Steven Greer - The Unknown Agenda
Barcelona, Spain, July
Kerry Cassidy (KC): Hi. I’m Kerry Cassidy from Project
Bill Ryan (BR): And I’m Bill Ryan. This is Sunday, the
26th of July, 2009. Have I got that right? I personally want to
say that I’m delighted to be here with Steven Greer.
Of all the people who we get emails asking us to interview, you
are number one on quite a long list. The reason for that is that
people see Project Camelot as continuing to kick the ball that
was kicked off by the Disclosure Project back in 1993. You
started something that we’re doing our best to support you with
in terms of bringing the truth to the world.
Steven Greer (SG): Oh, good. Thank you.
BR: We want to thank you for that.
SG: Oh, you’re welcome. Thank you.
KC: So we have some questions for you, but they might not be the
most comfortable of questions.
SG: Oh, I can take any questions.
KC: Okay. And we’ve heard that you’re not a wilting violet, as
they call it, or whatever. So what we’re wondering here...
because we have different philosophies, I think, and different
approaches, and I think that’s really interesting.
I know that we started out, maybe, at the same place in terms of
we’re taking witness testimony – and certainly you did – and
that tactic was very effective and has stimulated us to go down
the road we went on. We’ve been doing this for a little over
three years now.
I just wondered if you have a philosophy that you feel like, or
a trajectory, that brought you from witness testimony to free
energy, and if you could talk a little bit about that road.
SG: Well, obviously the Disclosure Project involves many
elements. One is the disclosure of the fact that we’re not
The other is that there are highly classified projects that have
been run illegally for about 50, over 50 years, dealing with
And, number three, you cannot say that this has been kept secret
and it’s real without giving la raison d’etre... Why would
something like this be kept secret?
Now, in the early days it could be argued that, well, there were
religious issues, that the people would panic at the idea that
there was life in outer space... or that there were theological
objections. And in fact these still exist.
I had a junior Jet Propulsion Laboratory scientist say the
reason that some of the information about the ancient structures
on Mars has been withheld is that it would “collapse the
foundations of all orthodox religions in the world.” To which I
I mean, it’s time people who think the world’s 6,000 years old
and we rode dinosaurs bareback need to get a life.
BR: We agree with that.
KC: [laughs] Yeah.
SG: Okay, so that was one area. But the largest one... and this
is when everything went deep black in October 1954 – we know it
to the day – was because they had actually figured out, and
mastered, the electromagnetic / gravitic propulsion systems. So
that was 55 years ago.
SG: Okay, so 55 years ago there was the ability to master those
technologies. And obviously, when the Rockefeller Commission,
that reorganized the Department of Defense and the CIA, was put
together by Eisenhower, what they did was reorganize it in a way
so that these sort of issues were handled under work for other
programs, and aerospace contracting entities, and high-tech
entities, and really took it out of the oversight of the
president and the Congress.
And that’s when it all “went south” and has been that way ever
The reason for that is because, if you acknowledge that UFOs are
real, the very next thing that any bona fide scientist or policy
analyst is going to ask is: Well, how in the hell are they
getting from one star system to another?
And when that question is asked, it will be answered, because we
have people on our team who can answer it in great detail.
BR: Yeah, they’re not going around in rocket ships.
SG: And when that is answered – I’m trying to finish one thought
here – when that is answered, you’re going to then see the end
of oil, gas, coal, nuclear power, all of it. There’s a
five-hundred-trillion-dollar asset base that they’re sitting on
and protecting. Two or three hundred people in corporations in
the world control half the wealth of the planet – the net worth
of the planet.
So the secrecy has to be understood within a larger
macro-economic geopolitical crisis where there’s been accretion
of enormous power in the hands of relatively few people, and
that this has gotten worse, not better, since the gilded age of
the Industrial Revolution’s dawn. It’s actually worse now than
it was in the time of Cornelius Vanderbilt and the Rockefellers.
It’s worse now than it was.
KC: Yeah, I definitely understand.
SG: So that, I think is… And so our focus, as we’ve learned more
and more about the reasons for the secrecy and the kinds of
technologies that are extant, is that we have concluded that
it’s very, very important to be able to bring out those energy
systems – at least what I call the “Level One” systems, the ones
that you could put on a box over here... something about the
size of a coffee table. And I’ve seen these.
Now, of course, seeing them and being able to bring them out and
having people release them is another matter. But I’ve seen
They extract energy from... some would call the zero-point
energy field, some would call it the quantum vacuum flux
field... whatever you want to call it. But in the fabric of
space-time around us there’s enormous electromagnetic potential
that can be touched into and brought out, and that is one of the
practical implications of disclosure.
I mean, there are many implications. One is informational, one
is diplomatic contact, and one is the issue of the science and
technology which could transform the planet, get us off of oil,
stop global warming, end the crisis of the have and the
have-nots and the poverty in the world. So that, I think,
resonates with many people.
There are a certain number of people who are interested in
extraterrestrial life. There’s a much larger number of people
who are concerned about the environment, energy crisis, the
poverty in the world, etcetera.
KC: So, is what you’re saying that what you were propelled
towards is the latter? Because I know your emphasis is now
really free energy, or it seems to be.
SG: No it isn’t. No, no, no.
KC: Well, it seems to be. Maybe I misunderstand…
SG: You need to not mis-state my priorities. Let me be very
clear on this. We have three programs going on with equal bore –
equal bore – simultaneously.
KC: Oh, really? Okay.
SG: Number one is CSETI, the Center for the Study of
Extraterrestrial Intelligence, which is an interplanetary,
interstellar, diplomatic initiative. That was the founding
entity and it’s still the primary focus.
The second is the Disclosure Project. That started as Project
Starlight when I was briefing the CIA director and the Clintons
and all these people.
It then evolved into the Disclosure Project when Clinton said: I
won’t do it because I’ll end up like Jack Kennedy. And the
Congress people that we met with said: This is too big a fish
for us to reel in. We’re not going to do it.
So it kind of devolved onto our shoulders. Then that’s why we
did in 2001 – to correct the date – the National Press
Conference event and the Disclosure Project. And that still
continues. We still continue to do that.
Then the third is the OrionProject.org and the focus on trying
to identify people who have an understanding of these new
physics and sciences so we can bring out some of the practical
SG: So those three things are going on with equal bore. We have
teams of people working on all of them.
KC: Oh, I see.
SG: I’m sort of the coordinator or head of those three projects,
but they’re interrelated. They’re actually three sides of a
pyramid or whatever... not pyramid, but three sides of one
entity and three facets that are interlocking.
KC: I had a misunderstanding. Part of the reason is because…
SG: No, that’s good that you brought it up because a lot of
people do have that misunderstanding.
KC: …we get a newsletter. The Orion Project, or however you
refer to it, newsletter comes into my inbox and it is, you know,
exclusively talking about more of the free energy side of
things. So it’s a misconception, you know, but is out there, as
you say. It’s very interesting to hear that you’re continuing
SG: Yeah. And people have to understand... You know people say:
What about disclosure?
