Paul Hellyer
Light at the End of the Tunnel




July 20, 2010



Bill Ryan (BR): This is Bill Ryan from Project Avalon, and the date is Tuesday the 20th of July, 2010.

And it’s my great privilege to be talking to Paul Hellyer, who many people listening to this will recognize as the very courageous ex-Canadian government minister, Minister of Defense in ’63 to ’67, who spoke out in 2005 about the reality of the extraterrestrial presence, and in so doing, created so much of a precedent as a very senior and highly respected government figure, making a very authoritative statement. And it’s always been mildly surprising to me that that has never actually achieved more wide coverage in the mainstream media, and this is one of the things, of course, that I’d love to talk to you about, Paul.

Paul Hellyer (PH): Good to talk to you.

BR: Absolutely. And, just as a suffix to my little introduction there, I want to say that you are a prolific author and you’ve recently finished writing and published two books which, I believe, are extremely important. One is called ‘Light at the End of the Tunnel’ and the other one is called ‘[A] Miracle in Waiting,’ and I would highly recommend anyone to buy and read these books. They’re very readable. They cover an enormous tapestry of material, and I think the common factor has got something to do with what is at stake for the future of the human race. Would you say that’s a fair one-line summary?

PH: That’s as good as you can do it in one line, yes. The two books were published recently. One of them is new, and the other one, the ‘Miracle in Waiting,’ is really republishing a book that was published first in 1996, where in the first two paragraphs I predicted the meltdown that occurred in 2008 – 2009, and said that it was absolutely inevitable. So it’s republished with just some very minor changes and my benevolence towards the banking system.

And the other one is entirely new. It is actually my thirteenth book. The subject, as you suggested, is ‘Light at the End of the Tunnel,’ but the subtitle is ‘A Survival Plan for the Human Species.’ And in it, I set out several things that I think are absolutely essential if we’re going to keep planet Earth as a hospitable habitat for the human species, for our grandchildren and their children.

They are, one, that we have to do something about global warming. Two, that we have to change the banking system that controls the destiny of the world at the present time, and, three, that people of different religions who have been fighting each other for millennia stop doing that, stop thinking that they’re exclusive and the only way to heaven, and start working together to build a planet where every person would have enough to eat, clean water to drink and a roof over their head and some clothing and a little educational opportunity.

These things are all tied in together and I start out the book with the question of global warming. And I found it quite interesting, and just recently, I was part of a group that was writing letters to the President of the United States, the Prime Minister of Canada and the new Prime Minister of Great Britain, to try and get them to radically and fundamentally change the banking and monetary system in the world, because this is one of the essentials, absolutely essential, things that has to be done, if we’re going to save the planet as the kind of ecosystem that we have enjoyed ourselves.

And what I found during the course of that letter-writing campaign was the extent to which the oil industry has muddied the waters about the science. And they’re doing to us exactly the same thing as the tobacco industry did previously. They’re saying, ‘Well, the science isn’t conclusive.’ Some people say that tobacco is carcinogenic and some people say it doesn’t [isn’t]. Until there is absolute proof, why... this is a legitimate business and we’re going to continue to pursue it.

Well, of course, as we now know, looking back, they had proof in their own files that showed that it was carcinogenic, and that it was poison and that they were actually producing a product that was very detrimental to human health. But for decades, in fact, they managed to fuzz that knowledge by leaking information and by getting scientists to raise doubts and questions about it, to the point where they could really go merrily on their way and not have to concern themselves about that dangerous fact.

So now we’re seeing the oil industry do the same thing about global warming. And I was amazed with the number of callers and emails, especially from the United States, where they were claiming that the global warming is just a hoax, and I’ve bumped into the odd person here in Canada who is, in my opinion, been equally deceived.

So the first chapter is really on that subject, and I should say that since I published the book, I've read a book by Dr. James Hansen, a NASA scientist in the U.S. who I would consider, of all the people I have read, the best. And anyone who really has doubts on this subject should try and get a copy of his book, which is called ‘The Floods of My Grandchildren.’ [Note: the actual title is ‘Storms of My Grandchildren.’]

Now, it’s not an easy read, but if anyone takes the subject seriously enough that they say, ‘No, the scientists are wrong and we don’t have anything to worry about,’ please get a copy of that book and go through it. And I would be very, very surprised if, by the time you’re finished, you don’t reach the absolute conclusion that Dr. Hansen is right, and that we have very, very little time in which to do something about it.

Now when I say ‘little time,’ he thinks that we may have crossed the Rubicon already. But I’m being a little bit optimistic on that score and say we have about ten years, plus or minus a year or two, in which to turn it around. Well, of course, as you know, most of the politicians of the world are talking about 30 or 40 or 50 years before they reduce the kinds of emissions from burning fossil fuels that are raising the temperature of the Earth so rapidly. So, there’s a real selling job that has to be done there in order to get people to take the whole situation seriously and do something about it.

