with very specific sciences that are clearly involving phenomena that some people would call metaphysical.

 

But it's not metaphysical, it's physical! It's just very advanced, and very high frequency and very high-energy physics.
 

AB: Fascinating. So it all eventually can be explained scientifically.

SG: Absolutely.
 

AB: Do you think that a lot of what we believe as religion could also be explained scientifically?

SG: A lot of it. Absolutely. And a lot of it is something that can be experienced. Remember, experience is the mother of all science. Empirical observation experience is the wellspring of all science, and so there's no reason to diminish experience. The point is that, if we don't have the instrumentation to detect certain things, it doesn't mean it's not there.

 

It just means we haven't developed the instrumentation yet.
 

AB: Well -

SG: For example, did x-rays exist before we had the ability to detect x-rays? Yes, of course they existed. So we're dealing now with civilizations that are able to morph, if you will, or to transition into faster-than-speed-of-light forms, and you then step into an area that some people would call metaphysical. It's actually very scientific.

 

So, it's not as if there's a clear barrier between science and this kind of information.
 

AB: There's not.

SG: The problem is that we're viewing this through the prism...
 

AB: Right.

SG: ...of twentieth, twenty-first (early twenty-first) century science which is really in its infancy. So what I point out to people is that there are sciences that will evolve over time where we can specifically measure and note things that are now considered to be impossible metaphysical things.

 

So I think we have to take it scientifically. I'm a scientist! I'm a medical doctor and it's not like I'm a psychiatrist, you know, I was taking care of people being shot and stabbed, and heart attacks. The point is that we have to view this with some humility and understand that at this point in the evolution of the human race, we're maybe half a step out of the jungle in terms of scientific knowledge.

 

We're not that far advanced, even though we think we are, and there's a tremendous amount in the universe yet to be discovered where we can then scientifically reproduce it. But, we can't ignore the early things that we discover. Just because we can't quantify everything doesn't mean it's [not] there and this is a huge mistake, in my opinion, that the SETI project is making.

 

They're trying to use electromagnetic signals to detect civilizations which, if they are advanced beyond the barrier of the speed of light, will be beyond the electromagnetic spectrum as it is currently described.
 

AB: Well, they're currently correcting some of their - some of the way they do "biz"...

SG: Yes of course, they need to.
 

AB: ...and so forth, yes. Um, when you're on the side of Mt. Shasta communicating with something, what do you think you're communicating with?

SG: Well...
 

AB: Do you have any guess? For example, a further question - have you ever gone beyond light in response to light? Has it ever come down to even rudimentary forms of communication of ideas of any sort, or concepts, or anything?

SG: Yes, it has, and I think that this gets us into a whole question of "How far do we want to take this at this time?"
 

AB: Right!

SG: But the CSETI experiment, if you want to call it an experiment, has been to go all over the world where there have been credible...
 

AB: Right.

SG: ...reports of these objects and see how far we can take it. Now, we're doing this on $3.85. We don't have NASA's multi-billion dollar budget which is really flushing money down the toilet, but - ouch...I maybe shouldn't say that since my uncle was involved with NASA very heavily - but the point is that there are things that we are doing now which are oriented toward, at least mapping out what are the possibilities of contact.

 

Now, if we're not alone in the universe and if they're here, even though it's a humble approach, I mean, we don't have the resources to do what NASA's doing, or even that SETI is doing, shouldn't we make some attempt in that direction?

 

I remind people we've had some rather spectacular things happen. In the '90's, we had over the volcano Popo, in Mexico, an enormous triangular craft that came and circled and signaled with us and it was fully materialized.

 

We have here at Mt. Shasta a couple of years ago, I think it was 1999, had an enormous triangular formation that was seen all over the United States that came right over the mountain, turned over us, we signaled to it, it signaled back. Now...
 

AB: Doctor. Why...

SG: People say, "Why is that important?"
 

AB: Why volcanoes, is what I'd say.

SG: Well, that's a very good question (and by the way, this was way out in space. This particular object was enormous). I would say that there is a large body of evidence that these extraterrestrial vehicles have been around volcanic areas and I don't believe that it is a geophysical effect, like quartz and minerals and what have you, because that piezoelectric effect is very well described.

 

These are very different from that and I believe it may be because they're concerned about the stability of the Earth, the stability of the Earth's crust. There may be other reasons we don't understand. But there is - I mean it's true that when Mt. Pinatubo was blowing in the Philippines, there were all kinds of craft seen.

 

If you go to look at some of the videotape from Japan at Mt. Unzen, this has been a phenomenon reported all over the world, particularly around the Pacific Ring of Fire...
 

