Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 30, 1998 - Art Bell

02:42:10

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - UFO Disclosure - Steven Bassett - Steven Greer

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening, or good morning, as the case may be in your time zone, wherever you may be, and there are so many.
	Stretching from the Hawaiian Menteishan Islands, out west, to the Caribbean, in the east, South America, down there, north, all the way to Nepal, up there, and worldwide, on ye olde internet.
	This, of course, is Coast to Coast AM.
	Great to be here.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Well, let's see.
	What are we going to do tonight?
	Well, in about a half hour, we're going to speak to the nation's only UFO lobbyist, Stephen Bassett.
	Steve Bassett.
	And then, at the top of the hour, we will include Dr. Stephen Greer.
	See SETI's Dr. Stephen Greer.
	And we'll see exactly where Disclosure is.
	So that's directly ahead.
	Checking the news.
	The Senate has voted 80 to 19 to approve adding Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic to the nearly half century old North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, leaving the door open now for other former Soviet satellites to join later.
	Now, this is pretty interesting in a lot of ways.
	Canada, Denmark, Germany, and Norway also have to approve it.
	Slowly but surely, everybody is joining NATO.
	Maybe the possible exception, of course, of China.
	But I started sitting here and thinking about it.
	If everybody... What is the effect when everybody has joined NATO?
	Literally everybody.
	Eventually Russia.
	And then maybe we'd change China.
	And when everybody has finally joined NATO, what do we have?
	We have a One World Organization.
	Has anybody out there thought about that?
	Defending against what?
	The North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
	Defending against what?
	Just a thought.
	Execs of some of the nation's largest high-tech companies are urging the Department of Justice to lay off Microsoft and let them go ahead and release Windows 98.
	I would join them in that.
	Why don't they lay off Microsoft, for goodness sakes.
	President Clinton refused today to explain the nature of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
	He said, quote, I have nothing to say.
	That was it, I have nothing to say.
	Clinton said, I think modestly observant people are fully capable of drawing their own conclusions, end quote.
	And of course, striking a second time at President Clinton's friend Whitewater, prosecutors charged Webster Hubble and his wife and two associates tonight with conspiring to avoid taxes On hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments, Hubble received from Clinton supporters.
	So there you have it.
	Anybody out there have any thoughts on what happens once everybody belongs to NATO?
	John in Ohio writes the following art.
	I just heard on my local Fox affiliate news station here, in Ohio, this morning, that they, being genetic engineers or whoever, are going to take samples from the Shroud of Turin, from which they are going to try and clone living cells so they can clone Jesus Christ.
	Can you believe it?
	Hearing this on our local Fox station.
	What is wrong with these people?
	Do they think they can play God?
	John.
	Well, John, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps, perhaps, John, That is how the Second Coming is intended to occur.
	By man's own hand.
	Wouldn't that be something?
	In Hong Kong, they have closed five beaches Thursday because of a new species of red tide.
	This is a very toxic phenomenon that has already killed, check this out, 1,500 tons of fish since mid-March.
	Red tides generally are caused when water temperatures increase and algae breed quickly, soaking up oxygen and releasing fish-killing toxins.
	As an interesting little item from Warsaw, Polish Roman Catholics can now plot graphs of their sins.
	That's right, plot graphs of their sins with a computer program designed to help them confess.
	sins are listed under biblical commandments and by their gravity now you know I'm not sure what obviously thou shalt not kill would be very grave but beyond that I'm not sure how they would line up does anybody out there know I was so curious one time about the Ten Commandments that I actually did an on-the-air survey and asked people how many of the top ten Of the ten commandments, not ten, um, you actually have broken.
	It is an interesting question to ask.
	Meanwhile, in Beijing, fist-sized hailstones have killed nine people.
	That's it.
	Hold your fists together.
	Imagine a fist-sized hailstone.
	Anyway, it bonked twelve people onto the other side.
	The hailstorm was accompanied by, of course, thunderstorms, gales, and a tornado that demolished houses.
	But that's something.
	Fist-size hailstones.
	All right.