I say: We have the testimony of 110 of these military witnesses
out there. We have DVDs and other materials and books out there
with thousands of pages of government documents.
We have put this positive proof and testimony out there and that
then has launched a worldwide disclosure movement in many, many
countries, as you know.
SG: At this point, when we started that endeavor, it was 30 or
40 percent of the public thought these were real. Now it’s 80
percent. Some countries – in polls that they did recently here
in Spain it was 90-some percent – think that we’re not alone and
ETs are real.
So we feel that the big over-arching strategy of establishing
that fact happened. What has not happened is, at least within
America, an official acknowledgement of the issue and the ending
of the secrecy. But this is due to a complex problem that I work
on behind the scenes, for that’s where the problem is.
The problem is within Majestic. And the problem is within
conventional political leaders and the military-industrial
When we started this effort I had about a third of this Majestic
group who thought what we were doing was something they would
support. Now it’s 70 percent. Now the other 30 percent would
probably like to see me dead.
But the point is – and they’re vicious – there are 70 percent of
them now who are really lining up. This includes the elements
within Majestic that are in Europe, that are within the Masonics,
that are within a lot of secret organizations that are fed up
with the secrecy and know that we’re at the end of how far we
can take this silly game of secrecy and secret power.
So a lot of the work that I’ve been doing, and it has directly
to do with disclosure, has to do with trying to fix that highly
dysfunctional dynamic which cannot be ignored.
You cannot pretend like those lions aren’t out lurking in the
jungle. You don’t have to capitulate, but you have to try to
educate them and give them another vision.
One thing I say to the people is that people who are addicted to
secret power, it’s... Kissinger once said power is the ultimate
aphrodisiac... that then the secret power would be that on
steroids and Viagra and every other thing – quite blunt.
And so, one of the real issues becomes what can you… You can’t
just take away. You have to give.
So my job is to try to also give some of these leaders, both
conventional leaders and people who are within these classified
projects, a new vision – a vision that can guide the world out
of its current direction, into a path of peace, safety, justice,
free energy, and a whole new transformation of our civilization
on this planet – very quickly.
Because, you know, we’ve run out of time, in my opinion. I don’t
think we have another 50 or 100 years to fritter away.
KC: As it happens, neither do they. I mean, what we get from our
secret witnesses and from people that are exposed to the
Illuminati philosophy constantly is that our time is running
out, in terms of…
Like, we just heard from a secret witness – and I’m running this
by you to hear whether this coincides with what you know – that
there is around ten months left of food before it runs out on
the planet, and that there’s another three to four years’ worth
I mean, I don’t know if this is down to the minute or not, or
whether it's more vague than it was stated to me, or more... You
know, where you would fall in that category, in terms of how you
SG: Let me say that there are a lot of… My father-in-law used to
famously say: Paper does not refuse ink; and in the modern era,
that the computer screen does not refuse digits. So, in other
words, anything can be said.
Now, one has to… My own assessment of that is that there are
competing interests that try to use whatever axis that they have
to provide a certain paradigm that is highly eschatological. The
eschatological axis within Majestic is a very powerful one.
I remember meeting with a member of a Royal Family in Europe
back in the ‘90s and his entire purpose in providing funding to
abduction researchers was to – and I know who they are, all the
mainline ones – was so that they would put the information out
to the public so that the public would learn to hate enough of
the aliens so that we could have an interplanetary war, which
would be the Armageddon that would precipitate the return of
KC: Yeah, we’ve heard this.
SG: Now, this was a very specific Opus Dei perspective and that
is really what is driving… It’s like Ahmadinejad in Iran saying
that, well, it’d be okay if we went to nuclear war with
Israel because that would force this Twelfth Imam, which is their
return of their Christ, to return to Iran.
SG: So this eschatological end the world perspective is…
KC: So you’re actually saying... Just to cut to the chase here,
you’re saying that this man’s testimony, to what I just said
about ten months and four years, is basically him being
programmed by the controllers, in a certain sense.
SG: Well, it’s “through a glass dimly”. In other words, yes,
we’re headed for a crisis. Yes, we’re headed towards a hiatus,
can I call it that, in the situation.
But what they don’t understand is that it is the end of one era
and the opening of another. It isn’t the end of life on Earth.
It is not going to be the end of the human race on this planet.
These are all…
KC: We would certainly agree with that.
SG: This is… And so the conflation of certain misinterpreted
spiritual traditions, whether it’s from the Book of Revelations
or elsewhere, or the Mayan calendar and 2012, has created this
sort of eschatological juggernaut – which is very Scientological,
it’s very Majestic, and it has a lot of underpinnings within the
philosophy of why the secrecy has continued on like it is.
This is one major axis of why the secrecy is continuing. The
other one is the technological and money and control, the
macro-economic control of the planet.
My point to people is that... For example, now I’ve been doing
this for 19 years and I’ve had… You know, if you brief the CIA
director you’ve had some good access, and that’s 16 years ago.
My family put the first man on the Moon. So I have had access to
people within classified projects for a lot of my life.
For example – and I know that we’re going to probably disagree
on this because I saw what you wrote on your blog after my talk
last night – there are people who have been exposed to what they
wanted them to see. This Bob Lazar was one that they then allow
to speak out.
Now the question is: What’s the agenda behind that allowing?
I have had more than a dozen people who have worked in
Dulce and in
Pine Gap in Australia and other
places where they have actually been growing the Gray and
Reptilian species that people think are ETs.
And the people who’ve been in the projects think they’re working
alongside an alien – and they’re not. They’re absolutely what
are called nano-bio-machines and they are Programmed Life Forms.
There is no question that that is going on.
So the larger question becomes: If someone comes up to you with
just an empirical observation, what is it they’re seeing?
Now I’m going to cross over into something even more
We have some people at Lockheed, and another program... I can’t
say where it is but it’s in the South in an underground
facility, and its chief scientist is someone I knew very well.
They have developed electromagnetic systems where they can put
someone into a state, and they can go into – and this gets into
a cosmological, complex discussion now – a lower astral, or
denser astral field. And some would call this demonic.
They can actually see beings and creatures there and bring them
in three-dimensional and materialize in flesh and blood –
through these electronics.
So a lot of these things that people are seeing have nothing to
do with interstellar and extraterrestrial.
So when I’m talking... when I talk about the interstellar
civilizations that also have transdimensional capability... You
can’t go through interstellar space at the speed of light or
SG: But there’s a cosmological indigestion happening within
Ufology and disclosure that I find disturbing because people are
conflating interdimensional with extraterrestrial with PLFs,
that are Programmed Life Forms, man-made.
All of this is being put together as if it is one thing, and it
isn’t. It’s, unfortunately, much more complex than this. This is
BR: We would agree with that as well. It’s very complex.
