Steven Greer: The Unknown Agenda
Barcelona, Spain, July 2009
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
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 alone.
The other is that there are highly classified projects that
have been run illegally for about 50, over 50 years, dealing with this.
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 said: Great!
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
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 them.
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
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
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
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
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 these other…
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 complex.
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 –
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
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 of oxygen.
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;
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 Christ.
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
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,
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
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
Now the question is: What’s the agenda behind that
I have had more than a dozen people who have worked in
facilities 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
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
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 less.
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
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 ’em.
Now, I say they’re aliens, but they’re not extraterrestrials.
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.
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 whole discussion.
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
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
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.
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
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 they want.
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 on it…
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 witnesses, okay?
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
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 Manichean 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 careful…
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 say…
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 psychotronic-related military-type 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 Manichean 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
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 Manichean
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 self-interest everywhere.
SG: And let’s back this up just a little further.
Let’s say that these civilizations…
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
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 here’s the…
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
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 good ETs.
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 taken.
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 ‘90s.
KC: Then we’re in agreement. But what you said on
stage was not that.
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
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
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
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
SG: No. There is. If you look at even what
Neil Armstrong said after…
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
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 gonna 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
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 and accurate…
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 about you.
KC: It’s insidious. The reason it’s insidious is
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 point is…
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 partial information.
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
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
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 with
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
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.
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
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 develop…
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...
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
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
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
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
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 complex.
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 self?
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
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
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
are friendly, then they’re somehow working on the side of 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 MILAB
SG: No, but my point is… Here’s what I said.
BR: But we don’t know these things. We don’t
SG: My point is that there’s no evidence that these
visitors are hostile…
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 my point.
SG: Well, actually…
KC: Yeah, let’s get to the place where, you know, the
SG: I’m saying there is…
BR: …irresponsible because he doesn’t know, and you’re
presuming to know…
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 very responsibly…
SG: …because I know what’s at stake if people are led
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
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
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 I’m doing.
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,
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 Salas. 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
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
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 that
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 OrionProject.org.
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 question...
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 polarity…
KC: But we live in a 3-D level and we are moving to
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
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
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 whole cosmological…
KC: I’m not confused. On the contrary, I’m using an
SG: I’ve never denied that there were those kind of
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 warm.
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
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 negative? Absolutely.
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
that monstrous doctor… or What are they doing?
BR: You’re doing what you must.
SG: And what my motive is, 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 anthropocentric…
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
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 footing.
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 fishermen 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
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
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
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 experience?
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
to be friendly, we’ve got to trust them, you’ve got to trust them. This
what the Incas said about the Conquistadors!
SG: Yes, but your metaphor is, again, an
anthropocentric projection onto something that I think is
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 humanity.
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
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
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 what your…
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 gonna make
immediately is to fear and panic. And that they’re gonna 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
SG: But the problem is, is that I’m completely aware
that my position is the minority position. Okay? I’m acutely aware of
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 overwhelmingly 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 dream.)
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,
BR: Thank you for sharing that, Steven.
SG: Thank you.
BR: Thank you very much. We appreciate it.
SG: Thank you.
here for the video