Transcript of Dr. Steven Greer's Interview
[During the first 10-15 minutes of the program, Mr. Bell played a rebroadcast of a hypothetical disclosure briefing by John Lear and asked Dr. Greer to comment whether or not he would release that information to the public. That part of the interview is not included here in this transcript.]
Art Bell (AB): All right, let me try this on you. Last night, I interviewed Bob Lazar - I know that you know that name - and --
Steven Greer (SG): Yeah, I know Bob.
AB: OK, fine. No matter what you think of Bob one way or the other, I got to a point in the interview where I asked Bob "Look, I'm going to ask -- there have to be other Bob Lazars out there. Send me email. Come forward. I'll give you air time. I'll put you on the air." And then I made the mistake - right after the break - of saying, "So Bob, what do you say to other people out there like yourself, should they come forward?" And he said, "Hell, no!"
SG: Right, oh yes, he has said the same thing to me because of the difficulties that people have experienced and yet - you know it's interesting, the Disclosure Project has over 500 people that we have identified. Over a hundred have come forward. None of them have had any harassment or problems associated with that. And I think that one of the problems is the "lone wolf syndrome". I think if you come forward as an individual, by yourself, trying to establish something this explosive, number one, the weight of the subject collapses that person. It can't be sustained with one person. It has to be sustained with dozens and I would posit to people maybe hundreds of people. And the other issue is that when a single person comes forward, there's an intrinsic credibility problem. Even if the person is saying everything that he says is true. But if it's something this explosive, it becomes hard to accept and when so much information is coming out about something this explosive from only one person, without independent corroboration, it sets that person up for a nightmare.
AB: Well, speaking of nightmares. Doctor, of the things that John Lear talked about, 75% which you said probably aren't so, are you discarding mostly the negative aspects of - I dont' know - either the alien presence or the way they look like, or what they've done to human beings? Or, what about the government stuff? In other words, what part of it do you buy into? You buy into the great secrecy, don't you?
SG: Well, I certainly, you know, accept the things that we have personally discovered and have multiple corroborating sources for. It's like at the New York Times, they want three separate sources. Well almost everything that we've bought into, we have more than half a dozen sources. So certainly there is extraordinary secrecy that's para-governmental, meaning that it is within certain aspects of what we might think of as the government. But in fact the Constitutional government as we think of it has very little sway over these matters and it's been really handled in an extra-constitutional manner.
AB: Do you think people have been killed over this information?
SG: Yes, I have no doubt of that.
AB: You have no doubt?
SG: Well, you - you know what I've said as well.
SG:You know we've had - before we got the security things in place that we enjoy today, our group suffered some terrible losses.
AB: I know that, but Doctor, do you really believe that if extreme prejudice has been used there would ever be an admission of that?
SG: Well, you know, it's very difficult to know whether something like that would be admitted to. I mean, some years ago, in the early first couple of years of the Clinton administration it was admitted that we deliberately infected African Americans with venereal diseases in the south.
AB: Point well taken.
SG: And we've also now admitted that there were nuclear experiments done where people were literally injected and infected with plutonium, the deadliest substance known to man. So I think that the world didn't fall apart then; it was acknowledged that those things happened. I think that many people understand that extreme measures are taken in the fog of war, or in the fog of confusion of dealing with something like this. I don't know that people would be happy with it - they weren't happy when those other things were disclosed. But of course, the point that we've always made about disclosure, and I think it has to go from disclosing information and documents about UFOs and extraterrestrial intelligence to the next phase, which is what we're working on now, and that's the disclosure of the raison d'etre for the secrecy, meaning of course the actual very powerful energy and propulsion systems that are well known in very classified, corporatized projects, but which of course would result in the termination of the fossil fuel industry including all oil, coal, gas, centralized utilities and what have you. But this sort of disclosure is something which can be a positive event and again, one of the things I said many years ago to one of the senior Pentagon people is that if a disclosure is done that hits all the "hot buttons" of paranoia, and fear and insecurity that humans have...
AB: Like God? Like our maker? Like how we got here? That sort of thing?
SG: Well, yes, which gets into very speculative areas, quite frankly. That part of the briefing I felt to be almost gratuitously speculative and beyond the scope of what would be a briefing that would be believable by most people. But I think the other issue is that a disclosure which would focus on the facts in a nonemotional way and would also point out the up side of this information and the very positive things that could redound to humanity over a period of time, that would be not a terrible event. So I think it depends on how one does this, and one would want to exercise a measure of wisdom.