SG: This is why, when Martin Cannon, back in the late ‘80s, put
together a 2000-footnoted paper and collection proving the
military-human involvement with abductions, and that the
creatures they were using were not ET... It wasn’t some alliance
between Majestic and these ETs. The ETs wouldn’t bother with
Now, I say they’re aliens, but they’re not extraterrestrials.
Okay? And now we’re getting into… and people say I’m being
cheeky. I’m not, because these are very bizarre creatures. Some
of them even… I’m going to take it one step further.
You’ve all heard of Roswell, and you’ve all heard that there
have been a number of electromagnetic weapons systems that have
targeted and knocked down interstellar vehicles... not at a
great kill rate in the early days. – I hate to use the words
kill rate. It’s terrible. – But it’s become more and more
efficient since SDI, and since the ‘90s, particularly in the
last five or ten years.
What happened, however, in the early days... They had enough
crude stuff. And of course, we had things like the Philadelphia
Experiment – which did not happen in Philadelphia. It happened
in Rhode Island. That was just a cover story... that’s another
But that was in the ‘40s. So there were very advanced
electronics that were already being used.
And by the time the
extraterrestrials showed up when we were detonating nuclear
weapons, we were able, at Roswell, at our only nuclear bomb
squadron, to have one of these weapons and a radar dome, or
configuration, that caused the two of those to crash.
SG: There were bodies on that. Some of them were living, and I
have a witness who actually handled one of the living ones as
late as 1950-’51 here in Virginia not far from where I live, at
Camp Pearry [spells] P-E-A-R-R-Y, a very top secret facility.
[Ed note: Greer means
Camp Peary, Army experimental training
center near Williamsburg]
Now, what’s interesting is that that genetic material from some
of those bodies has subsequently been cloned, from a number of
Now, you know, I have a daughter with a Ph.D. in neuroscience
and genetics from the most prestigious university in the world.
What I’ve done is, I’ve looked at this, sort of... What the
current state of neuroscience is in the non-classified world is
that if they wished to, they could take cells from a human and
clone them. Absolutely.
SG: Now, imagine what has existed within the classified world,
because these were the people who were the… These were the
humans who were the spiritual descendants of Mengele and the
Nazis, Wernher von Braun and that whole cell.
KC: You’re talking about the scientists.
SG: The scientists who were brought into these classified
projects, and who were at the foundation of the CIA and the
early space program. So the highly compartmented programs that
deal with this issue…
SG: And this is the thing: Everyone talks about antigravity and
this and that, but what they forget are the enormous advances
that have happened between the early ‘40s and now in genetics
and bioengineering and neuroscience.
Those have gone into application where they now have created
these creatures that people think: Oh, that’s an
extraterrestrial. I say: It is NOT an extraterrestrial!
So the whole thing has deliberately become confused so that
people will make an assessment that there are the good aliens
and the bad aliens.
And if we step into that “cowboys and Indians” mindset, they can
then divide the human race into another war footing that will
fulfill the Majestic plan that was hatched in the ‘50s, that
will take us, as Douglas McArthur said in his last address to
the Congress, to interplanetary war, which is the World War III
SG: So most of retail UFOlogy – I would say 90-plus percent of
it – has embedded within it this message and this information
and these images for the purpose of
Majestic. Now, I think
people do it completely innocently because…
BR: I want to ask a direct question here because this is
personal, and I haven’t said this on camera before. So here we
go. I’m an
abductee, and I’m a mountaineer. I was abducted out
of my tent in December, 1981 in the Himalayas on the slopes of
Makalu, which is in Nepal on the border of Tibet. And that
wasn’t done by the military.
This was done in December, in winter in the Himalayas. I was
taken out of my tent, floated over the glacier in the middle of
the night and it was minus 40 degrees. This wasn’t the military
who were doing that. They couldn’t do that.
SG: I’m not saying all contact has been military. I’m being very
specific. I’m saying that there’s enough… Let’s look: If you
have a nugget of gold and you dump a whole bunch of fool’s gold
SG: …and no one’s doing an assay. And the question becomes: What
part of it is extraterrestrial, what part of it is
SG: …what part of it is manmade? And what part of it is some
mixed-up, where people...?
And here I’ll make it a little more complicated. There are
people who’ve had ET contact and when these classified projects
find out about it they will then target them for an abduction so
that their paradigm and their perception of this will become
confused. This is…
KC: Okay. I think what happens here... We are aware of this
level that you’re talking about. We’re aware of all these
different dimensions because we’ve basically... (“dimensions” –
not dimensions, but “dimensions of this argument”) ... because
we’ve been exposed to these levels by different secret
But, and I think if we have a disagreement, what it is, is... I
don’t know if it’s completely, you know? It’s not an either/or
question. It’s a how much? It’s a percentage, as you say.
It’s going to be: Is there, sometime, abductions that are
ET-related that are real ET-related – okay? – and handled by a
certain group of ETs? Is there a MILAB element to it, and is
that maybe the largest portion? Highly probable. Okay?
But is it exclusively that there are only good ETs? I think that
when you extrapolate that, that’s where I have a problem.
SG: I think the problem is with the caricature of the…
KC: Because I think that that’s, philosophically, a problem of a
limited way of looking at reality.
SG: No, I think the problem is a Manichaen view that has to
divide entire species into good and bad. This is precisely what
Hitler did when he would say, you know, the Jews are bad and
they’re dirty and they’re this… I think we have to be extremely
KC: I don’t think it’s necessary to do that quite so much as it
is in terms of the overall… I mean, were talking universes.
Okay? We’re talking multiple species out there that go beyond
this solar system, certainly…
SG: Oh, I’m very aware of that.
KC: …and we’re talking about life in general, okay, so…
SG: But the point is that…
KC: I don’t think we can sit here and make a statement like what
I heard you say on stage yesterday, which was: There are no bad
ETs. I mean, how absurd.
SG: No, I think you could say that there is no evidence that the
planet has been invaded by hostile – is the word I used –
civilizations that have an intent…
KC: So far, to you; that you have not… In other words…
SG: You can’t prove a negative. This is axiomatic. What I can
KC: Well, then we have a problem. [laughs]
SG: You can’t prove a negative.
KC: In other words, that’s the point.
SG: No, no. But it is the point. You can’t prove a negative, but
what you can do is go with the evidence that you do have.
One of the sets of evidence we have through CSETI, which has
gone around the world and made contact all over the world with
thousands of people... We have never had a harmful event happen.
We have never had anything resembling anything that has
frightened or harmed anyone on the contact team.
On the other hand, we have had members of our team that have
been targeted with these
abduction events, including myself.
KC: Right. I agree.
SG: So, what I have to go with is the evidence that I have. I
also know that there’s the stage craft, to use an Institute for
Strategic Studies document that I have, that talks about the
stage craft of abductions because of its psychological warfare
value to the agenda of an Us versus Them Manichaen worldview
that would redound to the benefit of the military-industrial
complex. So this is very circular.
