Transcript of Dr. Steven Greer's Interview
Art Bell (AB): Dr. Steven Greer is the founder and director of the Disclosure Project, a lifetime member of the Alpha Omega Alpha, the nation's most prestigious medical honors society. This is a very serious man. Dr. Greer is an emergency room physician, a former chairman of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Caldwell Memorial Hospital. On May 9, 2001, as director of the Disclosure Project, Dr. Greer presided over the Disclosure Project Press Conference from the National Press Club in Washington DC. Over twenty military, government and intelligence, and corporate witnesses presented compelling testimony regarding the existence of extraterrestrial life forms visiting this planet and the reverse engineering of the energy and propulsion systems of these craft. Over one billion people heard of the press conference or heard it through the webcast, subsequent media coverage on the BBC, CNN, CNN Worldwide, VOA [Voice of America], Pravda, Chinese media - even the Chinese! - throughout Latin America. The webcast had 250,000 people waiting online, the largest webcast in the history of the National Press Club.
AB: Dr. Greer has released his new book, Disclosure: Military and Government Witnesses Reveal the Greatest Secrets in Modern History. The book contains explosive testimony from military, government and intelligence, and corporate witnesses with insightful commentary by Dr. Greer.
AB: Dr. Greer has met with and provided briefings for senior members of government, military, and intelligence operations here in the U.S. and around the world, including senior CIA officials, Joint Chiefs of Staff, White House Staff, senior members of Congress, and Congressional Committees, senior U.N. leadership and diplomats, and senior military officials in the United Kingdom and Europe.
AB: Dr. Greer is married. He and his wife have four daughters and they reside in the Charlottesville, Virginia area. In a moment, Dr. Greer.
AB: Well, through interesting means, the question we are dealing with tonight is whether these visitors are friend or foe, and I think it would serve to begin the conversation with Dr. Greer by asking what he thinks. Friend or foe, or is that just too simplified a way to even ask it?
Steven Greer (SG): Well, it's interesting because before Colonel Corso passed away, he told a friend of mine that an encounter he had with these life forms in the White Sands Complex. At one point, he asked, "Who goes there, friend or foe?" and the extraterrestrial said, "Neither." And I think it's a very complex question. Certainly if they were "foe" and they were malevolent, that could have been declared and I think the human situation that we face would have been taken care of long before we started having weapons of mass destruction and traveling in space. So, I'm very dubious of the kind of horror mongers who would like to have the masses believe that there's some alien threat that we need to sort of fight. I think that subserves the numbers of suspicious military, industrial, and corporate agendas, and it is mostly propoganda.
AB: The media doesn't help you then, does it, Doctor? Because, I mean, there's "Taken" and one million other examples of negative portrayals of the visitors.
SG: Well look. Fear sells, but also fear controls. I mean, how easy it is to control masses of people and... You know Wernher Von Braun told his spokesperson before he died that there was a concerted and very clear strategy to hoax a threat from outer space so that eventually the multi-hundred billion dollar enterprise dealing with warfare could become a multi-trillion enterprise and would involve the entire human race, not just a few nations. And I think that that kind of thinking is predictable if you're looking at these interests as huge cartels and special interests that would like us to have people shivering in their beds, terrified. Now, the facts really don't support that and I think that, you know, you can encounter something that can startle you or scare you. I mean, as an emergency doctor, I've scared quite a few two-year-olds doing ear exams! [Art chuckles] However, I wasn't there to hurt them. I think there are two separate issues here. One is our reaction to the phenomenon, and the other is trying to project our reaction to read some agenda into the phenomenon. So I think those are two very different things.
AB: All right. Well, let me toss this your way and at least see if you can deal with it. More times than not, Doctor, it seems to involve reproductive research, reproductive experimentation, or even suggested is, you know, some sort of genetic manipulation or experimentation. Would you agree or disagree with that?
SG: Actually, I would disagree with that.