AB: OK. Hold it right there. We're at the bottom of the hour.We'll have a clean shot till the top of the hour. Stand by, and we'll get right back to you. Dr. Steven Greer is my guest. From the high desert, I'm Art Bell.
[commercial and news break]
AB: Even if you assume the most benign of the truths - I think we've just agreed that people had been killed over this information to keep this information silent, and lies surely have been built upon lies for years and years and years until the stack stretches most of the way towards the moon, I suppose, and with regard to disclosure, Doctor, one crack can bring down a wall, and if we, for example, got information about new energy, the next questions would be, "Well, where the hell did you get it?", "Who'd you get it from?", "What have we done with them?", and on and on and on. In other words, the wall comes down.
SG: Well, of course, and this is one of the reasons why, aside from the obvious need for a solution to the biosphere pollution, geopolitical and other problems associated with fossil fuels, bringing out the information related to the energy and propulsion systems that have been kept secret, many of which, by the way, are not of off-planet origin, they are not of extraterrestrial origin. I remind people that a human being can invent something just as well as someone from another star system. And in fact, whether you look at the work of T. Townsend Brown, or you look at the work of Tesla, or you look at the work of Sweet and many others, there have been humans - very much humans - who have come through their minds the sort of innovations and discoveries, of the nature of time and matter and space and electromagnetism to allow for the generation of energy which is not needing the burning of fossil fuels or nuclear power or what have you. So, in fact, the issue really becomes "what's relevant to people right now", and I think what is most relevant to people right now is the harmful effects of secrecy, which very specifically has to do with keeping the world rather addicted to this little line of supertankers filled with this black stuff called oil coming out the Middle East and elsewhere.
AB: All right, well Doctor, I know that you have been on a worldwide search for the "Real McCoy", you know, alternative, over unity, whatever. I know you've been on that search. Where are you?
SG: Well, it's interesting, it's been a 2 year search. I will tell you that, as we expected at the outset, the vast majority of claims associated with this area are fraudulent. The next largest category are people who are not frauds but are simply delusional, meaning that they're sincere, but they're sincerely wrong. They believe they have something that is in fact a source of quote "free energy" and it isn't, it's a calculation problem or what have you.
SG: The third category of people are people who really do have something, and I'm speaking of people who have not yet been absorbed into a corporate structure or government structure. These are people who, unfortunately we have found, all but one of them so far, and I say all but one - and we'll get to that in a moment - who have been convinced that, quote "the world isn't ready for this yet", and to keep it secret. In other words, they've gone through the same brainwashing that has kept some of the military people in line to keep these other things secret.
AB: No kidding?
SG: Yes, and what's interesting - and some of these are people who have systems that we have personally seen and tested and which would revolutionize the way the people on Earth live on the Earth. However, I believe they have been intercepted by people who appear to be friendlies to them, and who are actually counterintelligence and disinformation people who have convinced them of sort of a, sort of played into the inventor's syndrome of a Messianic complex where they're told, "Well, look you know, the world isn't ready for this yet, but when there's this eschatological solution to the human problem, sort of the "End of theWorld" scenario, we can then bring this out, phoenix like, and recreate, or resurrect, life on Earth in a positive way, and you can be the bearer of this information."
AB: Yes, but Doctor, you would have to -
SG: You would convince many of these people to then say "I'll just keep this secret."
AB: Well, wait a minute, Doctor. Let's just say I'd invented something. Let's say I had the over unity device. It's the "Real McCoy" and somebody comes to me. What could they say to me beyond "look the world isn't ready for this yet?" that would cause me to keep my mouth shut? It's not going to be enough to say -- I'm gonna say "Bull! The world has been ready for this for the last thirty years. Where have you guys been? So what else are you gonna say to keep me from releasing it?"
SG: Well, there's a combination of veiled threats and a history of threats and then a sort of grandiose appeal to people to keep these things quiet until quote "the right time". Now, of course, one of the things that we've pointed out to these gentlemen, is that if you want to take sort of a spiritual view of this - if the Divine Being has allowed the minds of men to discover these wondrous sources of energy and sciences for almost a hundred years, only to have them cast aside out of lust for power and greed and secrecy and other dark human emotions, how can you say the world isn't ready? It IS ready. It's just that the sort of power elite, if you will, aren't ready because they don't want to let go of the centralized power that is contained within the entire structure of the macro-economic structure that's based on the energy system that runs the entire world economy. But the point is that we believe that this last category of people are people who actually have discovered great things, are geniuses, but unfortunately have been convinced to keep it secret.
Now, there's one final category of people, and - we have to date only met one person who's been able to demonstrate a viable - when I say viable, something capable of putting out multiple kilowatts of power that could power a home or something -
AB: How much can you tell me about him?