AB: Exactly!

SG: ...as it's called.
 

AB: Yes.

SG: And I don't believe at all that it's natural phenomena. I think clearly these are things under intelligent control, and perhaps (just perhaps... I'm speculating here) they're concerned with the stability of the biosphere and the Earth, particularly as we are stressing it.
 

AB: Well, if they're concerned, I'm concerned.

SG: Well, you should be.
 

AB: Yeah.

SG: And I think that this is one of the issues is that we are at a time in history where, again we're fifty years into an era when the type of environmental damage we're doing should have been retired.
 

AB: All right, well here's a really good question. Whether it would be a volcano, another natural disaster or perhaps by our own hand (which is quite likely), and disaster was - we're right on the precipice of some terrible disaster. Is it your view there would be intervention?

SG: Well, if you look at a document that we created in 1991, we very clearly stated that in the event of a worst - I mean absolutely worst case scenario, there would be an intervention to try to stabilize things and I think that this is something which is rational. If we have been observed for a number of years and perhaps a number of centuries, if not millennia, by extraterrestrial civilizations, there may be some concern that they would need to do that.

 

For example, thermonuclear war is something that could extinguish life as we know it on Earth.
 

AB: Yes.

SG: We have in the Disclosure Project, and you can see some of this at DisclosureProject.org. If people get on that web site, then they will see that there are people who were senior officials with the Atomic Energy Commission who were with the Strategic Air Command who said that when we were testing some of these weapons systems...
 

AB: Yes.

SG: ...that it was clear that these vehicles would come in and intercept and at times, even destroy some of the intercontinental ballistic missiles as they went into space, near Earth space, and they were clearly trying to indicate "Please do not destroy this beautiful planet, and if you do, we will try to stop it."
 

AB: How well documented is that?

SG: It's extremely well documented.
 

AB: I'm remembering hearing reports, Doctor, of missiles that were deactivated at some of our silos. I remember reports of the Russians having missiles actually begin to activate. I remember those reports.

 

Those were real, weren't they?

SG: They were real, and I think that what was being said, though, I think that the message being conveyed by these extraterrestrial civilizations is that we needed to break - to back down off this brink of nuclear holocaust. I mean, if you look at our testimony that is involving the area of Strategic Air Command and nuclear facilities, we have no fewer than half a dozen separate witnesses who were present at nuclear or Strategic Air Command facilities...
 

AB: Yes.

SG: ...or with the Atomic Energy Commission who corroborate that this was going on. We're not talking one guy who's unnamed. We're talking about at least half a dozen that we have on the record, and in our files we have probably another dozen, and what this indicated to me as I went around, (and I personally interviewed all of these men, virtually all of them) and what I found was I would ask them,

"What do you think was being conveyed to us?"
 

AB: But you're telling me, Doctor, that they knocked down ICBMs that had been test-launched. They knocked them down!

SG: Intercepted them, yes, and in fact, if you look at the testimony of Mr. Salas, and of Lt. Colonel Arneson, they say that at the one Strategic Air Command facility there were sixteen separate intercontinental ballistic missiles that were taken offline and rendered unlaunchable one morning as - now interestingly, the Soviet Union had the same thing happen.
 

AB: Okay, Doctor. Hold it. That's what I heard. Hold it right there.

[commercial break]

AB: Dr. Greer is here from CSETI, and boy, what a night this has been. Lots of things we've never heard before, and, trust me when I tell you, there's more directly ahead...

[commercial break]

AB: Well, if this is real, it's too good to be true. The timing is too good to be true. Uh, Dr. Greer?

SG: Yes.
 

AB: I've got a man on the line who claims he was at one of those silos. Caller, are you there?

Caller: I am there.
 

AB: All right, you were at - Uh, what's your first name?

Caller: I'm John, from -
 

AB: You're John. From?

Caller: From Centralia -
 

AB: Centralia, and you claim you were...

Caller: Washington.
 

AB: You claim you were at what silo? When, and what happened?

Caller: It was in the hotel flight in the summer of 1966.
 

AB: You apparently were on George's [George Noory] show, with George on the show?

Caller: Exactly, for about an hour, a month or so ago.
 

AB: Okay, and where were you and what happened?

Caller: Okay. We had - this was a year before it happened at Malmstrom Air Force Base, and I carried the top security clearances in the U.S. Government and I handled those nuclear weapons and those missiles.

SG: Right.

Caller: And we began to have...a series of outer zone security violations where something penetrated the outer security zone of the site, and then it was followed by inner zone security violations, and after that, then it wiped out the missiles. The missiles, the G and C went down.

