Aliens, Coverups And Free Energy - Interview With Dr. Steven Greer
- Dear Friends,Love and Light.David
Aliens, Coverups, and Free Energy -
an interview with Dr. Steven Greer
by Richard M. Dolan
September 10, 2004
Earlier in 2004, Phenomena Editor Richard Dolan interviewed Dr. Steven Greer.
Greer is the founder of the Center for [the] Study of Extraterrestrial intelligence (CSETI), which claimes to have initiated communication and contact with extraterrestrials on Earth.
In addition, Greer has founded the Disclosure Project, dedicated to ending official secrecy regarding UFOs.
Dolan (D): In 1990, you formed the Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CSETI),and within three years you're getting an invitation to meet with Laurence Rockefeller. How did that happen so quickly?
Greer (G): To be honest with you, I think it was the force of the message. Not only had we put together an enormous amount of documentation about the phenomenon, but we had also formulated teams that were going all over the world, and had reproducible results with hundreds of witnesses - who had been able to signal to these objects. We had different teams in England, or Belgium, or Mexico, or places in the United States. From a number of them we got videotapes, photographs, or other witnesses who saw the event happening.
D: Some of the stories are extraordinary.
G: Yes, and they're all absolutely true. In fact they're way understated. This is what caught the attention of people like Laurence Rockefeller, Mrs. Buttros Ghali [wife of the former UN General Secretary], former head of Army Intelligence General Stubblebine, and eventually friends of the President [Clinton]. Some very good friends of the President became cognizant of what we were doing and urgently wanted us to get information to the President, to his science advisor, as well as to some of the senior military intelligence people in his administration after he got elected in 1993.
So we put together briefing materials and had meetings. The main thing is that this is an inside game. I hate to use that term, but this has mainly been a process of educating two classes of people who are "insiders."
One are the people who are on the inside, who should know, but don't, such as Presidents, CIA directors, and so on. The other part of it is educating, from a new paradigm, the national and international security control group - which some call MJ-12 - that deals with these issues. That is a committee of about two or three hundred people, and I know a number of them.
The issue here is to educate them to the need for disclosure, for safe applications of technologies, and for this matter to be handled wisely. We feel that it has been handled promiscuously and dangerously. If you look at some of the things that have happened over the last fifty years, aside from it eroding the rule of law and democracy, the actual handling of the subject itself has been dangerous.
It's a very dangerous thing for example, for the Commander in Chief of Atlantic Command, Admiral Harry Trane, not to have had adequate information on the subject and to scramble jets up and down the eastern seaboard trying to force down one of these objects. [This refers to an alleged military-UFO encounter from May 1981 - Ed.]. This kind of behavior, which has mainly taken place in a vacuum of secrecy, is a danger to the national security.
You have people who have a need to know who can't find out anything. And then you have other people who do know and are controlling it, but they're in a cult of secrecy that becomes hermetically sealed.
D: You briefed CIA director Woolsey, and there's talk that you briefed some other very high-level Clinton officials. I'm wondering who those were. For example, the name Al Gore came up. Did you in fact brief Al Gore on UFOs?
G: Well, there are a number of people in public life that I don't want to comment on, who we are currently meeting with. They are and extensive group of people. They include people who are currently friends with every living president. There's not a living president who doesn't have a close associate on our advisory team. So from that, you can extrapolate.
D: Can you give a sense of when these briefings were happening, the kinds of things what were said? What do you think of Bill Clinton himself, and his sense of all this?
G: First of all, for the most part, very few people in most administrations knew anything about the subject. They knew what they saw on a badly-done documentary on the Discovery Channel. It's a sad statement, but that is really true.
This is not just the executive branch. I met with a member of the intelligence community back in the 1990's. That was Senator Richard Bryan, and it was traumatic. I use that word because there's this sense that [these officials] know this is the truth. But the problem is that if you make the case this is real, and you're talking to someone who is the head of the CIA, or is a high official in the intelligence community, you find they have been denied access. They've made an inquiry through channels and have been told no such project exists.
This is frightening. Not in the sense that the phenomenon is is frightening, but that people could be at those levels of responsibility and operational divisions where they really do have a need to know, and where they are completely left in the dark. I would say that none of the reactions have been, "oh this is silly, it's nonsense." This is important to hear: I haven't had a single meeting with a high official, either scientific, political, or military, who has had that reaction. Not in the least.
D: What were some of the other types of reactions?
G: Dismay, deep concern, and great interest.