SG: Yes, and I think that's a common myth and the medical science would not support the need to drag me and other people on board a spaceship to get a sperm sample and an ova or two - an ovum - to do this kind of experimentation. I mean, if you understand the basic genetic structure, and we've cracked the - pretty much close to cracking the human genome here by homo sapiens doing it. Humans. I'm quite certain interstellar-competent civilizations would hardly need to be doing those sort of things. So, this is not to say that people haven't had close encounters with craft and peoples from other worlds, but I think there's this large overlay of rather suspicious things going on. For example, unless someone knows of - and I'm going to throw out some acronyms here - what ARV's, PLF's and psychotronic weapons systems are, I don't think they can evaluate an experiencer and know whether or not they encountered a human or a non-human situation. For example, we know that since at least the late fifties and early sixties, we have had what are called "alien reproduction vehicles", manufactured by humans, that sure look like something from outer space! We also know from a number of witnesses that I'm dealing with that we have created things that are kind of look alike creatures that look like extraterrestrials but are man made. And we also know that there are very sophisticated electronic weapons systems that can alter awareness and alter experience, so these things used together can kind of simulate, or hoax a lot of things, and I think they have. One of the things that worries me about this whole area of discussion is that you have to back up, take a deep breath and look and say "Who would benefit from putting out a tremendous amount of false information which would do several things?" First of all, it would hide the real phenomenon that's going on. Secondly, it would spin the phenomenon in a xenophobic direction that would subserve a number of agendas that I mentioned earlier. And I think the other thing it would do would be to be off-putting to people. A lot of people, you know, really kind of get turned off by all that kind of stuff.
AB: Cutting to the chase, it would serve the interests of the military industrial complex which Eisenhower warned us about, right?
SG: It would very much subserve, but it would also do a couple of other things. It would be preparatory to what Wernher Von Braun and a number of other well-placed top secret witnesses that I've met with have told me, and that's this sort of an agenda to eventually present to the world a threat that we could unite against and instead of fighting each other, we could look out into the space and say, "Hey! We got someone else to fight!" and like the movie "Independence Day", let's go "kick alien butt" as they said. So, I think there's a lot of manipulation that can take place through fear and this is why I try to...You know, I'm equally suspicious of people who want to say, "Oh, these are all, you know,these are people like angel creatures that we should be worshipping." I think we should view them as intelligent life forms with whom we need to engage in a deliberate dialog. I think that when I formed the Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence in 1990 - twelve years ago, now - it was for the purpose explicitly of doing just that. And I think that society needs to do more of what I call "going out there and attempting contact", and less of this kind of speculation and fear-mongering...
AB: Well, I'm a big fan of talking before shooting, but you have suggested that you have proof that, in fact, we've been shooting! We've been shooting at alien craft, or unidentified craft that streaked through our atmosphere, or above it. We've been shooting at them!
SG: Well, there are too many witnesses from diverse places within the military whose testimony - and some of this can be read at our website, disclosureproject.org - where these things have been observed and people have given testimony to that effect, and not just in the United States, but elsewhere. I think this is one of the real dangers of secrecy. I think that whether you're talking about suppressing these extraordinary energy breakthroughs that could benefit the environment, eliminate poverty, or whether you're talking about this issue, the kind of secrecy and disinformation that has surrounded this subject is really very harmful to the evolution of and to our future.
AB: Perhaps so, Doctor. Why do you think we're shooting at them? Do you think we're shooting at them because the military kills people and breaks things and that's what they do, or because they KNOW something?
SG: I think that they...You know, if you wear rose-colored glasses you see the world in a rose-colored way. And I think that if you are - if anything you don't fully understand or control is viewed as "a priori" and until proven otherwise, a threat, you will react in that way. And I think this is one of the problems of the vacuum of secrecy. It becomes a rather incestuous and hermetically sealed system.
AB: But I mean, surely you do agree they know - the military, the government itself - knows more about, I guess, who or what these are and who they are and what their intentions are than we do? In other words...
SG: No, I don't believe that.
AB: You really don't think so?