 

They read G and C No-Go's, and when I spoke about this a month or so ago, and you know, it had been a long time since it happened. I'd forgotten about this, the third problem, the G and C No-Go's and then when I checked my notes, there it was!
 

AB: G and C, meaning?

Caller: Yeah, we lost control of the missiles.
 

AB: You're a little bit too close to your phone. Back off a little bit. G and C means what?

Caller: Guidance and control package.
 

AB: Thank you. And so the guidance and control package went down.

Caller: Down. And that just wiped out the missile. The missile didn't know where it was, and it's a failure. It's called G and C No-Go.
 

AB: All right, and all this happened. You had outer zone and then inner zone failure, so something was there.

Caller: Absolutely. And in our case, we had sightings. I didn't see these things, but we scrambled. The first thing you scramble are a couple of AP's [air patrols] from the launch control facility which controls ten of those minuteman missiles, and they sent these AP's out, and the boys (you know, young men), reported seeing saucer discs sitting over the silo with little lights or whatever, around it, and these are in the status of an excited utterance.

 

The reaction was immediate. They began to look around for other teams that were close.

 

All these missiles sit out there alone, and so they scrambled another team of, this time actually analysts and people that could be more qualified to judge what was going on out there - left unattended a nuclear missile out in the South Dakota prairie and got this other team across the hills as fast as they could in the night, and this second team containing people that I actually knew personally, saw this object on the silo and about at the same time, they were able to get a helicopter crew in, also carrying another team of analysts like myself out of the barracks at three o'clock in the morning, nine o'clock, I don't know what it was - eleven o'clock or twelve o'clock at night, and they brought them in range of that.

 

And, you know what's so strange after all this time, is that a year later when this happened in Malmstrom Air Force Base as now documented on those sites, that whole command crew had no knowledge of what had happened at Ellsworth.

SG: That's right.

Caller:: This terrible compartmentalization that we worked under, the Secrecy Act that we worked under, kept that word from spreading, so commanders in Malmstrom Air Force Base, when they had exactly the same sequence and that - they documented that with letters from Boeing, the prime contractor.

 

They took those - of course, we had to take those missiles out of the silo to find out what happened to them, that was our job, and so the first thing we did was pull those missiles and pull those cans (those guidance and control packages) and got them back to Boeing so they could see what had happened and they decided it was spurious current and this kind of thing.

 

But I was right there while it was happening. It was a nice summer night, early summer night, and I listened to it on the radio - you know, the Air Force radios, and I saw the helicopters come back in with photographers on them, this kind of thing. Talked to the wing commanders while it was going on.
 

AB: Doctor, these are the kind of people you want to talk to, right?

SG: Exactly, and I would encourage this gentleman and people like him to contact us at DisclosureProject.org and I will personally be in touch with him.

Caller: I will certainly do that.

SG: Thank you, and the point is that what he is saying is something we have dozens of corroborating witnesses for, and as you mentioned, there were similar events going on in the former Soviet Union and we have an enormous collection now of KGB documents and others regarding this sort of event.

 

And because it was happening on both sides of the Cold War, it was quite clear that these extraterrestrial vehicles were trying to say,

"Please do not engage these missile systems in a launch that will result in the termination of life on this planet."

So that's not an act of hostility, that is an act of enlightened guidance, and I think that unfortunately, what this gentleman just shared is very important. The compartmentalization of intelligence prevented one hand from knowing what the other had was doing, not only between Russia and the United States, but between and amongst Air Force personnel or agencies. I'll tell you a story that's very interesting.

 

The Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Command, Admiral Harry Trane was present at a facility in Norfolk [Virginia] (which is the Atlantic Command facility) when an enormous extraterrestrial vehicle came in off the north-northeastern coast of North America [in] broad daylight. It was tracked, eventually on at least five separate radar stations.

 

It was photographed by gun-camera footage by pilots, it - uh - we have a witness who was in the Command Center, who had zebra stripes on his uniform which means that you could only be there during a full code zebra alert, which is what you go to during a nuclear war and similar such emergencies. This event took place and the Admiral, because he had not been adequately briefed on this issue, gave the orders for our military jet fighters to force this object down, if possible. Now, they didn't, but the order was given.

 

Now this is a very dangerous situation, and one of the things I - when I met with the General at the time who was head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, whom I personally briefed for over an hour, I said,

"One of the dangers of this because of the super-secret nature of this subject is that enormous mistakes have been made, and can be made in the future that threaten our National Security."

And in this sense you have an Admiral who is one of the Commanders (the Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Command) giving the order to down an extraterrestrial vehicle because they don't know that they exist.