D: Would you say they generally believe there's some kind of cover up going on?
G: Oh yeah. I had with a member of congress who is on the House National Security Committee who said to me, bluntly: "We of course are window dressing."
I'll never forget the poignant moment when we were finishing the nearly three-hour meeting with CIA Director [James] Woolsey and his wife, Dr. Sue Woolsey (who at the time was the Chief Operating Officer at the National Academy of Sciences). He was getting ready to leave, Secret Service were out front, and I gave him a summary packet with a set of recommendations for the Clinton Administration. This was in the December of 1993. He looked at me and said, "Dr. Greer, how can we disclose what we are being denied access to? What would that say to the world?"
It's a very sobering thought, because part of the illusion here is that people we elect are actually in control. They're not. This is something that most people don't discuss. These [government officials] are not stupid or naive. Clinton was a very bright man. Cohen was a very brilliant man. Woolsey was a very smart man. They know there's something going on.
When we did our first briefing for members of Congress in 1997, we gathered about a dozen military witnesses of UFO events. Following that, I had a meeting over at the Pentagon with a senior official, an admiral at the Joint Chiefs of Staff level. My military advisor, a man with great access to the senior flag officers, was a friend of this gentleman. We went over there with a couple of these witnesses.
Prior to the meeting, I had given him some documents, code names, and numbers. These were current code names and code numbers. He took them and made inquiries at the Pentagon into these projects, and he hit pay dirt. He actually located these projects. When he made an inquiry, wanting to know what these projects were doing, he was flat out told, "Sir, you don't have a need to know." This is an admiral with the Intelligence Director. They told him he didn't have a need to know. He was furious.
D: These are the code words for UFO related programs?
G: Yes. They're actually ETV, extraterrestrial vehicle, related. No one uses the word UFO, by the way. UFO was coined after they knew they weren't unidentified and they knew they didn't fly. (Laughs).
By the end of this briefing, this admiral said to me, "If this is true, and I have no reason to doubt it, you're dealing with some of the most powerful technologies. These are things that could do circles around my B-2 stealth bombers." He also said, "Unless the civilian authorities authorize me to push further, there's not much I can do." I then told him what we were planning to do with the Disclosure Project. To the extent that we could get people and documents and other things, we were going to put them out there. He looked at me and said, "If you can do it, do it."
I was in Britain meeting with the Ministry of Defence, and also the former head of the Ministry of Defence, Lord Hill Norton. He's a Sea Lord, a Five Star Admiral. At one point he asked, "Why the hell wasn't I told about this when I was head of the Ministry of Defence?"
I said "Sir, what would you have done while you were head of the MoD, and you found out that there was a clandestine group that was transnational - e.g. transcended national borders - that had this information. That had lied to the Presidents, Prime Ministers, and high officials. that had used hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to work on thies projects, and had sequestered them inside private corporate structures. And had also, literally, engaged in elimination - murder - in order to keep it secret?"
He looked at me and said, "I wouldn't have stood for it for one bloody minute!"
I said, "That's why they weren't going to tell you, and that's why they will never tell you."
You see, the first thing these folks do is a soul biopsy. By that I mean they're going to take a reading of you as a person. Your whole person. If they don't think you'll go along with the game, they're not going to tell you. Or they'll tell you disinformation, or set you on the wrong track.
Whether or not you know has nothing to do with your position. This is the big mistake that the UFO research community has made. Assumptions have been make, [like] "oh, you're the head of the National Security Agency, you know." Some NSA chiefs have known, some haven't. [Former NSA Director] Bobby Ray Inman knew. Others haven't. Some CIA directors had knowledge, others didn't. Bill Colby knew a great deal.
D: Is that why Bill Colby died?
G: Yeah, basically, I mean that's an untouched story.
D: He died in 1996, in what was described as an 'unfortunate boating accident.'
G: [long pause] Well, I have never said this publicly, but I'll say it now because this is now many years gone. The week that he died, he was scheduled to meet with a member of our board, to transfer an enormous sum of money and actual hard material. Proof of this whole matter. Because he was sick of the secrecy, he was old, and he wanted it to come out. He very much supported what we wanted to do. One of his best friends, who was an old colonel, was our go-between. And it was under very suspicious circumstances, that's as far as I'll go.