SG: Well, what I can tell you is that our group, Space Energy Access Systems, has a worldwide exclusive license to try to bring this out. The person involved is offshore, is very frightened, has demonstrated to us that these technologies that he's been able to build, while somewhat crude, are actually very impressive, but to date has never been able to deliver to us a system. Now, this has been a very frustrating drama that has been going on now for about ten and a half months.
AB: Well then why doesn't that push him back a couple of categories?
SG: The only reason it doesn't is because -- he's in a gray box. What I would say is that this particular inventor is in a gray box where it's not quite clear yet if this is someone who has been unduly influenced by a third party to not cooperate, or actually has something, because we have seen and tested one of these systems.
AB: But I mean that puts the whole invention in the gray box.
SG: Well, yes. You have to separate out the behavior of the inventors from the technology itself, you really do. But in reality the result is exactly what you said, and that is, that it's in a gray box because at this point we're still waiting to take delivery.You know, we had - it's interesting - the first of March we had a private jet loaded to go and pick up this gentleman and the device and bring it back to a secure facility here, near our place here outside Washington.
AB: And what happened?
SG: A corporate lawyer and a business person that had been associated with this inventor stopped the whole transfer dead in its tracks, and it's very interesting. A whole book could be written about the drama of this little misadventure, or adventure, we're not sure which it is yet - but...
AB: On what basis was this stopped?
SG: Well, you know, the claim was that there was someone who was not being taken care of by the inventor who was supposed to be taken care of in the agreement that he had. In reality, we're not sure what was behind it. This is something that still isn't clear, and because we're dealing with a controversy and three separate countries, it's been a morass. So this is another one of the things that happens with these sort of efforts, is that you get these people surrounded by legal and business people who do everything they can to put a monkey wrench in having the technology brought forward. So the reason I say that this is in a class by itself is because we have been able to see an extraordinary phenomenon with this particular device that we cannot explain as anything but a device that is extracting electromagnetic energy that's usable from the so-called quantum vacuum space around that object. But in reality, because we have not actually taken possession of the machine or the plans to reproduce it, it remains very much in the questionable category.
AB: The claim here is that it extracted essentially zero point energy and turned it into kilowatts you could see.
SG: It wasn't quite kilowatts, maybe it was about half a kilowatt,and this is the machine that we were able to pick up and take outside, plug things into it, inspect it. There was no hidden source of power. It was one of the most extraordinary things I have personally ever seen. Now, that's the good news. The good news is that I'm quite sure that this can be done.
SG: Now, there's another category, and I would say that our group, the Disclosure Project, working with SEAS - and the disclosureproject.org people can look at what we're doing with this and also seaspower.com, our website. But what we have found is that there are about 3 dozen inventors who have devices in mature stages, or less ripe stages of development, and we think that with probably around 10 million dollars in research and development funds, that at least a dozen of those could be brought to commercial viability within a year or two. Unfortunately, they do need that kind of support and that's something we're looking at doing.
SG: And the next thing that we're doing, by the way, which we think is complementary to this and we're going to have information on this on our web site soon, and in fact I would say this is the first time I've ever called for this publicly is on this show tonight, is that we are going to do with the energy issue what we did with the UFO issue, and we are calling for exactly what you sort of brought up earlier, people who have been in either laboratories, corporations, government entities, or who are civilians with high credibility and high scientific credibility who have been either present during the suppression of these energy technologies or have seen them intercepted and cast aside or put into a black box, and who are willing to come forward and be identified. Now, we do know some people, some scientists, who have been involved in those projects, but they're terrified to come forward.
SG: What we're suggesting is that, let's get about a dozen of them who are highly credentialed who have been at the patent office, who have been in with an intelligence agency or corporation and have suppressed, for example, an 80 mile per gallon carburator, or who have suppressed a zero-point energy device, and who may have documentation to back this up or corroborating colleagues to back it up, and we will do next year, in the middle of this election cycle, a disclosure event, Disclosure Two, that will present to the world the fact that we do have a solution to the oil and biosphere and environmental problems, and that we have assembled people who are ready to testify and will testify quite independently again, here in Washington at the National Press Club, that in fact this has happened over the last fifty or sixty years. So, anyone who is like that and meets that criteria I just outlined can write to me personally at disclosureproject.org and we will get back in touch with them.