Well, then, the next point, of course, is what can be done? We have this huge oil industry. We operate our automobiles and our trucks and our tractors and our airplanes. They all burn oil as fuels, and people say, ‘Well, we can build better engines and we can do this and we can do that, and we can have wind farms to generate electricity. We can have solar panels,’ and so on. But none of these things are going to change the situation quickly enough to meet that ten-year turnaround period that I think should be our goal instead of a 30 or 40 year timeframe, when I am personally convinced that it will, in fact, be too late.

Well, this is where we get into the subject that you raised at the outset: the existence of exotic fuels. In the book I claim that these already exist. That if one is aware of what is going on in the bowels of the Earth in Nevada and Arizona and New Mexico, they will know that somewhere there, U.S. scientists working in conjunction with aliens from other star systems have developed exotic fuels. I guess a decade ago, Dr. Michael Wolf, who was one of the best-known scientists who worked underground there, said that they had developed both cold fusion, which is quite well known in scientific circles, and also zero point energy, which is using the energy that exists everywhere in the cosmos.

So, we have to go back, now, a few years, I guess, and say, ‘Well, how did this come about, and why don’t people know about it?’ And you raised that question earlier on. What’s the big secret, and why is it being held from us? Well, the story goes back many decades, and usually people tell it as having started with the crash of an unidentified flying object in Roswell in early July, 1947. Actually, there were crashes before that, but there was a crash there, and from that time on, the United States government, through its armed forces, have been back-engineering the technology that they found from the visitors’ craft. It has given us a whole range of things, of course, that are very valuable in our lives, that include microchips and fiber optics and a whole range of things.

But one of the things that is most interesting to people is the question of energy. How could these craft get to Earth over such vast distances without having energy forms that we were unfamiliar with? And without going into that subject in any detail, they are so far advanced from us technologically, that they were induced or coerced, when some of them were captured, to work with U.S. scientists in trying to replicate not only the vehicles that were used to get to Earth, but also some of the energy sources that are obviously at play.

And this area, it has such a tremendous potential, because I think those exotic fuels are already in a state where they could be used commercially. But if they’re not, then I know, from what I have read and studied about the extraterrestrials, that they would give us the technology if the United States Air Force would stop shooting at them, then they would cooperate and work with us in giving us that technology because they are very concerned about what we are doing to our planet. They want us to save it, and not to destroy it. And one of the things that they’re very concerned about is global warming. There are others, but that is one that concerns them greatly.

So we have this potential available to us, but most people don’t even know it exists. A lot of people suspect that there are exotic fuels, but they have no way of proving that, and it’s going to be very, very difficult to pry that information out of the people who guard it so closely. ‘Can be done.’ How could it be done? Well, ultimately, the United States Congress is going to have to get involved.

BR: Okay, Paul. That’s a wonderful summary. That’s like an opening chapter to our interview here. And I've got a bunch of bundled questions that I want to throw back at you, here.

If we step back from that scenario that you’ve laid out very clearly, the words that you used were that those in possession of this technology guard it closely. And they’re doing this on one hand, and I fully agree with that of course, and many of the people listening to this will also be aware of that. And on the other hand, we look around and we see spaceship Earth being systematically trashed with not an awful lot of time left, whatever numbers you put on it. Someone who would be in very strong agreement with that thesis would be James Lovelock, the founder of the Gaia hypothesis. He also is concerned that we may have reached some kind of a tipping point.

PH: Yes. I quote him in my book.

BR: Yeah. Regardless of the numbers, clearly we’re in deep trouble. But why are the people who consider themselves to be in control of this planet, why, in your view, are they allowing this to happen? Why are they guarding this? Even if they have free energy available to them, and I do believe that they certainly have, it would be quite easy to say, ‘Hey, look what our government scientists have just discovered. This is wonderful, folks.’ Is this all got to do with the economy, or is there a larger picture here whereby some huge crisis is being catalyzed with some purpose behind that? What are your views on this? You must have spent a lot of time thinking about it.

PH: I have spent quite a bit of time thinking about it. I don’t think anybody really knows the whole answer. I know that the secrecy has existed from the beginning.

We had a scientist in Canada, who was sort of in the loop in the early years of the 1950s, and he claimed that the whole program relating to the extraterrestrial technology was classified more highly than the hydrogen bomb. And that, I would say, has been proved conclusively ever since, and it is alleged, and I believe it to be true, that there are many aspects of what is being done, even beyond the knowledge of the President of the United States, and for which he is not cleared to know what is going on.