SG: No, in fact, I think there are people in the civilian domain, certainly people in our team that have worked on this issue who have a broader and better understanding of this. There's an ambassador from Canada I'm working with who came on one of our expeditions, where we train people to attempt contact with these life forms and these spacecraft, who did so on his own up in Canada and had an enormous encounter. And, it was interesting because I find that there are people who seem to have an ability to break through to a bigger understanding, a larger and more complete understanding of this because they're not in these highly compartmented operations that have a very narrow focus, or tunnel vision, sort of approach. I wouldn't assume that the premise of your question is correct and that they would know more. They may have more technical data, but that's different from knowledge, wisdom, or greater understanding of what's going on.
AB: Actually, you think what's going on is disinformation. Decoy, distract, trash, disinformation, right?
SG: [chuckling] Right. I wrote a paper a few weeks ago, called DDT, and I have a friend who had used to be General Odom's right hand man. General Odom was the head of the National Security Agency for many years, and this man literally carried his briefcase - and he works with me. He said,"You know, we have a term, DDT, and this is where you set up a Decoy to Distract people and then Trash a subject, or take them off the course, and this is done routinely." And I think a great deal of what's put out there is DDT and I tend in that sense to be a bit of a skeptic about a great many of the positions that are taken to be conventional wisdom.
AB: Why decoy, distract and/or trash? I mean, why all of that? With regard to this subject, why?
SG: Well, I think aside from obfuscating the entire matter and just confusing people ...I was talking to a member of Congress last year and he said, "You know, there's so much conflicting information, it's too damn aggravating to look into this subject." An investigative reporter once said to me, "This is like a tar baby. You hold onto this thing and you get sticky all over." And I think that there's a certain amount of obfuscation that that serves. I think the other thing, that I mentioned earlier, is the spin. I think it enables - if you put out information that, particularly if it's spun in a direction that would present a threat and eventually build a sort of subconscious fear of all things from outer space, it would serve this larger agenda of eventually announcing that we need to put a few trillion dollars in weapons in space. And I think that is an explicit agenda of certain quarters, and I think it's something that people need to have their eyes opened to.
AB: Do you think that all of these reports of abductions, some of them very seriously researched, are balderdash? I mean, is it baloney?
SG: Oh, no! Not at all. I think there are large numbers of people...
AB: Well, then...
SG: Well, quite frankly, I know people personally who have had contact with these life forms and have had encounters. I don't use the term "abduction" because that's a criminal term and I think it's intrinsically xenophobic. But, let's just say "an experience". But I think that there are many other people who have been victims of clandestine military operations. You know, Dr. Helmut Lammer wrote a book about the military related abductions, and I have interviewed people inside many of the so called abduction support groups who had their primary experiences revolve around military personnel commanding these things that look like alien robots and which I have learned are human made, doing things to them. So I think there are several phenomena going on and people are mistaking it as one extraterrestrial phenomenon.
AB: You know, flat out - why would our military do this to our citizens?
SG: Well, you know, psychological warfare. You go back to 1953 and there are some very interesting documents that I got my hands on after I met with Clinton's first CIA director that talks about the psychological warfare value of this subject, and that this should be an item for the psychological warfare review board of the CIA. And I think that these are the kinds of things that happen not infrequently.
AB: Have you released these documents?
SG: I think some of them are in the first book, Extraterrestrial Contact: The Evidence and Implications, and certainly in our briefing material that we have put out. I have about 2,000 pages of these sorts of things. Some of them were declassified after I met with CIA Director Woolsey and, of course, many of them have been out there for years, but people have just kind of thumbed through them. If you read them carefully...
AB: I mean, it's astonishing to suggest that the CIA director himself said, "yeah, we're doing this" you know, psychological war. For what?
SG: He didn't say that to me. I'm saying that these are earlier documents....
AB: The documents?