SG: However, I will tell you - you know, Art, I'm very careful. We're not going go forward with anything like this until we have multiple corroborating people who are highly credentialed, and highly credible, who are ready to put that information out to the public. The reason we think this has to happen very soon is because the public is being terribly mislead about not only why the world is run the way it is, but what has to be done to correct it. You know, we're looking at a 30-some billion dollar energy bill coming out of the Senate that doesn't address any of these issues, and with a fraction of a percent of that, this whole problem could be solved. So the public needs to know that there are seriously positive solutions to these energy problems that have been ruthlessly suppressed not out of national security but in point of fact, out of a ruthless sort of greed and a lust for power.
AB: Well, when you brought people forward, Doctor, credible people, and did the disclosure you did do, that wall did not come crashing down, or at least it hasn't yet, now --
SG: We never expected... See, that's a misinterpretation. That was never the intention that it would all crash down at once. This is a process. You know this thing has been building for not 50 or 60 years, Art. It's been building, the secrecy has been building for nearly 100 years.
AB: Well, alright, this is a second wall we're talking about, if you were to -
SG: It's a brick in the same wall. You see, this -- let me correct you here. This is part of the foundation of the secret apparatus and this is one of the chief cornerstones. The raison d'etre - the reason, the very purpose for much of the secrecy surrounding the UFO issue - isn't because, you know, they're here to eat us for lunch. If they'd wanted to eat us for lunch we'd be eaten already. It's because the energy and propulsion systems that explain the phenomenon of a UFO would make obsolete the need for oil and fossil fuels and these other very primitive, almost atavistic, technologies that we're using...it's like cavemen stuff.
AB: Well then, Doctor, explain then how you can disclose one without disclosing the other?
SG: No, the whole point is that you disclose both of them and one will bring the other one out, but the thing that right now is going to have the greatest traction and relevancy to a public terrorized in the aftermath of 9-11 and who are appalled at what's going on now in the Middle East and what's probably going to be going on in the coming few months. I won't say more than that, but I think it's going to get worse before it gets better. And I think that they're going to want to see that there is a solution to the purpose - to the reason why - many of these things have occurred. You know, many people forget that Osama bin Laden was an ally of the United States when we were in fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, or helping him fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. It wasn't until we encamped in the Middle East trying to protect oil over there in the first Gulf war and the lead up to the first Gulf war that people in that part of the world became so furious with the West. And this is not to excuse the barbaric and horrific acts of the terrorists or of 9-11. It is, however, to shed some light on the background of this. You know, Art, I have just been invited --
AB: But, but, Doctor! Uh - one second. If we're having wars, we've had wars about oil, we're having a war about oil now. We're shedding American blood for oil so, how are you ever going to release information that says that blood was shed for nothing because we already secretly had the answer to the whole damn problem and it didn't have to happen. The war didn't have to happen. The oil doesn't have to keep coming and American boys don't have to shed their blood (and women) over in Iraq or anywhere else for oil because we really don't need it. How is that ever going to come out?
SG: It has to come out, and the longer we wait, the more painful these sacrifices will be, and I predict 9-11 will look like a picnic if we don't get our act together and fix this fundamental problem of very wrong-headed secrecy that has lead to an out of control, spiraling out of control, situation on this planet. And I think that the public already thinks this. You know, you don't have to go to a conspiracy theorist to have people understand that there are powerful cartels that have maintained the status quo and that there probably have been solutions to the energy issue and the environmental issue that have been kept out of the public domain because you're dealing with a five trillion dollar a year part of the global economy. So I think that this is not something that people are going to have a hard time understanding. I think, in fact, there can be another flip side of this. Part of it is the horror that you expressed which will be one reaction, but there is another reaction and that will be "Well, thank God there's a solution!" to this.
AB: That's not a trivial reaction. That reaction would bring down governments, tear nations to shreds. Politically, socially a disaster.
SG: It could if they don't handle it right. This is the other point. If there continues to be a resistance to letting this information come out -- you know, I had an executive producer from one of the big 3 news networks who was going to do an enormous expose on what we had found with the Disclosure project and about a year ago when we were working on this with him, he came to me and said, you know, I cannot do this piece. And this is an extremely mainstream, powerful news figure.
AB: Time is very short. Why couldn't he do it?
SG: He said, "They won't let me" and I said "Who are 'they'?" and he said, "Well, you know who 'they' are" and he smiled and I said,"Yes, of course, I know who they are." But the fact is that the public is going to have to relentlessly continue to do this, and there's some good news here. I've just been invited to do a 5,000 word guest article for one of the world's most prestigious foreign affairs journals.
AB: You know what, we're going to have to end the interview on good news.
SG: That's good news.
AB: So, Dr. Greer, thank you for being here!
SG: Thank you.
AB: Hot stuff! Good night my friend!
SG: Good night.