I think that what I’m saying is one has to be very careful if
you’re going to be involved with disclosure and contact in
saying: This group is bad, this group is good.
We’re good and we’re bad. And we’re slipping right back into the
Israelis versus the Palestinians, the Jews versus the
Christians, the Muslims versus the whatever…
KC: Okay, but this is not where we’re going…
SG: But if you say that there are bad aliens that are working
with a secret government, then…
KC: The language is actually
Service to Others versus Service to
Self, and that, in itself, is also a matter of degree. So it’s
not really good. Anyone…
SG: But you can’t judge. See, here’s the problem.
KC: Well, none of us can. That’s my whole point here.
SG: Well, that’s my whole point!
KC: It’s a matter of degree.
SG: And I think before one starts going down the path of The sky
is falling! and we start unleashing this Manichaen worldview of
Here are the ones that are Service to Others and here’s the ones
that are selfish... I would say that there’s some enlightened
SG: And let’s back this up just a little further. Let’s say that
KC: Especially by the invaders.
SG: By the who?
KC: [laughs] If there’s an invasion race, then enlightened
self-interest is going to be the predominant model by which
they’re going to operate, right?
SG: And, you know, you’re entitled to that. I think you’re…
KC: I’m positing. All I’m doing here… Look, until it actually
happens in black and white…
SG: Look, where have they invaded? Who has been invaded? And
KC: There is evidence. In other words, you can get evidence on
both sides of the question.
SG: Well, but to characterize it as an invasion... What if there
is an interstellar group that have different… Different ones of
them have different functions. For example…
SG: Okay, I’m going to take this a little further. There’s one
group that has a very specific function. You might call this the
Noah’s Ark function, that this planet is under tremendous
environmental stress. We’re losing thousands of species and
plants and animals.
I have spoken with people about the landing in Provence, of this
ET craft in a lavender field, and there were these little ETs
out picking lavender. It sounds hilarious. What were they doing?
BR: Just like the movie, yeah.
SG: Absolutely happened and it left physical trace. Could there
be a human
genome project that’s trying to protect the human
genome and a genome project for Gaia, the Earth?
There could be all kinds of things going on that are beyond our
ability to say: That’s happening by people who are selfish and
invaders. And that’s happening by people who are the good ones.
KC: Exactly. Yes.
SG: I think that that sort of dichotomy and dualism that I read
on your blog is the exact script that Majestic would want people
to buy into to support interplanetary war. I think that there is
KC: Yeah. I think that the paranoia over interplanetary war per
se, and that scenario, is laudable, okay. In a certain way we
understand that you’re coming from a heartfelt perspective when
you talk about Let’s not get caught up in polarities. Okay?
But what we don’t want to do is analyze this scene, this
scenario, and the realities that are out there, and say we’ve
come to definitive statement where we can say: There are only
Now, let me tell you why that’s dangerous as well, because what
that does is leave people, humans, and humanity possibly in
general, in a vulnerable position. They are then going around
following ET like the Pied Piper down whatever road they’re
SG: No. I’ve always said, and unfortunately you haven’t read my
books and things, but…
KC: Actually I have.
SG: Well, I have made it very clear that there are two things
that are equally dangerous – the deification of these visitors
or the demonization of them.
SG: Both are equally dangerous, and I’ve said this since the
KC: Then we’re in agreement. But what you said on stage was not
SG: I didn’t deify them and I didn’t demonize them. My point is
that we’re living in a universe together; we’re going to have to
live together in that universe.
SG: The solutions are not going to be name-calling and We’re
better than you are and Those are in service to self and Those
in service to others and this whole thing.
I think we have to look at this from a much larger picture, and
that is not only Earth, but the whole cosmos is going through a
KC: Right, that’s true.
SG: It is not just an Earth moment. It’s a universal moment…
SG: …the hallmark of which is universal peace, the hallmark of
which is that. And so it is also true...
KC: The ideal would be...
SG: ...that interstellar civilizations are not allowed to leave
their biosphere until they have become in agreement for peace.
KC: That’s an assumption.
SG: This has been proven, because if these civilizations…
KC: No way. Nothing’s been proven on this planet to that degree
of sophistication. There’s no way…
SG: Well, if they were here and they were invading and they were
hostile, they would not have waited for us to have the kind of
weapons we have today. They would have absolutely shut this
civilization down in 1945.
KC: On the contrary... I mean, we have to actually get into a
whole socio-political look at what it is to be an ET
space-faring culture in search of planetoids or planets, and
building new environments, and then what you do with them.
In a sense, you can actually take the Earth as a microcosm and
you can look at How did it go when we took over different
SG: Yeah. But see, this is the whole problem…
KC: …and what was the model? Then we get to space and we also
have to figure…
SG: This is a huge problem. You’re engaging in an
anthropocentric projection onto interstellar civilizations…
KC: As above, so below. In other words…
SG: Well, so in your belief. But I think that you’re completely
involved in this.
KC: All I’m saying is that we’re part of the universe and you
can’t eliminate... And there’s no definitive decision on this
part. You’re making absolute statements.
SG: Do you think our classified projects have traveled
SG: They have not.
KC: We’ve got evidence that they have.
SG: Well, I’d love to see you prove it.
BR: We don’t have evidence but in May 2001 you said that they
have superluminal capability.
BR: What have we done? Gone to Pluto with superluminal ability?
It takes five seconds.
SG: No, because they’re not allowed to use it. Now here’s
something that… There is a quarantine on this planet until we
become peaceful. This is why, if you look at…
KC: There is a philosophy that there’s a quarantine.
SG: No. There is. If you look at even what Neil Armstrong said
KC: Why? Because an ET told you? I mean, really, let’s get down
to it. We’re all in communication with different races…
SG: Well, let’s get back to the cover-up with what Neil
Armstrong was heard saying. It’s in Timothy Good’s book, Above
Top Secret. You can read it.
SG: And I’m sure you have. You’ve read it.
KC: A mind-controlled astronaut is what you’re talking about.
You’re going to give me testimony from a mind-controlled astronaut.
SG: No, no.
BR: Let’s hear where this goes. I’m interested.
SG: He said that when... We were basically warned off the Moon,
and that’s why we didn’t continue to go.
KC: And I believe these warnings exist. There has been evidence
that we’re warned off Mars because certain craft have never made
it there, have been shot down, have disappeared, have had
technical problems that haven’t been explained by NASA.
SG: Well, and one can put a xenophobic spin on that. Or one can
say that perhaps there’s a wiser cosmic order that says that
until a civilization reaches a certain amount of civility for
the civilization, and peace, they are not allowed to travel
amongst the stars; that the entry ticket is peace. And I think
that is the situation.
KC: Okay, I understand that’s your philosophy.
SG: No, it’s not my philosophy. It’s what the evidence… This is
not how I started out. This is what I have found to be true from
many different witness testimonies and the observation overall
KC: But our witness testimony would contradict that. So what do
you do with that?