SG: The documents are authenticated and officially released, and this has been known for many years that a subject like this can be used for many purposes in terms of disinformation and psychological warfare. And I think, you know, let the buyer beware. I think people have to be cautious and kind of, you know, screaming the sky is falling when it comes to this sort of thing. They need to step back and with a dry eye look at what part of the data supports things being what they appear to be, and what part of them is some kind of a "Memorex" or a hoaxing or a copycatting of this phenomenon. Remember, since the 1940's and '50's we have had the ability to replicate antigravity, to dematerialize and rematerialize things across distances. Extraordinary technologies that have been highly compartmented and classified. If you take an agenda to try to hide a phenomenon or to mislead the public on something, and you have this kind of technologies in your collection of little tricks, a number of things can and predictably would be done. I also remind people of the Wilburt Smith memo, of I believe 1951, when this Canadian top secret memo explicitly says "This is the most top secret subject in the U.S. Government" and it was classified more highly than the development of the hydrogen bomb. So, if you look at that you could understand that a number of things would be done to set people off the trail of what's really going on into a number of areas and - all the better if it would also subserve another agenda of engendering fear or trepidation.
AB: Well, everything in the media is certainly suggesting right now that that's the agenda. Either that, or we just like really scary stuff.
SG: Well, people do like a good ghost story in a horror flick. And you know people don't often go to see things about peace and love and this and that, but they sure as heck will go to a good gory movie. So I mean, there's an element of salesmanship there, and I think that has it's own traction.
AB: And I suppose that as an emergency room doctor - physician, people don't necessarily remember, when they think of you and what you did to them, they don't remember you fondly necessarily. Doctor, hold on, we'll be right back.
AB: Alright..."Fast blasted" to me by Bruce in Clovis, New Mexico, for Dr. Greer: "Couldn't we be shooting at THEM to symbolically indicate that this is our territory? This Earth is our territory. Normal primate behavior, right?"
SG: Well, that's an interesting point, because when I asked a Navy Intelligence person, a guy, way back in the early '90's about this horrible thing that had been presented to me that indeed we had done such things, not just here, but around the world, and actually had operating weapons that could reach into space for some decades, I said, "Why are we doing that?" He says, "Well, it's like dogs peeing on fence posts, marking their territory."
[both men chuckle]
And he said, "It's as stupid and as banal as that." And I just - of course my mouth dropped open - I said, "You must be joking!" He said, "No, that's just how the thinking goes." You know, I mean, it's believable, if you look at how humans have behaved with each other, or how one tribe has - look at Africa and Rwanda, where one tribe killed another tribe to the tune of at least half a million people in the past decade. So, I mean, if you look at the kind of savagery and the kind of prejudice and tribalism that does infect so much of human behavior, it's predictable but it's tragic and what I would say is that we have to kind of get over it and evolve through that kind of behavior because you can't go bamming around the universe with weapons of mass destruction and technologies that are capable of collapsing space into traveling through light years with this kind of mentality. And I think that's one of the real dangers of the secrecy. I think humanity can rise to a higher level of function than that. However, so long as there's sort of an avaricious and secret entity that runs this show, that isn't going to happen. This is why disclosure is so important.
AB: But if you think about our guns and think about what their guns must be like to simplify - oversimplify things. Why would anyone - your own words - want a cosmic war in space, an Armageddon, the very destruction of Planet Earth, which is damn well what it could lead to...
SG: Of course.
AB: Why would any - well, so...?