So it’s an extremely difficult question, and, I guess, originally, they may have been a little bit concerned about the public reaction when all of the information finally comes out, bit by bit, as to what has been going on for the last 60 years. I think, probably more important for the United States armed forces, was the fear that the Russians might be doing the same thing at the same time, that they might have achieved as much, for example, as the Americans themselves had. This, of course, they have found out not to be true and probably one reason for the end of the cold war, or our perceived end of it.

Then I think there was some concern about the religious communities and the effect it might have if all of this information came out too soon. And you probably noticed that the Catholic Church, in particular, has been making statements the last two or three years to sort of get people ready for information in this area. They have now said that God’s children exist in other parts of the cosmos, that we shouldn’t be surprised about this. Quite a liberal attitude, actually, on this subject in the last few months. And that may have been part of it. And fear of the economic consequences may have been part of it.

And no one really knows, I think, the answer for sure, because no one knows who controls this group that I refer to in my book as the ‘cabal.’ There is a shadow government in the United States, and President Clinton confirmed that at a press conference, where he was asked why he didn’t expose all of the information in this area, and he told the reporter that there was a shadow government and that he didn’t control it.

Well, there is within that shadow government a small group, and how small and how tough is very hard to say, but they are believed to be sort of the group that reports to what started out as the MJ-12, when President Truman set up a very, very highly select group to look at this area of Ufology and alien technology.

But now we’re told that it’s the MJ-36 and that there are Europeans involved. Well, who are the Europeans and why are they involved? I don’t know, and I don’t think there are very many people who do know. But I do know that some of them, at least, represent the wealthiest, most powerful people in the world.

And this brings me back to the beginning, of whether or not they want clean energy resources to be made public yet, until they’ve had more time to exploit their trillions of dollars of assets in the oil industry worldwide, and milk them for all they can before they finally switch over into the new energy and then try and do the same for it.

So that’s the long answer to the question, which is really that, publicly at least, there is no easy answer, and the U.S. Congress has to take control and insist on getting the people involved to talk, and even at the risk of threatening to cut off their funds. And it has to be the Congress and not the President, because traditionally it’s been too dangerous for any one person to take on this role, and I certainly would not advise the President of the United States at the moment to be the one to insist that it be done.

I think it has to be the Congress, who have been providing the funds over the decades and without doing what they were elected to do, and that is being able to report to the American people what they were getting for the funds that were being spent, and what ultimate good they were going to be to the taxpayers who have footed the bill. So, that’s where, I think, the action has to start, and the sooner it starts the better. But we can’t get it started until more people are talking about it and realize the potential, on the one hand, and the absolute necessity, on the other hand.

BR: Right. Now, just to backtrack on your own journey, Paul, I believe it all started when you were given a copy of Colonel Corso’s book ‘The Day After Roswell,’ is that right?

PH: Approximately right, yes. I had watched the ABC two-hour special, and a friend by the name of Pierre Juneau had been sending me all kinds of stuff for two or three years which, for the most part, I hadn’t read. But there were a few things that came along that sort of tweaked my interest a little bit, but it was Colonel Corso’s book that made the difference.

BR: I seem to remember you told Paola Harris in an earlier interview that, after absorbing the book and being fascinated by it, you consulted a colleague who was a military general, who you never named, and he was able to confirm for you that the detail in the book was true. Is that right?

PH: Yes. Though he wasn’t a colleague, he was someone I had met. Actually, it was a friend of my nephew and I had been reading the book. And it was my summertime reading. My nephew went past and asked me what I was reading. I told him. And he said, ‘Well, I’m a skeptic.’ And I said, ‘Okay, it’s a free country. You can be as skeptical as you wish.’ He went home then, and about two or three days later, he phoned me back and said, ‘Well, I phoned the General, and when I told him what you were reading, he said, Every word is true and more. Where can I get a copy of the book?’ So I told him to get a copy of the book and he could hardly wait.

Well then, that was really the confirmation that I needed, because I had already come to the conclusion from the book itself that it was legitimate. I compared it with the best science fiction I had read, and I thought to myself, ‘Well, no. I’m familiar with too many of these people by name and the places, and this could not possibly be fiction.’ So I am convinced that it, in fact, is real. But it was the General’s confirmation.

But before I decided to actually go public... And I felt very strongly about it because of the issues involved, the question about Earthlings taking on people from other stars for size, militarily, for example, and what it does, the possible risk that’s involved there, all of these tremendously important issues. And I had decided that it was important for me to say publicly that there was a need to disclose what was going on and what was known, and to review the military’s reaction to the visitors and all of this sort of thing. So I had met the General at a – he was a retired general – at an aviation conference.

BR: This is a Canadian general, is it?

PH: No, he’s in the United States Air Force.

BR: United States Air Force, okay.