 

They don't know why they're here. Initially, they thought it might be a Soviet missile coming in, and it wasn't. They got on the "hotline" and connected with the Soviet Union and found out that in fact, it was not Soviet.
 

AB: Um Hm.

SG: And then we ended up scrambling jets all the way from the northeastern United States, all the way to Florida! And if you read the testimony of this witness, Merle Shane McDow (had a top-secret clearance) this thing then took off, went over the Azores, it tilted about sixty degrees and then - zip! Went right out into space. Now, the interesting part of this is not only the fact that you had an Admiral who was completely overwhelmed by the event because he had not been adequately briefed, but the reaction to it, which could have been catastrophic.

 

What if we had engaged that object violently and militaristically and resulted in its destruction? This is the sort of thing that is very dangerous and what this gentleman [the caller] just shared, which is a very important bit of testimony, is that he was present at an event that happened well before the event that Colonel Arneson and other witnesses we have describe at Malmstrom, but they were not privy to that prior event and therefore, they also could have taken measures that could have been injurious to our national security, could have been injurious to themselves, or to these visitors.

 

So, there is a tremendous risk with the level of secrecy going on here when you have these sort of commanders left in the dark.
 

AB: I can't remember whether it was STS-48 or one of the - (several of the missions, actually - captured footage which appeared to show objects in space being fired at by something rising out of the atmosphere and taking definite evasive measures. So, there might be evidence, perhaps even space-based, that we are firing at these things.

SG: Well, there is evidence and I have multiple independent corroborating witnesses who have worked in projects where they have developed systems to do this.

 

Now, I remember telling Mrs. Buttros Ghali personally (Leah Ghali, the wife of the Secretary-General of the U.N.) that these sort of things, these sort of events were occurring and that this was a threat to world peace like we have never seen; that you have a rogue, unsupervised group of people taking actions like this that endanger our security, and within the vacuum of this secrecy - part of the problem Art, is that within this vacuum of secrecy, there's not enough discourse.

 

There's not enough sharing of information and perspective to prevent these things from getting out of control, and that's one of the really great risks of this kind of super-secret, unacknowledged project.
 

AB: But, something here just doesn't make sense. I mean, if we've made a deal with them, or -

SG: We haven't made a deal with them. That's all pop-culture nonsense.
 

AB: All right! Then - then we're obviously in fear of them. We wouldn't be firing missiles and put up chase planes and fire at these things if we were at all comfortable with them. So, militarily we're certainly not, and if a small cabal of people know about it somewhere, and we've got our military shooting at them, we've got a definite conflict of interest here.

SG: Yeah, we have a problem, not because there's a threat. We have a problem because the people dealing with this are people who are trained to look at everything they don't understand as a possible threat. I have to be very careful what I'm saying here.
 

AB: That's the way they're trained.

SG: That's the way they're trained. But this is the danger of having people like Senator Clayborne Pell kept out of the loop, this is the danger of having people... the reason for disclosure is that there is an enormous benefit to getting not only the technologies out but the information out and there's a tremendous risk to having, if you will, our wise elders in our society and other people being not only deceived on the issue but flat-out denied any access or control over it.

 

So I would say that if you look at a document, a letter that was written by Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoeter, who was the first CIA director. He wrote this letter where he said that the secrecy surrounding this issue is a threat to the national security. I'm being very careful of what I'm saying here. I'm quoting almost verbatim, although I don't have the document in front of me. And it's important for people to understand that it wasn't that there was a threat from these extraterrestrial vehicles, it was that it was a threat to the national security arising from the extreme and dysfunctional secrecy that evolved around it.

 

And of course, all you have to do is turn to what the - our President Eisenhower said when he said that "there was a threat to our liberties and to the world of the unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by the military-industrial complex" and I am quoting verbatim now.
 

AB: Yes, I know.

SG: My point is that I am not anti-military at all. In fact, our biggest supporters in what the DisclosureProject.org is doing, are military people. I cannot tell you how sincerely people in the senior ranks of the Pentagon have told me that they are appalled - appalled - at how this has been managed and how it is very dangerous. If you imagine, here I am an emergency doctor, and I've been invited to brief the sitting head of intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff...
 

AB: That in itself ...

SG: ...and he was given by me, the code names and code numbers of these covert programs that were current as of the 1990's.
 

AB: Yeah, I bet he loved hearing that.

SG: He loved hearing it. He inquired into these operations and he was told, and I'm quoting:

"Sir, you don't have a need to know."

So, by the time I met with him, he was hopping mad. He said,

"What the hell do you mean, I don't have a need to know? I'm the head of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff!"