SG: Well, on one level, I think there are some folks who know that response is unlikely because it - you know, my own view on this, having studied it now for a number of years, and actually since I was about eight years of age when my uncle was designing the lunar module, I got interested in these things and after I had an encounter with one of these craft and the creatures on it, I came to the conclusion that that is unlikely that civilization could evolve to the point of escaping their own solar system, or perhaps even their own biosphere for any length of time, without destroying each other, unless they had socially and spiritually, if I can say so, evolved past that kind of naked aggression and violence and this is why I seriously doubt that that's what we're facing. However, it's not to say that perhaps there's a big cosmic mirror being held up to us. I mean, in the sense - and let me be clear what I mean by that - we have a situation where if societies from other star systems were to observe us in the last hundred years, they would be concerned about our capacity to be some trouble out there. So, perhaps we have tried to do some things to stretch our wings out there in space and have been tossed back like a bad penny! And I'm not so sure that that's not appropriate, but it may have angered those who would like to have stretched their wings, and I'm hinting at something here that I have some personal knowledge about and that is that we have tried to do some misadventures with some technologies we have that have not been very happily received. And I think the response has been displeasing to those here on Earth who would like to have done it. And I think this is another reason why there needs to be a bigger view to this problem than can take place within the confines of the highly compartmented and ultra secretive projects dealing with it today. I think there are people well-suited. I'm working with a number of seasoned and very enlightened international leaders and diplomats who are interested in this, but they're routinely denied access and control over these projects. So, I think that there is, in a sense, a leadership in exile here on this planet that have been shoved out of these affairs and I think that the people are going to have to see that that leadership is put back in place.
AB: Do you see any signs of that occurring? I mean, for all the hope that people like yourself might have had about the current administration, this has got to be the most secretive. It's generally regarded as the most secretive administration that we've had in our adult memories.
SG: I agree, yes it is, and I think that it was like that prior to 9/11, and has only gotten worse. However, I will say that there are competing views within the current administration on this, and again, I have some personal knowledge of this. I had a meeting earlier this year with one of W's friends about this issue and about the whole disclosure effort and there's some sympathy there. Now, one of my concerns is that any disclosure that could be forthcoming from the U.S. Government could be again spun in the direction of another threat that we need all to come, you know, hide in our bunkers and spend trillions of dollars in weapons. I think that this is the trajectory that some of the retrograde factions that may surround the current administration would like to see happen and what we have to hope for is that there are some higher angels there that will guide us to a path of greater wisdom than that.
AB: Perhaps, but the power would be, seem to be, on the side of secrecy.
SG: At this point, yes. And, however, it's ironic you know, it took Bill Clinton to put through some things to reform the welfare situation. It took Nixon, a staunch anti-communist to go to China, because if a Democrat had done it, people would have howled, and it could take an administration that is steeped in secrecy and has long years of supporting secrecy that could make this sort of departure so things are often counter-intuitive, Art.
AB: No, No, you're right about that. I mean that's actually been almost all of history that the Democrats end up doing what you wouldn't figure they would, and the Republicans end up doing what you wouldn't think they would.
SG: That is correct.
AB: You're quite right about that.
SG: So there's always reason for hope and I think ultimately we just have to keep getting the word out and plugging away and I think that again, one of the things that we're working on, and people can read about this at the website, seaspower.com, where we're on the brink of some serious breakthroughs in these extraordinary energy devices that have been so long suppressed and I'm hoping that within the next three to six months,we will have a major press conference with an actual functioning system.
AB: Well, I want to talk to you about that a little. I mean, you and I have had some chats about this, Doctor, and they go back some years now.
SG: Yes, I'm very skeptical, but we're....
AB: And you know, just about every time we've talked, you've been, you thought, perhaps months away, either on top of a discovery, or just months away from some stuff that obviously has fallen through.
SG: Well, you know what's interesting about this is that I have actually seen some very significant breakthroughs, but the people who have them are so terrified, and what we're trying to do is extend an umbrella which is really a spinoff of the disclosure effort. You know, I point out to people, and anyone listening who has such an energy device should get on that website and submit. We announced a one million dollar prize, still unclaimed, in the form of guaranteed licensing royalties for any such device that is proven to work at three independent labs. It's on our website and they can read it -- seaspower.com.
AB: What have you actually personally verified? What do you really know to exist, Doctor?
SG: I know that there are a number of systems right now on this planet that do what these people have claimed, and what we are trying to do is convince them that it is now time to step forward with them. There's a lot of fear and, you know, I was talking to Tom Bearden once about this, and there have been people who have absolutely been dropped dead trying to do these things. Now, one of the things that can protect that is to have an enormous network of people who know about what you're doing. I will say right now, without saying where I'm going, but in the next thirty days, o. It's a device that's putting out five kilowatts of power with no input power through a resonance - magnetic resonance process that is tapping this magnetic flux field in space around us. Another device....