PH: Yes. So Philip gave me his number and gave him a heads-up that I would be calling, and when I called him, again, he just said, ‘Every word is true and more.’ And he spent the next 20 minutes telling me a bit of the more which was just absolutely totally fascinating, going as far as he could without breaking any great secrets for which he would get himself in trouble.

BR: Is that off record, Paul, what he told you, the more? Are you able to share any of that with us?

PH: The only thing I will share is that he confirmed that there had been face-to-face discussions between United States military or United States officials and the visitors from other planets.

BR: Was that the famous Eisenhower meeting in 1954?

PH: He didn’t specify any particular meeting. Just that the... blanket statement that there had been face-to-face discussions.

BR: Okay.

PH: So with this assurance, then I felt absolutely convinced and ready to go public, as I did five years ago.

BR: Okay. Now, after your public statement in September of 2005, you then must have been on the radar of a lot of other government ministers, government officials, intelligence agencies, military personnel in several different countries, and some of those people may have been friendly, with the same kind of humanitarian concerns as yourself. Did anyone approach you, off record, saying, ‘Paul, I’m delighted that you’ve come forward. I can confirm this. I’ve been on this journey. I’ve had my own verifications.’ And anyone who came to you to help you build your understanding of what was happening, on or off record.

PH: On a certain level, yes. I’ve had lots of people talk to me. I was just a novice at the time, five years ago. Since then, I have not only read many, many books and many, many documents, some previously classified and others not. And people have contacted me with their own personal experiences and confirmed all sorts of things from actually having seen one of the vehicles, having been inside a crashed vehicle, and all sorts of verifications of one kind and another. But this was really related to the people at the working level rather than at the governmental level, although there were some government employees, of course, included in the list.

BR: Okay. Is there anything from those subsequent contacts and meetings that you can share about consolidating and deepening your understanding of the bigger picture? Because while the summary of what you’ve stated so far will not be unfamiliar to many people listening to this, but there are so many questions. And one of the questions that a lot of people are concerned about… Actually, there are two questions, really.

One is about the agendas of the visitors, and almost everyone who I know who studied this in depth understands that there is more than one group and there may well be more than one agenda, and they may not all necessarily have the welfare of the human race close to their hearts. And the question that is sort of allied to that, is there is a huge amount of circumstantial evidence, and perhaps it’s even more solid than circumstantial, that the military of the world are preparing for something, defensively. Underground bases, classified programs that go way beyond the technology that NASA has, that might be a lifeboat program in case planet Earth really hits a hard time.

Is this something that you’ve looked at? Do you know anything about that? What are your opinions about what we may be going into? Not just about global warming and the financial system and the way we’re trashing the planet. But is there something else going on which is leading the military to take defensive measures, and what role do any of the ETs have in that?

PH: Well I, of course, don’t know the answers to all the questions. I know that there are a number of species, and, as you suggest, some may be more benevolent than others. It is my feeling that most, if not all, are benevolent.

I have only two bits of evidence in the whole panoply that I have looked at that raise any doubt in that, and they are, one, from alleged briefings of U.S. presidents by the military in the United States, in which they have said that there was one species that was not friendly. Well, I’m not totally cynical, but if I were part of the military-industrial complex, and I wanted to spend a few hundreds of billions of dollars more gearing up to take on the star visitors for size, that’s exactly what I would say. I don’t know whether it’s true or whether it’s not true. If I had to bet, I don’t know. It would be a close call, but I would certainly want everyone involved in the whole cover-up to swear under oath who those people were and to provide evidence and back up their statements with hard evidence, because without it, I would be skeptical.

And there’s one book I read that had some instances where it appeared [that] some of the visitors had been less than friendly. But in each case, you would have to raise the question as to whether or not they were the trouble makers or whether we started it. Whether we took them on for size and they retaliated or defended themselves as they might have considered it.

And again, I think we need a lot more evidence than we have so far before we can take any sort of a definitive stand on that point. Now, as far as their agendas are concerned, as you suggest, if you have more than one species, you probably have more than one agenda, and it could be that in some cases they are primarily interested in genetic material to produce hybrids, using human genetic material to mix with their own, and that they may like our planet as a summer playground to stop-off on when they’re on vacation or whatever. They may have been taking some of our resources, I really don’t know. There are some people who think that they’re so sophisticated that they could take resources from the mountains or the seas and get away with it, and we would probably never even know about it.

So when you talk now about the counteroffensive measures, it’s hard to know what they’re related to. There are some people who say, ‘Well, the cabal, in conjunction with those rich people who have been controlling things, are working out an escape plan to take a few fortunate people off the planet to another planet in the event of a catastrophe here.’ Well, you know, that’s a good story and is there any truth in it? Who knows? I don’t know. It’s becoming increasingly feasible, I would say, guessing on how far they are probably advanced, far, far more advanced in the technologies that they have available than any of us have been told.