SG: Well, fine, I’d like to speak to them.
KC: Yeah, absolutely, and maybe we’ll have to compare notes. You
know, really, to be honest with you, this is valuable, because
what happens, for better or for worse, is we’re both out there.
We’re both investigating these questions and they are open
questions. Actually, the information has…
SG: They are. But I think it’s rather unhelpful that you go onto
a blog and say that what I’m saying and doing is sinister.
KC: But I said it was…
SG: I think that, you know, I have never said anything harmful
KC: It’s insidious. The reason it’s insidious is because…
SG: Insidious and this and that.
KC: …it leaves the Earth vulnerable…
SG: And I think this is exactly the kind of thing, and I’m going
to absolutely... You know, you invited me to an interview.
SG: I’m going to provide an interview. If you want to over-talk
everything I say, you can over-talk what I say.
KC: You over-talk us.
SG: But I am telling you that… But I’m being interviewed. So the
KC: [laughs] It’s mutual. See, you don’t know this and I’m sorry
we didn’t have time to tell you our philosophy of how we conduct
an interview, but I did kind of warn you…
SG: You obviously want to have a debate.
KC: … that we have differences of opinions.
SG: We have differences of opinion, and that’s fine, but I think
the most dangerous thing we can do is with... See, everyone has
SG: To start making sweeping judgments that are negative... And
you can say: Well, it’s not negative. We’re just saying that
they’re in service to self versus service to others, and couch
it however you wish.
But if we go down that path, we’re already creating a new
cosmological Us versus Them, which is the absolute
recapitulation of the mistake on Earth for the last 10,000
years. I think we can do better than that. I think we have to
learn to look at these things…
And let’s say that everything that your philosophy and how
you’re viewing this is correct. If it’s a hundred percent
correct, I would still say the path of wisdom is education…
SG: …elucidation, engagement peacefully, higher states of
consciousness – all of this.
SG: I don’t think it consists in characterizations,
name-calling, what have you. Now that goes on on the diplomatic
front and between nations on the Earth, and I think we have to
be very careful not to engage in that sort of anthropocentric
projection of the current state of duality of the human
condition on these visitors. I think it may be much more
difficult to make those kinds of assessments.
But if we go down that path, what we’ll be doing is that we’ll
be dragging the baggage of the old era into this pivotal time,
this embryonic time, where we’re trying to transition to a new
civilization – the hallmark of which will be universal peace.
I don’t think we’re going to be going into a period of time of
competing planetary systems having wars. I think that this is –
all of that – is the Scientological view and it’s many of the
I think that actually we’re going to go through a quantum
transformation that’s global and interplanetary that will make
this quite clear in the coming years, if not months.
I think that time is getting very short for how much more time
we’re going to have before there’s this large transformation.
And I think the other thing is to say... I would say to people:
If there is a civilization that is here for their own purely
selfish interest, and have not a shred of altruism or concern
for humanity or Earth, those are the beings I would want to meet
And I’ve said this for years, because you need a diplomatic
initiative to North Korea and Iran and China more than you do to
Great Britain, if you’re an American, let’s say. So this is…
KC: Absolutely, but you can’t be in denial of the potentiality…
SG: There’s no denial here. I’m not some sort of Pollyanna fool.
And that characterization of me being in denial... I’m not in
denial about anything. I’m just saying that...
KC: Well, I… Wait, wait, wait. You’re personalizing this in a
way that it’s not personal. In other words, what I said is I
didn’t direct it at you. I said…
SG: Jan can give me what you wrote on the blog. I’ll show you
what you wrote on the blog.
KC: Excuse me. I said that what you said on stage was insidious.
And it’s insidious because what it does is leave, again,
humanity… Look, let’s both agree here…
BR: It’s a real misdirect.
KC: We both love…
BR: It’s a real misdirect.
SG: [to Bill] [unclear]
BR: It’s a misdirect.
KC: We both love humanity. We’re both here to make sure that we
make it through this next era. Okay?
KC: And we can say we have a common goal, in that sense.
KC: When I say it’s insidious, I’m not saying you personally are
insidious. What I’m saying is what you’re saying leads to an
insidious state of affairs if people out there were to become
disarmed and completely vulnerable and allow, like I said, ET to
take over “the sovereignty” of the Earth and of humanity to
SG: This is not at all… I never suggested that.
KC: …to develop on its own. But there are implications to what
you’re saying when you say: All ETs are good.
SG: Your implications about that.
KC: When we’re using the words good and bad... Let’s be honest,
we’re using the words good and bad because we have to use
language and we’re just using it in a simplistic way…
KC: …to cover a very wide spectrum of what it means to be good,
philosophically, and what it means to be bad, philosophically.
We’re not naïve, and we’re not looking at this in a black and
white way, so let’s not go there.
SG: We have to be very careful because that slips into that very
quickly. That language slips into that paradigm very, very
KC: Sure, and it could be misleading. I appreciate that.
SG: And I think it is misleading, but I think the other thing,
that it’s also very dangerous. I’m not at all suggesting that
humans disarm. My whole message is about humans empowering, not
only in consciousness, but in organization and every other way.
BR: We agree.
SG: And moreover, you said that we need to be armed. Well, yeah.
Armed with what? I think that knowledge…
KC: That’s the other discussion. We can talk… That’s spiritual.
SG: It is spiritual, and this is the chief purpose of CSETI.
KC: Knowledge is to question constantly. What we’re not positing
is answers here, so much as Let’s keep exploring.
And at no point do we decide that “all ETs are good” because
suddenly we have a paradigm that says: You cannot leave the
planet beyond a certain point unless you believe in “peace” and
unless you have obtained a certain level of civilization.
That means that you are there for good, all good, and therefore
better than humanity. There’s sort of an implication under
SG: And your alternative would be what? Conflict with the ones
who aren’t good?
BR: No, that’s polarizing it in a way that we are not.
KC: It’s a model of universes, multi dimensions, that is more
BR: You’re polarizing it.
SG: What’s your answer then?
BR: My answer…
SG: What’s your answer to these ones that are in service to
KC: It’s complex. It’s more complex.
SG: The ones that you see…
KC: There are no limits. Go ahead.
BR: Okay. My response to this is to agree with you that it’s a
very complex situation and there may be alien agendas that we
are not able to understand. Just like the farmer can understand
what the farmer’s doing, but not what the veterinary surgeon is
doing. You know?
If you approach a wild animal because you want to give it some
food, the wild animal’s going to run away because it doesn’t
trust the human.
BR: There are all sorts of aspects to this that we may be very
presumptuous in our ability to understand. But my point is that
it’s dangerous... And I’m not even saying that it’s a deliberate
misdirect, but I do believe it was...