AB: Are you really? When you go to see this device, do you think you're actually qualified to judge if it's doing what is...
SG: [breaking in] Oh no. I tell people I'm the stupidest person on two legs when it comes to electrical and mechanical systems. I'm the strategic guy. The people I bring with me are top drawer physicists and scientists who can do that vetting.
AB: Because aside from ...
SG: I'm not able to do that. I would never pretend to. The reason I never got sued in ten years of a busy E.R. is because I know what I don't know. Know what I mean?
AB:[laughs] Yes. I would virtually mean tapping what's probably - we'll just call it zero point. In other words, an energy that we sort of think might be out there, but I've never seen proof of it. And you think you're going to.
SG: I actually have seen proof of one in the last year, but the scientist is really scared to come forward. He's convinced he'll be killed, so -
AB: Good God!
SG: I don't think so at this point, but you know people make their own decisions and I've identified what I call an inventor post traumatic stress disorder syndrome where they are so afraid and paralyzed. We're dealing now with some people in the last two months that I think are really ready to step out from behind the veil and the testing has to be done. I anticipate it'll take three to six months to do both the in-house and the laboratory testing and at that point we will then do a reproduceability study and rebuild the system and see if it actually works on a reproduceable basis and if so, we will not walk, but run, and let the public know about it and see it. That's what we're doing and I think the world desperately needs it. We know these things have existed in the past and have always been gobbled up and suppressed, and at this point, we're convinced that it can come forward. One of the Disclosure Project. Many of them had top secret SDI/TK clearances. Not one of them receiving a phone call saying be quiet, because before we did that, I met with folks who can give us the kind of support and protection needed and said "Put it in place. We need to come forward." And as of this date today, not a single person has been harassed, threatened, imprisoned, nothing! And so, I'm very optimistic that this can happen. I think people have created too large a boogy man of a fear. Not that there hasn't been reason for fear in the past, but I think we're moving into a time where we can get this done and we need to do it.
AB: I don't know, if I had something like that, indeed, I might be fearful. I understand what would be threatened as you do by something like that. Why don't you imagine that fear would be absolutely justified?
SG: Well, whether it's justified or not, here's the unique thing. If someone has such a system, what we're suggesting is that through a firewall and a licensing agreement that the person who has it, hands it off. If we cannot perform and get it out to the public, it reverts back to them, no questions asked. But if we succeed, anything we do, they're not liable for. Those agreements - they can just put their hands up and say, "Hey, that crazy guy Greer is doing this. I have no control over that at this point." That can legally be done and that's what we intend to do because if someone wants to give me a National Security Secrecy order to suppress something that we' re controlling, I'll simply go on a major network T.V. show that's invited me on to do this, and tear it up in front of a hundred million people. I mean, there's a point where you're going to have to simply belly up to the bar and do it. Unfortunately, I don't think scientists and inventors who are sitting in their laboratories are the people to do that. We need to have a large network which we have put together of people from all walks of life, who'll stand up and stand tall and let this happen. I think then you have a chance. I think the little guy trying to invent something doing all this, it'd be very hard. I think they need to join in a coalition such as we have and do it. I'm quite convinced at this point in time that will happen.
AB : You talk about alien reproduction vehicles. That means that our government got their hands on something, back engineered it and that would include power plants, so the inference obviously would be that these systems, these inventions, these ideas, these whatever they are - these technologies are already really in our hands.