So, just one more reason for full disclosures, Paola Harris calls it, and a lot of other people. And one more reason why Congress has to start prying some of this information out and getting it into the hands of the public and all cross-examination under oath. And with one other caveat that I mention in the book – it wasn’t original with me. It came originally from the star visitors and then through one of my people that I interviewed at great length – and that is an amnesty…

BR: This is Jim Sparks, isn’t it?

PH: Yes.

BR: Yeah. I know Jim. We’ve spoken to him.

PH: And Jim and I talked at great length and he gave me permission to quote from his book at some length, where I went into this question of the amnesty, just copying what he had from the extraterrestrials. And I can understand why, because they have broken just about every law in the book here, they, the cabal, the shadow government, and there is no way most of them would give testimony, probably even under oath, if they thought they were going to spend the rest of their lives in jail for doing it.

So amnesty, I think, is an essential part of the whole thing, and then a very systematic cross-examination by some of the best legal talent in the United States, and just determine to get all the facts bit by bit until the whole picture is out and understood.

BR: Right. Now, if you've spoken at length with Jim, and he has some extraordinary stories to tell. Let me just explain, for the benefit of anyone listening to this who doesn’t know who Jim Sparks is. He is a multiple abductee. He has been abducted hundreds, if not thousands, of times. And, initially, he put up what could be called a ‘brave fight.’ He resisted and he swore at them and he refused to be controlled.

And eventually, he grew to trust these extraterrestrials, realizing that they were functioning in a very different way from the way that humans were. And as he trusted them, it seemed that they then shared more information with him about what it was that they were concerned about. Would you agree to that summary?

PH: Absolutely, yes. Very good.

BR: Yeah. And one of the things he grew to understand that his abductors were concerned about, was a possible future that didn’t look very good at all. And of course, this is a running theme among contactees and abductees, and people who have had dreams and visions, and goodness knows what. And it does tie in with what we were talking about a few moments ago, about what seem to be defensive preparations that the military of various countries seem to be taking.

And my own view about this, is that the future is not fixed and we do have choice, we do have free will and it may be that there are some probable and improbable futures, but we still have a degree of control over where we are headed, and that the visions or the information that has been presented to us by, for example, Jim Spark’s abductors, may be more of a warning than a prediction. And I wondered what your view was about that, because having spoken so deeply with Jim, you must have spent a lot of time thinking about this as well.

PH: Absolutely, and I think you are absolutely right that the future is uncertain. This is really what my book, ‘The Light at the End of the Tunnel’ is all about. Saying we have been given the power of choice as to what we are going to do, but it depends totally on what we do as to what the future is going to be.

Because, we can blow up the planet. We have more than enough nuclear material to make the planet uninhabitable totally. And if we were ever crazy enough, if we ever had a lunatic in charge of one of the stock piles and they decided to use it, it would be goodbye Earth, certainly for most of us, if not the great majority of us.

And the same thing is happening to a lesser extent with the global warming. So we have choices there.

And then the third area that I raise in the book, which is related, of course, in a direct way, is changing the banking and monetary system so that individual governments have the financial resources to finance the transition from the old regime of the oil consumption to the new exotic fuels, and also from a military-industrial priority to a peaceful priority.

These are tremendously expensive undertakings involving trillions of dollars, and if you look at the way the system is being run now, with them agreeing to cut back and balance budgets and do all of these things, then there is very little hope for the planet, because governments are not going to have the financial resources to do what we have to do physically.

And, just to add for the benefit of anyone who says, ‘Well, what then do you do?’ And I, of course, have been promoting for 60 years, that governments are going to have to end the private bankers’ monopoly to print money and to take back some of that power, and to share the money creation process between the governments on behalf of the people who own the patent, and the private banks who have been exploiting it for their own benefit now for a couple of centuries or more.

And if we do that, then we would have the resources to meet the problems of poverty and poor health and all of these things, and to, at the same time, finance the transition from fossil fuels to exotic fuels. So this all ties in and this is all choice, but at the moment, in this area in particular, we are making all the wrong choices. And that is the reason I was so active at the time of the G20 and hoping for a little common sense and was so disappointed when I didn’t see any, and will continue the fight in the months and years ahead if I still have strength to do it.

BR: Now, are these choices being steered by an elite group which actually don’t want to release this technology? They don’t want to reform the financial system. They want to keep a financial grip on the planet. Or do you think that that is dissolving and melting away in some way and they are looking for ways to come clean? The announcement of the Vatican last year about our brothers and sisters under God might be an indicator that they are looking for a way to disclose what they know. I wondered if you felt that you could trust the insiders enough, to feel that there really was a genuine hope that things could actually unfold in a positive direction?