AB: [chuckles]

SG: And here I am sitting there trying to explain to him why he doesn't know and what's really going on. Now, this is 'through the looking glass', my friend. Here I am, you know I'm an emergency doctor taking care of heart attacks and car wrecks and stabbings and shootings and I'm here sitting with one of the highest ranking military people in the world trying to explain why he's being lied to and denied access to these projects. It is very dangerous.

 

This kind of secrecy is not only illegal, but it is a threat to the national security of the United States and to world security.
 

AB: Is it illegal?

SG: It absolutely is.
 

AB: Let's think about that. In what - how is it illegal, specifically?

SG: Okay. If you have projects that deliberately lie to a sitting U.S. president and lie to their commanders-in-chief, like the man I just described, and lie to the supervisory committees and members of key committees in the Congress - and I'm going to say something here and I don't mean to overstate my position, but I'm the only living person who has met with all of the above, who is in the UFO community.

 

And if those people are being lied to and deceived and denied access to these projects, there is no way that they are operating under legal, constitutional authority! They are a priori, and on their face, illegal operations.

 

So this is one of the reasons why I said the gentleman who just called in (who is a wonderful military witness) really should not view it as an unpatriotic act to come forward because really what they are doing is blowing the whistle on the biggest illegal operation in the history of the world that has bankrupted our country and has brought the world to the brink of environmental and geopolitical catastrophe, and it is time for people to stand up and say "Enough!"
 

AB: Are they going to? Are they starting to?

SG: Yes, absolutely. We have a constant number of people like this gentleman who just called in, who are willing to come forward and to give their information and the next phase of this, of course, is to find the scientists who understand the physics behind these systems to begin to come forward and bring out the actual operational energy and propulsion systems.
 

AB: Doctor, is it fair to say that this began post-1945, or have we been visited since - I don't know, the beginning? Or did everything really begin to happen post-'45, or '48?

SG: Well, I think that there was an enormous increase in activity after we detonated the first nuclear weapons over Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and at the Trinity site at White Sands.

 

There's clear evidence that they were alarmed. The former editor of Flying Saucer Review, Gordon, told me that in his opinion, we had basically kicked a hornet's nest because when we started detonating thermonuclear weapons at the same time we began to have the early capabilities of rocketry and going into space, a big red flag came up over Earth and said, "Oops! Society at Risk!"

 

Not only at risk for ourselves, but potentially looking down the road at risks to other civilizations. I mean, let's step back, if we can, just for a moment and look at this situation through the eyes of a civilization that's observing us, that have passed this way before...
 

AB: Right.

SG: ...and have been able to survive the level of evolution we are at today. And they see a civilization that in one person's life span have gone from an agrarian society to a society launching vehicles into space; has gone from having muskets and rifles to having thermonuclear weapons. You would have to think that there would be some concern there - and warranted concern.

 

So, I believe that that's what we're dealing with and it's a very serious problem that in my opinion and in the opinion of Brigadier General Lovekin and President Eisenhower, according to him, has been not in the best of hands.

 

It has been terribly mismanaged and what we have to begin to say is that "How do we correct this problem? Let's not just whistle past the graveyard, let's fix it."
 

AB: Well, it's always made sense to me that the nuclear detonation would have been like a gigantic light bulb going off to anybody watching us, and where were the first major sightings, and maybe the crash? Roswell!

SG: Yes, Roswell was the only nuclear bomb squadron in the world.
 

AB: Not a coincidence.

SG: Not a coincidence. And the information I have from former Colonel Corso - people who knew him very well told me that when he was at White Sands, that there were enormously important close encounters that happened there over the first birthplace of the atomic weaponry and, if you look at the testimony we have at DisclosureProject.org, and in the books and videos we have, Colonel [Ross] Diedrickson, who was with the Atomic Energy Commission talks about that every single nuclear weapons storage area and facility - not just Malmstrom and the Strategic Air Command, but the manufacturing and assembly facilities were being visited by these vehicles because there was, apparently, great concern about that.
 

AB: All right, hold it right there, we're at the bottom of the hour and we'll be right back with Dr. Steven Greer. I'm Art Bell.

[commercial break]

AB: ...Dr. Steven Greer is here and what he has to say is very sobering [Art gives out his email address - artbell@mindspring.com or artbell@aol.com]... Also - for my guest, Dr. Greer. People want to get hold of you. People want to learn more. People maybe - I don't know - maybe they want to join the effort, they want to help, they have information to give you. How do they get hold of you?