SG: Well they are, but they're the tree that fell in the woods no one heard. I mean, they're in ultra secret projects, and as Ben Rich who was head of Lockheed said to three people I'm working with today and who are on my team, that it would take an act of God to ever get them out of those projects to benefit humanity. He said this a few years ago at the UCLA School of Engineering after a talk there, and he was referring specifically to technologies that were capable of traveling faster than the speed of light to the stars out in space, and so, you know, and I stand by that statement because I have three independent people who were there who heard Ben Rich say it. Now yes, so yes we do have them, but see, this begs a larger question in that the laws of the universe are universal, and scientists have been coming across the physics behind the phenomenon that Tom Bearden and others, and Tom Valone, and Moray King and others have described for many many decades, and go all the way back seventy-five years and find people who have. The question is why hasn't it gotten out to benefit the world? Now, what we're trying to do at this point is to connect those scientists with those devices to a very large strategic network and then quickly move it forward, and that's what we're doing. I hope we succeed. If we don't, we're at least going to give it the college try.
AB: And how can people help you?
SG: Well, I think that if people know of someone who actually has one of these systems they should contact us at seaspower.com. There is a contest of sorts that's just a way of really supporting people that do this. It's a one million dollar guaranteed prize in the form of licensing fees and royalties that we will guarantee to anyone who proves they have this and allows us to test it. They should network those people to us and contact us as soon as possible. We are in the process of either fabricating or testing a number of these systems. I also want to point out that - people have heard for years that "What ever happened to that hundred mile per gallon fuel injection system on vehicles." Those also actually exist, and we've done the research on that. Now, that's another - it's not as sexy as antigravity or zero point energy, but remember, we've got a couple of hundred million cars on the road in this country and around the world, more than that.
AB: Oh yes.
SG: And we would like to see those systems supported. So we have a program right now where we're about to test seven different internal combustion modifications that you could retrofit and throw in a car so that your SUV will be getting, you know, thirty to fifty miles per gallon instead of ten. So these are things that we're looking at, and some of them are extremely promising. As soon as we have a confirmed, independent lab testing of them and reproduction of them, we will announce this to the public.
AB: Ah, meanwhile, we've got the Bush Administration passing legislation that increases mandatorially the gas mileage for the SUV's you talk about. Four or five miles to the gallon, or whatever the hell it is, not much. I mean, if they really had this technology then what are they doing passing those kinds of laws?
SG: Well, because the people passing those laws are not educated on these issues and that's just one of the things I was talking to Tom Valone today about, who does a lot of work in Washington with this. He was meeting with a prominent senator's aide on energy issues and they're actually very open to this. We're going to be having some further follow-up meetings with those people in the next week or two. So, I think that, you know, people assume that just because you're a senator or member of congress that you're omnicient. On the contrary, they're so overwhelmed that they seldom understand these sorts of issues. And I think ultimately that the proof of the pudding's going to be in the eating. We need to present some. This is what the challenge is that I'm putting out there tonight. If someone's got that kind of system for an automobile or a zero point device, and it's ready to be properly protected and put out there, they should contact us, because there are a whole lot of people on both sides of the aisle in Congress and all over the world waiting for these kind of solutions. Because remember, George Bush himself said last year in the State of the Union that it was a national security imperative that we become independent of imported oil. Right now, we get something like 57 percent or 55 percent of our oil from overseas and it makes us a very vulnerable country, not to mention the fact....
AB: Apparently it's also a national security imperative that we hide this wonderful information we have about those who are visiting and the technology they have brought.
SG: Yes, isn't that an interesting irony?
AB: Well, it is.
SG: Yes, but often the left hand doesn't know what the right hand's doing, and this is the whole problem with compartmentalization. Don't assume that people really have access to the things that we're talking about, and I think that this is an important point that if it's hidden away as tightly as Ben Rich was discussing, I think it's going to be up to the civilian scientific inventors and activist community to push it out there. I wouldn't be holding my breath for Lockheed Martin or Northrup to open up their bag of tricks and let one of these things come floating over a superbowl game.
AB: Oh trust me, I'm not.
SG: I'm not going to wait for that one!
AB: All right, listen, we're out of time. That's the hour.
SG: Great! Well, thank you so much, Art and... best to you!
AB: Good luck, Doctor, and thank you very much for being here, and I really mean Good Luck!......
[commercial break and end of interview]