Personally I believe it was a misdirect to lead people to
believe, with the authority position that you have in the UFO
community, that if anybody feels that all… that anything other
than All ETs are friendly, then they’re somehow working on the
That’s a polarization that’s not true. We don’t agree with that
– at all! We think that there’s a big maybe category, where for
sure some ETs are friendly.
BR: I’ve met some of them, personally.
BR: I don’t even think that my abduction was ill-intended. I
think that this was a program in some way for something, which
I’m doing now. You may have had a parallel experience.
But I don’t know what’s happening. I’m willing to roll with that
wave, because I don’t think they intended any harm to me. But
they sure as hell weren’t military. That wasn’t a
SG: No, but my point is… Here’s what I said.
BR: But we don’t know these things. We don’t know…
SG: My point is that there’s no evidence that these visitors are
BR: Sorry. Give me 20 seconds, yeah?
KC: Actually, there is…
BR: But we don’t know – hang on. We don’t know, but neither do
you. And you shouldn’t say that you know and you don’t. That’s
SG: Well, actually…
KC: Yeah, let’s get to the place where, you know, the fact is…
SG: I’m saying there is…
BR: …irresponsible because he doesn’t know, and you’re presuming
BR: …and you’re capitalizing on your authority position in the
UFO community and that’s irresponsible. You’re leading people
who are feeding off your words, and you shouldn’t do that. You
should be very…
SG: No, I am totally not irresponsible. I’m trying to do this
SG: …because I know what’s at stake if people are lead into the
path of panic and polarity and duality.
BR: But we’re not doing that.
SG: And this is absolutely the impression…
BR: And you’re giving the opposite impression, saying: Don’t
worry about a damn thing.
SG: No, no.
BR: And that’s equally bad!
SG: I’m not saying Don’t worry. I’m saying… Let me tell you…
KC: Why not just enlighten awareness.
SG: Can I answer any of this?
BR: Do it. Go on.
SG: It’s too long…
KC: [laughs] I think you’re answering it. I think you’ve been
answering, but go ahead.
SG: Is that? Because no, you haven’t heard my answer yet. My
answer is what I consistently say, is that there’s no evidence
that they’re hostile and that we have to be in an armed
position, in a Star Wars SDI position. And that dealing with it
in that way is the last thing that we should be doing.
BR: I agree with that.
SG: So, whether or not…
SG: Let me finish.
BR: Wait a minute.
SG: I cannot say that there is… You can’t prove a negative. I’ve
said this three or four times. I can go with the evidence I’ve
seen. Moreover, I can go with the experience of 19 years, of
thousands of people in CSETI expeditions and experiences we’ve
had with these visitors... none of which has been fearsome,
negative, invasive. None of this sort.
The other point that I have to make is that if it were true that
there were civilizations that had self-interest and were going
around the cosmos colonizing and invading different worlds or
planetoids or what have you, then I would say that those are the
civilizations we need to find a way to engage. And it isn’t
going to be down the barrel of a laser weapon or an
electromagnetic pulse weapon.
KC: I think you’re making a jump. I mean, I have to say here...
SG: Let me finish. I haven’t finished my answer.
KC: You’re making a jump to Star Wars from us just saying there
may be ETs with some self-interest guiding their paradigm.
SG: Well, but let’s take a step back from humanity for a moment
and look at this through the eyes… Let’s say there is a
civilization like you’re describing.
BR: What civilization are we describing?
SG: The ones that you think are not in service to others, but in
service to self.
BR: We think they may have agendas that are not necessarily in
our interest. That’s not a polarized position.
SG: Right. But let’s say that’s the case…
KC: And it doesn’t mean we want to shoot them in the head,
SG: Okay, but let’s say that’s true. I don’t think it is true
but maybe I’m wrong. It’s possible, I mean. I don’t pretend to
know everything. Maybe I’m wrong.
But let’s say that’s true. What might have instigated that?
Now, let’s go back 100 years. We’re in horse-and-buggies and
rifles and things. My grandmother, born in the late 1800’s
post-reconstruction South, saw her son design the Lunar Module,
put the first man on the Moon, and now her grandson doing what
We’ve gone from horse and buggies to the capacity for
interstellar travel and antigrav, and dematerialization and
transdimensional technologies, from gunpowder and the early
stages of the Industrial Revolution. At the same time we’ve gone
from rifles and machine guns to thermonuclear weapons.
Is it a coincidence that the sort of Pandora’s Box that opened
when we started detonating thermonuclear weapons was because it
was having an effect beyond just the Earth, transdimensionally?
Is it possible that the trajectory they saw our civilization
going on, these ones you think may not have our best interest in
heart, may have seen us going on a trajectory that, if it
continued on that trajectory would lead to us going into their
neighborhood with weapons of mass destruction, with our
unchecked simian tendency towards war-making and what have you?
So, I’m trying to say let’s look at this for just a moment
through another perspective that’s non-human, if we can. It’s
very difficult because we are human. I think…
KC: I met Robert Solace. He watched the craft fly over, okay? In
Montana, the missile silos, and turn them off. I’ve talked with
him in his house about these experiences, as you have in your
KC: We’re totally on the same page on that. There’s no doubt
whatsoever that they came and they are absolutely adamant that
this technology not go... first of all, not happen on the Earth…
SG: It would destroy the planet.
KC: …but second of all, not go beyond. It’s actually
interdimensional in its destructive ability.
SG: Correct. Yes, I’m very aware of this.
KC: So, I think we’re in agreement on that.
SG: In other words, what kind of hornets nest did we pick? And
therefore, what kind of provisions and things are going on as a
consequence of that? So, I always say…
You know, everyone starts getting into the, oh, This alien
agenda and That alien agenda, and I would say: What would be
more constructive is that the human agenda be fixed. That we
learn to live on this planet and fix…
KC: No disagreement there.
SG: …fix our own home. Create a peaceful civilization rather
than worrying about other motives from other civilizations.
Here’s what I predict. I predict that if we were to do that, and
learn to live together without clubbing each other over the head
and killing each other on this planet – as below, so above –
that we would see a change, perhaps, in the cosmic order for
So, rather than engaging in debates and speculation about the
agenda, perhaps harmful aliens and this and that, I would say
why don’t we create a civilization of abundance and of peace and
of enlightenment here? And go into space with that intent and
see what the response to the cosmos will be then?
It may be the response that we’re getting now is a directly
proportional response, karmically and otherwise, to what we have
been doing to each other.
KC: Absolutely. We are attracting... like a mirror.
SG: You know, in the last 100 years we have killed 160-million
of our own fellow humans. I think that if you reflect on that...
And I was seeing an interview with Robert McNamara towards the
end of his life where he was reflecting on the terrible mistakes
he made in Vietnam and the other wars of the 20th century.
What I think is that there needs to be a sort of Let’s look at
ourselves and I think that many times…
KC: But let’s not do that to the exclusion. It’s not an
either/or question. In other words, what I hear you saying is
let’s be a little more sort of Earth-centered in our view of
reality and not worry about the agendas of those other beings
out there. And let’s concentrate on building our nest and making
it a good, healthy place, and playing nice with each other.