SG: Well, I think that they can get hold of me best through DisclosureProject.org which is our web site, and I would particularly encourage any of these military witnesses who want to come forward to contact me, as well as any of the people who may have knowledge of these energy and propulsion systems that they can demonstrate because we are poised to bring these out to the public and would like to do so over the next year or two, if at all possible, and we're open to people doing that.

 

We have another web site for the energy company, which is SeasPower.com, and people with the energy and propulsion systems who want to have us evaluate them for them can contact us there.
 

AB: Have you taken stills and video of the contacts you've had?

SG: Yes, we have a number of videos. In fact, we have a wonderful videotape of a very large triangular formation that came over Mt. Shasta, in fact, a few years ago, and we have these from a number of places. When we were in Florida and Pensacola, we had four of these objects appear. Three of them made a triangular formation and signaled with us for, oh, fifteen or twenty minutes, maybe longer. So, we do have these things from around the world, and more importantly, we have some wonderful participants and witnesses who have been present during these events and it's really a wonderful thing to see.
 

AB: Doctor, I started - I began to ask you this before, but I really want to pin it down. You say "signaled with you" and my question was "Have you had anything that went beyond signaling, anything that imparted information that you could tell us about in any way at all?

SG: Well, I think that at this stage we're really primarily focusing on what ability do we have to get these objects onto site and have them interact with us and I think that's really the stage where we are. I mean, there's not the sort of sense of sort of sitting down over coffee and having an exchange of information...
 

AB: No.

SG: ...at this point...
 

AB: No.

SG: ...and that's really, I think, premature, but my sense of it is that there's a lot that's communicated through the willingness to communicate. Think about - it's a very simple thought - if you see an object in our atmosphere, or exo-atmospheric even, and they're able to interact with us, what does it say about the potential that we have as a society to create communication with life in outer space, with life in the universe?

 

This is a very exciting prospect and even if it's in a very preliminary stage at this point, it speaks volumes about the potential down the road if we would organize ourselves around doing it. I have to say there are growing numbers of people who are interested in exploring that and exploring this whole issue.

 

One of the ... I don't know if you received - I think we sent you this paper that's coming out actually tomorrow on August 10, that's titled "The Unacknowledged Threat: Illegal Covert Operations and the Risk to World Peace and the Environment," and this is a paper that I was invited to write for the World Affairs Journal, which is one of the most prestigious foreign, international relations journals in the world.

 

People like George Soros and Colin Powell and others have written in, and there's a special edition coming out tomorrow of the Journal that talks about this sort of secrecy and what's going on in the world, and so, in a sense, you have to understand this is a journal that virtually every Prime Minister and Foreign Minister in the world reads, and in it I describe not only the nature of these illegal covert operations, but the risk to our society of the secrecy and within that, the promise of contact.

 

We have to begin to look at this seriously, and one of the things that we're doing is to move this into serious debate and serious investigation by people in "the mainstream" and I think that this is very important for us to do. And if you look at what we're doing with the CE-5 initiative, where we take people - lay people. I mean it's everyone from - we've had rocket scientists, and we've had housewives with us out here doing this - who say "Well, look. Let's see what we can do to contact these objects."

 

And when one appears in the sky...
 

AB: Yes.

SG: ...and they see you and you see them and they start interacting with you, it is a cosmic moment. It's a truly amazing thing. Maybe, Art, you can come with us on one of these.
 

AB: Well, maybe. But, then it seems logical to pursue the next step, which would be some limited form of transmission of data back and forth, or an attempt at that. Any idea how you might pursue that?

SG: Well, I think there are a number of ways. One is that eventually I'm quite sure that there will be the potential for a landing of one of these craft and communication with the occupants and this is something that when it happens, then it's documented. It'll have to happen at a time when the world is ready for that. Now, I would say that the world should have been ready for this fifty years ago, but because they've been lied to and mislead about the subject, we're playing a game of catch up so (and I don't mean Heinz ketchup, I mean catching up)

 

And this is one of the real problems of the current time we're in. But I think that this is something that is very doable and I don't believe that it's something that is futuristic. I don't think we're talking hundreds of years from now. But remember, they're looking, as we all are, at the entire global situation and so long as we have this dysfunction where there are lies being perpetrated on the subject, and fear-mongering being perpetrated, how far can you take this kind of open contact?

 

This is where the CE-5 initiative and our attempt to make contact with these objects coincide with the Disclosure Project because society has got to not only know about it but find a way of dealing with this issue in a way that is not violent and is not militaristic. We haven't done that yet. We should have done it in the '50s and '60s.

 

We didn't and now it's time that we need to do it, so -
 

AB: If you managed contact on the level you were just talking about, why don't you imagine the military, becoming aware of that fact, would take it out of your hands so quickly?