PH: I personally don’t believe that that is likely. I think you could find some individuals who would think that way. But they are not the ones who have been in charge; they are not the ones who are in control. And I think you have to separate the Vatican sort of preparatory pronouncements and changes in policy. I think that is to prepare people for getting a little bit of knowledge, which is already coming out from several governments where they are releasing files, but the most primitive of files that really say nothing that isn’t well known by everyone who has even taken a few minutes to study this whole matter.

But when it comes to the hard evidence of what has been achieved in back-engineering and the new exotic fuels and changing the banking system, I think that the tightly-knit little group is just as powerful and just as all-pervasive today as it has been, and that this is probably the number one problem when it comes to looking at the future of the world.

BR: So what can be done, then? Do you really think that the kind congressional hearings for example that are advocated by Stephen Bassett and others can actually pry open this oyster’s shell that is so tight shut and has been for such a long time. What do you think the process would be? If you could fast forward in this movie for the next ten years to a good ending, what do you think it might look like? And what can you and I and the people listening to this do about this? Or are we just helpless spectators?

PH: I think the, realistically, nothing is going to happen without a popular revolution. And by a revolution, I don’t mean people taking shotguns and baseball bats. I’m talking about a revolution of the mind and heart which would be sufficiently widespread that people would say to their elected representatives, ‘Unless you do certain things we will not vote for you, period.’

That is the only thing that politicians understand, because on the other side, you have this powerful group that we were just talking about who have all the money, most of the potential for propaganda through papers and other media that they own. They are the top dogs and they know it and they have been enjoying it and they like to enjoy it, and hope to continue enjoying it. So they can control the congresses and parliaments of this world to a considerable extent by simply discreetly financing the campaigns of people who are not too critical and who are not likely to spend too much energy challenging them.

And the only way to really change that, is to get the kind of popular movement which, ten years ago, would not have been possible, but with the Internet, is increasingly possible, where millions of people around the world say, ‘Hey, political buddy of mine. Change your ways and do A, B, and C or don’t count on my vote. And on the contrary, I will vote against you if you don’t do something, because this is just so serious.’

So, I think, as improbable as it seems, that that is the best hope. A little public education wouldn’t hurt. Of course, it’s all part and parcel of getting the kind of massive movement that I was just describing and hoping for and praying for. But it is hard to get it out. I just succeeded, a couple of weeks ago, in getting a piece on monetary reform in the main English language newspaper in the City of Ottawa, the capital of Canada, and it was a real challenge.

It took a month to get the editor to agree to print it, simply because this is one of the three things that the mainline press embargo, and I list them in my book. They are the monetary system, the banking system, total disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence and technology, and the negative effects of globalization; and they just don’t print these things. So it was a tiny breakthrough, but at least it is the kind of thing that gives you hope and keeps you going.

BR: That was one of the questions that I wanted to ask you, because you are so high profile and you are so well known in Canada that one would have expected the mainstream media to jump all over you after your revelations in September 2005. But it sounds as if that hasn’t happened. It sounds as if you have been sort of quietly ignored, because nobody really knew what to do. Is that right?

PH: At the beginning, it was worse than being ignored. They took interest in asking what I was going to say when I spoke, but then didn’t report anything that I did say. It’s only, I guess, in this last twelve months or so, that there have been any reports in the mainline press on this subject of the extraterrestrial presence that haven’t had an element of ridicule or that have been straight, and just reported the facts as presented to them. So, at least that much is encouraging.

BR: Do you see signs of what you described earlier as a popular revolution? In the five years that you've really been involved in this topic, have you seen or felt things change around you? Do you feel that there are signs of hope?

PH: I would have to say yes to that. There have improvements, both on the side of disclosure – more people are coming forward. There are more whistle blowers. There are more books being published. Some of them as fiction, but still revealing a lot of facts – and then this improvement in the popular media. Several people have been on the ‘Larry King Live Show,’ where they have discussed this question.

Unfortunately, they usually have a debunker on with them, like the argument over global warming or nicotine: you get both sides and confuse it. But, nevertheless, there has been some considerable improvement in the mainline treatment of the subject of the extraterrestrials, and I think this is a significant move forward. And if we could just get the same kind of thing going now with the banking issue, that would give me also great hope. So, yes, but on a scale of one to ten, we’re maybe at one now, and we have got to get up to six or seven before we get the kind of popular movement we really need to change the system.

BR: Understood. Are your colleagues, your colleagues ex-ministers, people in the armed forces, for example, in Canada and in other countries, the people who you are bound to be talking with back-channel, are they saying to you, ‘Well, I guess I support what you are doing, but I’m sure pleased that you’re doing it because I don’t dare do it myself because of the repercussions,’ or are you playing a role in encouraging other high-profile figures to come forward with what they know? Because you can’t be alone in your understanding of the situation at a high level.