I will say that this colonel, who was good friends with Bill Colby, came to the wake of a good friend of mine who died - there were three of us who got metastatic cancer the same month, and I'm the only one left living, all under rather strange conditions, that's all I'll say about that. He said to me, "You know, we can't look back. We've got to to forward." These are tragic losses that both of us have had. It's very emotional I can't talk about this and not get choked up. Some of the things that have happened to keep this secret are really unconscionable.
D: I've been suspicious of Colby's death for a long time. I think a lot of people are.
G: We know exactly what happened. I know when it happened, how it happened, who ... but the whole point is that I'm not one of these take a pound of flesh, revenge kind of guys. I'm more like, "let's keep our eye on the ball." The ball is the future of civilization we have here on this planet. We're running out of time to do some of the right things that should have happened in the 1950s.
D: What about your efforts regarding Zero Point Energy?
G: From the Disclosure Project and the CSETI work we met a number of scientists from places like Murray Hill, Lockheed, and Northrop. They worked on some of these exotic propulsion and energy systems, and had not already been gobbled up by the military-industrial-intelligence complex. We concluded that there was actually enough science and invention to form an effort to bring it out.
So a spinoff of the Disclosure Project became Space Energy Access Systems, Inc. It's not so much that we're trying to bring out antigravity, electrogravity, or magnetogravitic technologies to the public at the first blow. But revealing science and physics behind energy generation capabilities that would explain the behavior of UFOs.
We've developed a collection of some two dozen or maybe three dozen inventions and inventors. Some are bench-type prototypes. Some are a little more developed, dealing with energy and propulsion systems that merit further research and development. My opinion is that it will take ten or twenty million dollars to take most of those things into anything of commercial value. By that, I mean something you could put into your house, start operating off the grid, extracting energy from the quantum vacuum space, the so-called zero-point energy field.
We can now state with some confidence that we have observed and tested systems out there that are far enough along that they're not decades away. Maybe 12 to 24 months away from having at least Generation One energy devices that could completely replace oil, gas, coal, and nuclear power.
Of course, we have a basic R&D need that is going to be rather expensive. Large corporations will not fund this, and if they do, they're doing to "black box" it. These technologies have been known since the 1940s and 1950s, and it's been "black shelf" for that long. But there are some cracks of light coming out. One of them is a powerful member of the Senate that we're meeting with. He's showing a tremendous amount of interest in this area - and I think I can open some doors for some basic science R&D funding.
D: Do you have a device, or a blueprint of a device, that actually would produce excess energy?
G: Well, of course, Tom Beardon and his MEG [Motionless Electromagnetic Generator] is being developed that does this. It's not ready for commercialization. It needs quite a bit of further R&D. But, yes there are. We visited another gentleman who's got a device, more old fashioned, kind of a Tesla-type rotary system. But this device was putting out 400-500 watts of usable power at 60 hertz and 110 volts from basically the quantum vacuum field. It was quite remarkable when this person had some threats, he was frightened.
For many of these inventors, unfortunately, the currency of fear goes a long way to keeping them from being too bold. But, yes, we have seen these things, and I'm optimistic that it can be done. My big concern is will it take longer than the earth will allow. There are some serious problems going on right now.
D: Yes. We're in the middle of a natural gas crisis in North America and we're maybe a decade away from hitting the petroleum wall.
G: Correct, and the people I work with at the Department of Energy have pointed out maybe less than a decade from now, particularly if there's any economic development at all in Russia,China, and India.
D: Plus, there's evidence OPEC's cooked their books, so there's really not telling how much is left.
G: Yes, and also what the refining and shipping capabilities are. This is a very complex, centralized, energy supply line trying to feed six billion people. One of the problems with the whole fossil fuel game is that its very zero sum. Meaning that there's only so much of it to go around. It almost requires that about 80 percent of the world's population be impoverished, while maybe twenty percent, if we're lucky, can live something of a civilized lifestyle. When, locked away in these black boxes of covert industry and military intelligence, are the solutions for this.
D: Unfortunately it does not look as though we are even close to moving in that direction.
G: Well, I wouldn't be so sure. There's the outside game and the inside game. The inside game that I see going on is encouraging. I would estimate upwards of 40 or 45 percent of the policy group that deals with these issues are in favor of this coming out. I know there are preparations being made for that to happen. I think a number of people in circles around the world are beginning to look at this problem, and are thinking there are serious secrecy issues that need to get resolved.
There are also some promising technologies that they are just beginning to be made aware of. That's why I tell people, part of this is an educational and "consciousness raising" process. But part of it also is being bold enough to say "we're prepared to provide the leadership to do this."