SG: Well, they are aware of it. I can tell you that when I was first approached by senior military people, who are in these covert programs, was after we had established this kind of contact at fairly close range in Florida, and in Belgium, and in Mexico.

 

And I was visited by the former head of Army Intelligence and a whole bunch of other "spooks" who basically said to me, "what in the hell are you doing?" and I mean, quite frankly that's what they said, and I said, "Look, you know, we really have in a sense discovered the 'Rosetta Stone' of interspecies communication," and we don't have time in this show to go into that, but the fact is that it can be done and it needs to be done because we cannot cede the high ground of contact between our culture and these other civilizations to a purely militarized effort, and I was very clear about that.

 

This was in 1992, April of '92 when I met with these gentlemen. They were trying to persuade me to cease and desist from doing this. I did not -
 

AB: Really? Really? In a forceful manner?

SG: Well, it's always very subtle, but, yeah, it was threatening and I was taken to a hotel room 'til three in the morning, and - whatever it was, very late - and there were sixty-four questions, and basically, one of them said,

"What the hell do you think you're doing?" and I said "Look. I'm a citizen of the Earth who is aware that we're not alone. And I think that it's time that there are people who are reasonably aware and enlightened, and reasonably peaceful in their orientation to the future, to step up to the plate and try to make some sense of this, rather than a purely paranoiac and military approach."

AB: And it ended amicably?

SG: It ended amicably. Subsequently, about a month later, I was at another retreat up in the Rockies, and this group tried to entice me into joining this... I was offered a Board seat on the covert group that deals with this. I was offered enormous sums of money...
 

AB: Oh?

SG: ...enormous access to technology. I said, "No, thank you." They then went to my wife, God bless her, and tried to convince her to convince me. She thought they were charming. I said they were rogues. And I said, "No, thank you," and that's where we left it and then within about thirty days of me saying "Absolutely not, I'm not going to do this. I'm going to stay an independent free agent for the truth," every kind of defamation of my character, up to and including claims that I wasn't actually a medical doctor appeared on the internet.

 

So you can only imagine the kind of nightmare my life has been since 1992.
 

AB: Of course, and now threats! Now telephone threats.

SG: Right. But you know what? We're going just keep on keeping on, because I think the people need to know the truth. I believe in a good future for humanity, no matter how difficult the current birth pangs of our transition may be. If we all pull together, we'll be able to see the future of our dreams.
 

AB: Well, it's certainly true that your best place is right here, right in the middle of the public eye. It's your safest place and I guess you would make that case, wouldn't you, to military men who are starting to get a little older and would like to talk?

SG: Yes. Let me tell you something that was said to me. You know, one of the ways I've been very wise is that I know what I don't know. I've never killed anyone in the emergency department because I knew what I didn't know. Let me tell you, what I didn't know about this stuff in 1990, when I stepped out was a lot!

 

And so when I had guys who were good men who came to me who had experience in national security, military, and these things, I listened! And one of the guys who came forward was a national security lawyer.

 

He said,

"If you want to live to see tomorrow, you don't walk but you run and you get millions of people to hear what you're doing and you keep them informed in real time or they will erase you."

And he told me this and I looked at him like he was a nut and it turned out the man knew what he was talking about, but I listened to his advice and I said,

"You know what? The vanguard, our shield in getting the truth out, is the public."

It's not all these big shots. It's not all these high officials, and I've met with them all, it's you the people. You, the people, are the people who can make this happen and can also watch our backs and that's why we're out here talking with people.
 

AB: So the best thing other than those witnesses that you obviously want to talk to, the best thing for the general public to do in trying to support you - and a lot of them want to support you in your effort - is to what? Just be in touch?

SG: Write their member of Congress, and the President saying they want a disclosure. Help us find these technologies that are hidden in people's garages that have been suppressed. Help us find more witnesses like this wonderful man who called in tonight, maybe pray for us - I mean - quite frankly, I'm not a religious person, but hey! You know, I would like for people to please hold us in Light and pray for our guidance and we want to do this because I think the time has come for the truth to be known and I appreciate anything that people can do to help.
 

AB: All of this said, do you take precautions for your - I mean, it's not just you, it's your wife, it's staff members - do you take some precautions?

SG: Yes, we take very good precautions and it happens on many levels and one of the levels is that there are substantial groups in this covert structure who very much support what we're doing and they have warranted to me our safety and the safety of all my witnesses.

 

The proof of the matter is that I'm still breathing the free air of Earth...
 

AB: True.