PH: I would be very hesitant to encourage someone who is 40 years younger than I am and had a family, to speak too openly…

BR: [laughs]

PH: …because I understand the risk involved. There would be or has been, traditionally, quite a considerable risk. And the whistle blowers are not really appreciated by the cabal and its cohorts in the intelligence communities. One has to be a little careful there. At my age, I figure it doesn’t matter. There isn’t much they can do about me except put me under, which is going to happen soon anyway.

BR: [laughs]

PH: And it’s a risk I’m quite willing to take, but if I were 40 years younger and my family were still in school, I don’t want to mislead you into thinking that I would just stand up and put my head on the chopping block, because I’m not the least bit sure that I would. I just don’t know what I would do under those circumstances.

BR: That’s extremely honest of you and I salute your courage. But on the other hand, presumably, knowing that this interview will be listened to by people who are in some considerable positions of authority... This interview will be listened to by the military and the intelligence services. These people are doing their job. It is naïve to think otherwise. Is there something that you would want to say to them, knowing that you have an opportunity to talk to them directly?

PH: Yes. There is safety in numbers, and this is the encouraging part of what is happening now, with so many people speaking out: you reach a critical point where they just really can’t discipline all the people who are beginning to tell the truth. And if you get enough people telling the truth, why then, I don’t think that there is likely to be any repercussions. It just wouldn’t be feasible on their part any longer.

BR: That is very well said. I would add to that, if I may, by saying that there are probably a lot of people, on the inside, who signed up for political service or for service in the intelligence agencies or for service in the military when they were young men and women, really sincerely believing that they were doing the best thing they possibly could do to make the world a better place. And then they get lied to, just in the same way, by those forces and factors who want to control them.

And then they are in a very difficult situation, because they are on the inside, they've got security clearances, they have signed their oaths of office, they have families to worry about. But some of these people must be deeply troubled, because what they signed up for isn’t the game that is actually being played around them.

And I guess I would urge those people to have the courage to come forward. Because if we do have that safety in numbers, it’s going take some of those people to come out first, and of course, you are among those first to come forward. So now I wondered what you could say to encourage those people to follow your example?

PH: I think it would be very brave of them and I think it would be one of the greatest contributions that they could make to society. I know that there are people who feel that way, because I have talked to people who feel that way. They feel absolutely betrayed by what they have learned from the inside, but stepping out and risking all is a big decision, and it has to be weighed very carefully. So I never criticize people who won’t do it, while at the same time, if they are in a position where they can take the risk, I certainly encourage them to.

You know, it was the same way in Cabinet. I went through a number of Cabinet colleagues who, at one time or another, wanted to resign under question of principle, which I had done. And they didn’t, simply because, for them as individuals and as heads of family, they felt that the risk that they were taking was too great.

To anyone who can take the risk or who is so profoundly certain that they have a responsibility to humanity to speak the truth, why, more power to them. That’s just what we need at this particular juncture, in particular, when every time I pick up a newspaper, I see more cases of betrayal by public servants and others, milking the system for their own benefit, committing all sorts of things including fraud.

And I just say to myself, you can’t run the kind of world that we are all hoping for and that is possible, and that is really essential for the long-term benefit of the planet, unless the people start acting in a more moral and spiritually-inclined way. I think that is probably the overriding, or overarching, aspect of what people have to do as they face the future on this broad front.

BR: That’s a wonderfully inspirational message, and thank you for being so clear and eloquent about that. As you probably are aware, there are an increasing number of young people who feel just as passionately as yourself. I get messages from teenagers, sometimes, who are far more concerned about the world than I ever was when I was 18 years old. And I’m very impressed with a lot of the young people, their sense of responsibility, their strength of passion, their awareness of the problems in the world that they have been born into. What message would you have for them, because it is very easy for a young person to feel very powerless, isn’t it?

PH: It is. You're absolutely right, and many of them are a real inspiration. And I just say, all the best to you. Keep it up. Because some of them have tremendous power. I’m a supporter of an NGO operating in Lesotho, where the Chairman of the Board was recruited into the business by her son, by her teenage son, who heard about this at school, and who came home and said, ‘Mother, we’ve got to do something about this.’

And so, from someone who was just on the sidelines before, the mother was recruited and is now the Chairman of the Board, a tremendous influence and a tremendously positive development. I guess there has to be more of that. We hope and pray that these idealistic young people remain that way and don’t get seconded as they go along and people start putting pressure on them for various reasons of various kinds.