There’s no disagreement with that.
SG: No, it’s not either/or. I’m saying let’s do that. That’s why
we’re doing the
KC: We have absolutely no disagreement with that.
SG: That’s why we’re also doing the contact, diplomatic effort.
And we invite all these… We always invite all these
civilizations to make contact.
KC: But actually you’re assuming that there’s no intervention
going on. And I think this is getting to the root of the
question. In other words, do you know about screen memories? You
must know about them if you’ve been as deep as you have.
SG: Well, yeah, the psychotronic programs that have been in
existence for many years…
KC: All right, because you obviously have a positive view of all
your interaction. And, you know, not to get personal on this
level, but to say that if I meet a being who thinks they’ve only
had positive interactions with certain ETs or animals or whoever
they are, then I might look at that person and I might
This is my issue – I might question whether or not that person
really knows what they’re having because they might be screen-memoried
and they might actually be having some negative interaction in
there and not know it. Now, obviously I’m not…
SG: So you’re back to the positive and the negative and the
KC: But we live in a 3-D level and we are moving to the 4-D…
SG: And see, this is... The whole point is that…
KC: Actually it goes beyond that, so don’t interrupt me, because
I want to finish here.
SG: I don’t think it’s that simple.
KC: Absolutely, and we agree on that. It is very complex.
KC: We’re multidimensional beings. We live on lots of different
levels. We are spiritual beings first…
KC: …and humans second. Okay? We actually are just inhabiting
these human bodies at the moment, in my view. Okay?
SG: Correct. Short-term lease.
KC: I have had a number of Samadhi experiences myself, so I
totally know where you’re coming from with that, and I
appreciate that. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is
extremely complex, this picture of what’s going on here.
None of us have all the answers, and to make definitive
statements that we feel you are making out there – okay? – and
to actually limit... to put blinders on to such an effect to
say: There is nothing to be worried about, at all, humans out
there. Just worry about your own little playground. And
meanwhile, out there, are...
Because I got to tell you, if you’re aware of psychic and you
have psychic perception, you know there are entities that do not
have bodies that are negatively oriented. Now “negative,” again,
becomes a judgment. And how do you want to call negative…
SG: Those aren’t extraterrestrial. Now you’re confusing the
KC: I’m not confused. On the contrary, I’m using an example…
SG: I’ve never denied that there were those kind of entities...
KC: Okay. Fine.
SG: But those aren’t extraterrestrial, physical… Some of this
may be definitional.
KC: I know that. Let’s extrapolate from there. I’m simply
focusing, right now, on what you might term a “negative entity”
that doesn’t have a body, and I’m saying…
Or you could even say fire. Now, fire is an entity. It’s a non-…
It doesn’t have a body, and yet it has a power, it can create
itself. So, in a sense you could say it’s negatively oriented if
it burns your house, but on the other hand it could keep you
So by the same token we could find entities that are in physical
bodies – again, spirits having a physical experience – which
could be an ET, it could be us… it’s so multidimensional. Don’t
you see what I’m saying?
SG: Oh, absolutely.
KC: In other words, if they are spirits as we are spirits, then
they can be moved by the positive polarity as they could be
pulled by the negative polarity.
It could look, from the dimension of being in this 3-D world
that we’re inhabiting called Earth, in this human body, in this
experience, and how they impact us, could in fact be ultimately
negative to our growth cycle. That is, in fact, something that
has been posited as a very real possibility.
SG: Well, anything is possible. I mean, obviously. I just don’t
see the evidence for that. I do see the evidence for humans
killing each other. I do see weapons in space where we have
targeted these visitors…
KC: I appreciate that.
SG: … and all of that. So, I mean, we can talk in circles all
day on this.
KC: Yeah. Sure.
SG: My position is that there has not been an action against the
Earth and humanity from an extraterrestrial, interstellar,
physical civilization to here, that I think would cause us to
want to have a sort of armed conflict response.
Now, are there experiences people have that they interpret as
I’m going to tell you something, and people don’t like to hear
this, but in a major trauma case, if a child comes in and
there’s no time for anesthesia, and I have to put a chest tube
in the chest wall of that child, I must look like the most
horrible monster and devil that ever lived.
My motive is to save that child. My motive is to help that
child. But to anyone seeing it who would just walk in from
another planet or off the street, they’d go: What is that
monstrous doctor… or What are they doing?
BR: You’re doing what you must.
SG: And what my motive is that I’ve got five minutes or less to
save that child’s life. So, all I’m saying is that this sort of
KC: It’s a matter of perspective.
SG: … and it is a matter of perspective. I think that’s why I
prefer to be cautious, cautiously optimistic, put out a positive
view on how we should be interacting with this thing. It is not
irresponsible. I am not insidious. I think that these sort of
characterizations are highly offensive, as I have never attacked
you folks publicly.
I found I was attacked on your blog today. It was unfortunate.
But my perspective, I want to be very clear…
KC: No, no. Your philosophy was attacked. You were not attacked.
SG: Yeah, well, whatever.
KC: Actually, you were complimented.
SG: But I just have to say that that is why we’re wanting to be
cautious because it is so easy for humans… I mean, look what
happened after 9/11. It is so easy for humans to take shreds of
information and then go on a war footing or go on a conflict
BR: We agree with you.
SG: This is the inherent danger of some of the things that
you’re saying, is it can shove humanity.
KC: Yeah, okay. I understand.
SG: Okay. And there’s one thing to have a private conversation
about speculating about the motives and the agendas of the
aliens, but when you start talking to the people of the planet
about this and you start putting out… and positing that there
are these – and to use your word, and the polarity negative and
this and that – this would throw the planet into…
And it would also throw the planet completely into the camp of
Majestic, who for years has been trying to... and has also taken
presidents aside, like Reagan, and tried to convince them of
exactly the argument you’re making so that he would spend
hundreds of billions of dollars on SDI.
I think this gets into
serious policy issues.
KC: Yeah, yeah.
SG: Okay. And I have responsibilities here that you’re not aware
of. So to say I’m irresponsible... You don’t know what my
responsibilities are. And therefore…
BR: I want to…
SG: No you do not! What I’m saying here is that…
BR: I want to ask a question which is very… I want to take this
back, now. Just wait a second, let’s cool down and I want to
just make an analogy.
Now, an analogy that I sometimes use, and it usually results in
nods of agreement, is that we’re like fisherman on a South Sea
island, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, having believed for
generations that we’re the only people in the whole world.
We’re sitting around a campfire cooking our fish and we’re
trying to figure out: That big metal ship on the horizon, what
do they want with us? That metal bird that keeps on circling
around our island, what are they doing? Is it real? And Did you
see it? And all this kind of stuff.
We’re trying to figure out the intentions, assuming that we
believe in their existence, of these other beings that we’re
suddenly starting to realize might exist in our universe on this
little tropical island.