	I've got more here, but not time to get to it right now, because I want to get a few calls in.
	We're going to be picking up Steve Bassett here at the bottom of the hour.
	Oh, there is one item, though.
	Actually, two.
	There is a photograph that you have got to see.
	If this doesn't crack you up, nothing ever will.
	I don't know who did it.
	Somebody who had a whole lot of time on their hands, I guess.
	Try and identify everybody in the photograph.
	It's on my website now.
	You will find it on the latest news and web items, you know, right there at the top.
	Entitled, Photo of New TV Series, Aliens Island.
	And I'm not going to identify the people in the photograph for you, but whoever did it is one talented geek.
	There's no question about that.
	Who had to have spent days, if not weeks, putting all this together.
	It is simply remarkable.
	And the other item is, you'll see something there entitled, two digits for a date.
	And we are seeking qualified, talented people.
	Two digits for a date would be the words for a song.
	And we are giving you the lyrics, again sent by some person who otherwise didn't want to be identified for whatever reason.
	It's a cute little year 2000 program song that we want use of some singer out there with talent and music to put together and send to us.
	So we're giving you the lyrics.
	The lyrics are on the website.
	It's called Two Digits for a Date.
	We want some creative person out there to go ahead, take the words, make it into song, and send it to us.
	And your reward, if you are the one who sends in the most creative effort, will be to have it played here on the air.
	probably increasingly as we get closer to the year 2000.
	Alright, let us go to the phone, get a few calls in before the bottom
	of the hour here.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Hey, how's it going?
	It's going fine.
	First time caller, I'm calling from Edmonton, Alberta.
	Oh, yes.
	Oh, yes.
	Unfortunately, is this open line right now, I hope?
	Sure.
	Okay, because the station up here stopped carrying you.
	Well, it used to be CJCA.
	Right.
	And they actually, of all things, turned in their license to the government.
	Yeah, well, because they had this guy on who was always trashing them, so the government took the license away.
	But that's helping to run up here, right?
	Is it really?
	Yeah, I mean, is it really that bad?
	Yeah, it's really heavy government regulations, which you can see on the radio and such.
	I guess I better not say anything bad about the Canadian government, huh?
	Watch what you say, or they'll come down hard on you.
	I think they're going after Howard Stern right now.
	I don't know for sure.
	Unfortunately, I'd get you up on a Seattle station, but it doesn't always come in.
	It depends what the weather's like outside.
	Yeah, a Como in good condition should do some roaring up there.
	Absolutely, yeah, if I listen to Como.
	So, my question is to you.
	I've been listening to you for a little while.
	I've always wanted to call you, because I had this really weird experience, and I want to know if you've ever heard anything like this.
	Sorry, my dog's going a little crazy.
	I don't know if you can hear me.
	Ah, no, it's all right.
	Let your dog go crazy.
	I can handle it.
	What is your weird experience?
	Okay, well, Edmonton is, I guess, kind of the prairies.
	I don't know if you've ever been in northern Canada.
	It's kind of the prairies.
	Lots of big river valleys, and we're on a river valley here, and this was a couple years ago, uh, in the wintertime, and I was out tobogganing with some friends, and, uh, it was, I don't know, not very cold outside, maybe minus ten, I'm not sure, Fahrenheit, sorry, excuse my ignorance, but I only know it's South Celsius, but, uh, we were out tobogganing, and, uh, all of a sudden, the sky just, this is about ten o'clock at night, and the sky just lit up, right?
	Like, uh, like brighter than daylight, this is insane, right?
	So we're in this river valley, and, uh, I can see, as far as I can see, and it's so bright, And it's like time almost stopped.
	So for a second there, I thought, geez, what exploded, right?
	I thought maybe there was an explosion or something.
	Because on the top of the valley, there's an oil refinery.
	So I thought maybe something was going at the oil refinery, but there was no noise.
	It was just bright as day, bright as day.
	And I'm looking around and I can see it.
	It was like time stopped.
	Sounds like the brightness of Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
	Remember when the guy was in the truck?
	Remember that?
	Yeah, well, see, that's what I'm wondering.