SG: ...and none of these military witnesses, even the ones with top secret SCI [Special Compartmented Intelligence] clearances up into the '90s have never even received a phone call threatening them, and I think that - what I say to people is that "Don't be intimidated by the threats. Look at the good future and do the right thing." The only thing I ever ask myself is, "Can I look in the mirror and say 'Am I doing the right thing?'" If the answer's yes, I'll do it!

 

And so I really don't care otherwise whether or not someone wants to threaten me, and I have never - I will tell you that I have a military advisor that's been with me since the early '90s who, when it came up at a meeting once about the security of me and my family, he stopped the discussion and said "This is something we do not need to worry about."

 

And this man has the gravity to deliver. So that's where we are.
 

AB: Okay, and on the other side of the coin, you must be very gratified that with tonight, ABC apparently has decided to do a very serious effort - they tell me, they promise me, two to three hours long. I mean, this is kind of what you've been waiting for, so there must be some gratification in this for you, isn't there?

SG: Oh, yes, of course, and in meeting with the producers I think that there is a sincere attempt and I really think that Peter Jennings is the kind of man who's independent thinking enough that, if he's presented with the facts, he will present them to the public, and I hope he stays in that state of integrity throughout the process because I know that there will be pressures for him to get off the path and to do a sort of "spun" ridiculing piece about it.
 

AB: Well, I don't expect that.

SG: I don't expect it, and I think that it's a very good - and believe me, for a journal like the World Affairs Journal, which is, as I mentioned, read by virtually every Head of State and Foreign Minister in the world - to personally invite me to do a special, 5,000 word article on this issue is unprecedented.
 

AB: Well, as you know, Peter Jennings is Canadian. I read a story in the first hour of the program tonight entitled:

"Canadian Skies Abuzz With UFOs In Route to a Record Year. More Sightings of UFOs in Canada this Year than in Recorded History."

That's something!

SG: Well, I just had a senior minister with the Canadian government contact me. This is something that I won't say who it is.
 

AB: Oh!

SG: But a very - we're talking a major player in a G-7, G-8 country, who is extremely interested in this subject, particularly as it pertains to the environment and the energy and propulsion systems that we're working on and so I would say that there's some very good movement north of the border. There's some very good movement within Congress, by the way, with people we've met with.

 

And so, what we have to say is that, yeah, look. It's an uphill battle. There's a Goliath out there, maybe we're David, I don't know, but we're going to try. The fact of the matter is this is the deck we've been dealt and we've got to deal with it the best we can.
 

AB: The U.S. seems so far behind some other countries, notably one to the north of us, Canada; Mexico to the south of us. Much more involved publicly and from a government point of view than the United States. It just seems so unlikely, unless we know something they don't.

SG: Well, the fact is that we are the Super Power that is straddling the Earth and we do have these technologies developed very fully. While there may be other countries who have significant case files such as in France and Spain and other places, the fact of the matter is, we have had an intensive project that is over fifty years old dealing with the technologies behind these systems and because we're sitting on those secrets, that's where the disinformation is greatest, the control is greatest, and the risk is greatest, and for that reason it's most dysfunctional here and I think that this is a serious problem that needs resolution.

 

I will say something here rather counterintuitive.

 

There are people within the covert group running the secrecy who desperately want to see a solution to it, but they have painted themselves into a corner and don't know how to get out of it. Now, they're still a small minority, but if at one time, I was told when I met with the - Clinton's first CIA director, Jim Woolsey, I was told about a third of this policy group was in favor of bringing this out.

 

I'm told how, it's forty to fifty percent, so it's a growing number of people who want to have this disclosed and whether or not time is on our side remains to be seen.

 

But, certainly the truth is on our side and ultimately the truth will be out there.
 

AB: Is there any indication, Doctor, that there have been communications between the U.S. and other countries on this topic? And we're almost out of time, dammit!

SG: Yes, I know. What a shame. But, look. Yes. Certainly within these classified programs they are transnational and when I say transnational, there are no national boundaries when you're dealing with the corporate, financial and intelligence world on this level of secrecy. It absolutely just busts through anything you would consider a national border, and in a way, it's a rather frightening image.

 

One of the fascinating things about - I'll go back to this "Manchurian Candidate" - believe me, I have no connection to the film at all - but it was interesting how they portrayed this enormous corporation as being this large global corporation with para-governmental and military involvement as well as financial involvement.
 

AB: That's it, Doctor, we're -

SG: That's what you're dealing with, so yeah, it's always been transnational.
 

AB: Buddy, we're out of time! Thank you.

SG: Thank you.
 

AB: Thank you and good night. See you on ABC...