Now, the problem is that if we really do look at this as a human
situation which is quite real, really, what experience do we
have as South Sea island fishermen to figure out –
Maybe they want to cut our trees down. Maybe they want to save
us because the sea level’s rising and they want to take us to
another island. Maybe they want our minerals, or maybe they want
to convert us to Christianity. Maybe they want to eat us, kill
us, or maybe they want to make friends. How do we know?
The danger is – and this is a question now – the danger is that
I’m here around this campfire with you guys and I hear you
saying those other men in those big ships and those metal birds
must be friendly.
And I’m saying: Wait a minute. We need to be a little bit
careful here because, actually, even though we do get into
fights on this little island every now and then, how do we know
we can trust them? Maybe we can, maybe we can’t. What’s your
That’s an attempt to characterize, by analogy, how complex this
is. That’s why I said that it was irresponsible, as I would do
if I was around that campfire, as an elder of this community
saying: They’ve got to be friendly, we’ve got to trust them,
you’ve got to trust them. This is what the Incas said about the
SG: Yes, but your metaphor is, again, an anthropocentric
projection onto something that I think is non-applicable.
I think that, in addition to that, our... I keep coming back to
this. Not only in my personal experience, but the experience of
hundreds of people, thousands of people, that we have had
involved with our diplomatic contact programs, have not had any
of this sort of experience that would lend us to believe that
there are civilizations that are hostile to the Earth and to
On the other hand, I have had many sources describe to me the
Programmed Life Forms, the military involvement with hoaxing
abductions, a false-flag operation to create an alien threat
that we can unite against.
So I have to go on the knowledge and the experience I have, and
it isn’t just observing something from afar, because we’ve
actually had contact. We actually have more information than
something just floating up above the island. So the analogy
breaks down very quickly.
And even if there was this potential for one or more of these
planetary civilizations to be of concern to us, my answer would
still be the same:
There needs to be engagement. There needs to be a diplomatic
détente. There needs to be a rapprochement. There needs to be an
enlightened approach to this where we really move out of a sort
of duality that leads to conflict on Earth.
I think that regardless of what your assessment of the agenda,
the path of wisdom and safety is that.
KC: Okay, we don’t disagree with that, okay? Let’s talk about
where we agree…
BR: I agree fully, and it needs to be in the public domain.
KC: I mean, we certainly agree on the end objective. Okay? The
end objective, from our point of view. Okay? We are not part of
the military-industrial complex. Okay?
We’re doing what we do because we believe in truth, because
we’re dedicating our lives. And, indeed, our lives literally
have been in danger because of what we believe. We do it on a
daily basis and you, of all people, should understand this.
KC: So we’re not taking this lightly. Our end result is not to
be what they may desire as their ultimate end-game. In other
words, we’re not here to support their end-game and we’re not
naïve about what we’re doing either. So neither of those things
is true. Okay?
We are not trying to promote sort of a fear-based paradigm such
that people get into a place where the only thing they can think
of is to shoot ET in the head, to be graphic, or to allow for
I mean, we basically agree with your philosophy in that way,
wholeheartedly. In fact, I would say, we are dedicating our
lives to that.
However, on the other hand, we are also not going to sit here
and pretend that we know all the answers. And we’re also not
gonna assume that all contact is positive. On the contrary to
SG: You’re going to say whatever you think.
KC: Yeah, obviously we are. But in terms of this discussion and
for the reason that we… You know, you’re sort of saying our blog
thing, our posting, you found offensive because we’re saying...
What you’re saying on stage, and again, you’re on stage. You’re
on stage actually more often than we are, far more often – and I
have to say, therefore your responsibility is great.
Perhaps your approach is a bit simplistic in that you are
assuming that if you talk about the potential that there are
other things going on, or a potential for other ways of looking
at the question, that the jump that the whole audience out there
is going to make immediately is to fear and panic. And that they’re
going to jump on this bandwagon of the military-industrial complex,
and all go out and grab their guns and knives and want to go
shoot ET and fight with each other and other worlds, and so on.
That’s not... In other words, you’re going from...
SG: But the problem is, is that I’m completely aware that my
position is the minority position. Okay? I’m acutely aware that.
KC: Actually, that’s not true either. I mean, there are plenty
of people out there that are advocating peace and love, and
getting on their cars and jumping up and down: Please, ET, come
save us because you’re all good.
SG: No. I would actually challenge you to look at Hollywood, the
UFO community, the books and videos that are out on this
subject. They are overwhelming negative and terrifying. I think
that this is one of the problems.
BR: I don’t think so.
SG: I think that one of the problems is that we have to look at
this with a long view. And the long view, as I see it... And
this is all I can do is go by my own moral compass and what I
think is right. I don’t think I’m irresponsible. I don’t think
I’m simplistic, and all these sort of characterizations.
I think that I have a responsibility to help articulate a path
forward that is wise and that does not redound to further fear
and panic and negativity on this planet, but that moves us
forward in a positive way and that can lead to what I’m certain
will be the future for this planet.
That’s one of, not only world peace, but universal peace and a
wholly, completely new, transformative civilization on this
planet that isn’t thousands of years off or even decades off
now. I think it’s very, very near.
So, I think that that’s what I wish to articulate. There’s no
simplicity to it. It’s actually a rather complex concept. It’s
also a way of engaging spiritually.
I want to share a dream I had. I don’t share this very often,
but... Back when my friend Shari and I and another member of my
team all got metastatic cancer in the same month and we were all
going to die. She died, but she was still alive. And Bill Colby
had died, been killed trying to help us just before this. It was
a terrible time, actually, for me.
I had a dream. And, of course, I’m human. I was angry. I was mad
as hell at what was happening to us.
I had a dream – I think I was in England doing some crop circle
work – and in the dream there were these giant lions that were
stalking me. They were going to try to kill me. (It’s funny
because Dr. Tom Bearden talks about “the lions” of this cabal,
and I’d never heard him use that term at the time I had the
But here were these huge lions, and they were stalking me and
they were going to kill me. And it was this lucid, lucid,
I didn’t run. I didn’t get angry. I didn’t have hate in my
heart. I opened my heart and went to a place of universal love
and consciousness and I engaged each lion in their eyes.
We were doing this, following each other around, and eventually
they became so engaged with that energy that, even though they
had huge claws and fangs, they actually flipped over on their
back and I was petting them like this, like they were big
pussycats. We had become… It completely diffused that situation.
I use that as an analogy of sort of an aikido, spiritually, of
the engagement I’m endeavoring in, both with the public, with
Majestic, with the visitors. That’s what I’m doing.
KC: I understand.
SG: That’s it in summary.
KC: I think that’s a great description of your approach and
what’s motivating you. Thank you very much for that, Steven
BR: Thank you for sharing that, Steven.
SG: Thank you.
BR: Thank you very much. We appreciate it.
SG: Thank you.