BR: It has always seemed to me that there has to be significant hope ahead. Otherwise, [laughs] these young people wouldn’t be here. They wouldn’t be here on planet Earth as souls having incarnated, as it were, whatever one’s spiritual model might be. These young people are coming in hundreds of thousands, and they seem to be reporting for duty, almost. It’s like, ‘Here I am; give me a job; tell me what’s happening. I want to get going. I realize the problems.’ And, I just wondered whether you shared that view to any degree.

PH: I think it is a very profound spiritual orientation, not necessarily religious, but very spiritual. And whatever it is, it is the kind of dedication and vision and inspiration that, as you put it, is the only hope of the world.

BR: Well, that [laughs]… that is… that is so true. And there are significant numbers of young people who will be listening to this, and I myself am on the wrong side of 50, and I dearly would love to be an angry energetic young 18-year-old ready to take the world on. Somebody I knew, just a few days ago, we were talking about anger, and they postulated a wonderful equation that I would like to share with you. And they said that, ‘Anger plus love equals action.’

And that really made me stop and think. I wrote that down straight away. [laughs] I thought that was an inspiring little formula.

PH: As long as you are angry about the right things, it’s absolutely true and it’s a powerful statement. But I would say, don’t worry about being on what you call the wrong side of 50…

BR: [laughs]

PH: …all I can say is, it’s just yet to come.

BR: [laughs] You are so right. I have been delighted with this conversation. Is there anything else that you would like to cover, you would like to say, you would like me to ask you, you would like to ask me? Is there anywhere else you would like to go, or do you feel, as they say in Hollywood, ‘This a wrap.’

PH: I think we have pretty well covered the waterfront. There are so many things, but we have touched most of the important buttons, I think. And if we could just start by getting people of vision and hope and dedication to educate themselves, as to what can be done. And then recruiting others, starting with the youngest of the young, and carrying on. Then a miracle could happen, and miracles are possible.

The book on economics, called, ‘A Miracle in Waiting,’ indicates that we could revolutionize the world by changing the banking system. We could revolutionize the world by spending the money that we spend on arms, on building houses and providing healthcare, and portable water for the people who don’t have any. There are just so many miracles in waiting if we would just get out there and make them happen.

But we can’t just wait around for intervention from extraterrestrials or anyone else. We have to do it, because that is what we are here for. And if we were all to work together, we can make the miracle come alive, and be thankful that we were part of it.

BR: Beautifully said, and it is a very inspirational title to that book. Let me ask you possibly the most difficult question here, and that is, are the benevolent extraterrestrials just watching and hoping that somehow we are going to pull off this miracle, or are they in some way subtly steering us along, and supporting, and intervening in non-obvious ways. What are your views on that?

PH: My views are very strong. I think they are pulling for us. They’re cheering for us. They want us to succeed. They want us to maintain the planet as a hospitable habitat for our species and for their visits, and perhaps maybe for some migration. I don’t know. I think for the most part – and this goes back to the interviews I’ve read that people had 50 or 60 years ago – they are pulling for us and they are on our side. And they just wish that under their rules, they were allowed to intervene directly, but apparently they are not.

All they can do is help and pass along information, and they are doing that as best they can. But, it must frustrate them considerably that we are such slow learners and that we are so slow to act on the things that are obvious to them, and which they think should be equally obvious to us. So what we have to do is become more familiar with what they are saying and what their concerns are, and then incorporate those into our daily living. And perhaps do a little less grandstanding and trying to be the hero of the thing and working more as a team, team world, to make our world the kind of place we want it to be.

BR: A team world. Yeah, that is a good concept, isn’t it? Okay, Paul. Is there any last word that you would like to say, as a final temporary farewell?

PH: Thank you for a great interview. It has been a real pleasure to talk to you.

BR: Well, thank you. I hope this is not the last time we talk, and I really want to extend my admiration and congratulations to you for having the courage, in your position, to stand up so tall and to say all the things that you have been, and to be an example not only for your own peers but also for the younger people of the world. And I really want to thank you on behalf of everyone for the role that you are playing.

PH: Well, you are very kind and I do appreciate it.

BR: Paul, thank you so much. Wonderful interview. I’m very grateful to you. [pause] Hello, Paul, are you there?

PH: Yes, I’m still here.

BR: [laughs] Okay. All right, good. I think that’s a great wrap and I’m really delighted and I do want to thank you personally as well.

PH: You are not exhausted?

BR: No, not at all. No no no.

PH: Was it…

BR: The night is yet young. It’s only ten o’clock here.

PH: Well, if you come to Canada, why, give us notice and we’ll buy you dinner or something or other.

BR: That would be a very great pleasure. I will let you get on with your busy day, and thank you so much for everything that you are doing to help the world be a better place. Bless you and thank you so much.

PH: Not at all. Thanks a million. Bye.

BR: Good bye.  

Click here for the audio interview


unique visits

Google+