	It was just the weirdest thing, right?
	Was it that kind of brightness?
	It was that bright.
	It was like a white light, right?
	But it wasn't like I couldn't see.
	I could see all around me, and I'm just like, what is going on?
	And then it stopped.
	I looked at my friends, and they're like, what the heck just happened, right?
	We're all dumbfounded.
	Then a park ranger, this is the weird part, right?
	A park ranger comes up through the bushes.
	I don't know what he was doing down there, right?
	But he comes up.
	And we said, what the heck was that light?
	He asked you?
	Pardon me?
	He asked you?
	No, no, we asked him.
	Oh, I see, okay.
	And what'd he say?
	He's like, what light?
	And we're like, what are you talking about?
	The whole valley was just lit up, and he's like, sir, I don't know what you guys are talking about.
	Jumped in the car and drove off.
	Uh-huh.
	It's just the weirdest thing that's ever happened to me, and I want to know if you've ever heard anything like this before, because I guess you're kind of the authority on it.
	I am not the authority on it.
	I'm a good listener.
	You're kind of the middleman, right?
	I'm the middleman, yes.
	Well, maybe the park... See, this will get me kicked off again.
	The park rangers in Canada may be in league with them.
	Right.
	I mean, that's kind of where we're going there, right?
	Yeah, that's what I'm wondering.
	If he was in on something or what?
	What did he do?
	Well, you must have some kind of agency in your government that deals with this kind of thing, don't you?
	I'm sure.
	There's too much bureaucracy up here, though.
	I can't keep it all straight.
	What is it that you have?
	We have these various, you know, like the FBI and CIA.
	Well, we have the RCMP, obviously, the Mounted Police, but we also have, like, CSIS, which is kind of like CIA.
	I don't know.
	They're always up to something.
	I don't know.
	You know, you've been on here long enough, they could have traced your call.
	And that dog of yours, that dog is barking at something.
	Yeah, I wonder what it is, Art.
	You're making me suspicious now.
	I'm watching for headlights coming up my driveway.
	You take care, and let me know how it comes out.
	If you're able.
	If we don't hear from you, we will assume the worst.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello?
	Hello?
	Art Bell?
	Good guess.
	Oh, wow.
	This is the first time I've come up on the radio.
	I see.
	Well, turn your radio off.
	That's very important.
	Who are you and where are you?
	My name is Amelia.
	I'm from Akron, Ohio.
	Akron, okay.
	I just wanted to see if I could try to get you on, and I did.
	Now that you've got me, what are you going to say?
	Well, I've got a little story for you.
	I don't know if you have time, but they Okay.
	I don't know if I ever was abducted, but I know somebody who was, and I was a witness to this.
	You saw an abduction?
	You actually saw an abduction?
	Well, this is when I was a little kid.
	How little?
	About seven.
	Seven.
	How old are you now?
	Thirty-five.
	Thirty-five.
	And you're sure of what you saw?
	Well, this is what happened.
	I don't know if it's right or not, but they took You be the judge of it.
	Okay.
	I was about... Okay.
	In Mexico, when kids are ready to go and date, some parents go and find a little kid to get to their daughters, and the daughters get the little kid, so they can be like a little chaperone for them.
	You mean when... Now, let me get this straight.
	You were living in Mexico then?
	Yeah.
	Where in Mexico?
	What part?
	Baja, California.
	Okay, in Baja.
	And so, when girls go on dates, they send the little kids along as chaperones?
	Yeah.
	Well, that's cruel.
	Well, not really.
	Sort of cruel.
	Well, yeah.
	I mean, if I went to pick up a girl and I had to take, you know, three or four, like, five and seven year olds, what a lousy date.
	Tell me about it.
	Anyway, your story.
	Okay, well, she came up and picked me up at my house.
	And we were going to go and see her boyfriend.
	Uh huh.
	Okay.
	He was up in a field taking care of this guy who was making adobe bricks for his new addition to his house.
	Making adobe bricks, okay.
	Okay.
	And we were in this field.
	We came up and the field was empty.
	So we were coming back from the field and this bright light came up.
	Okay.
	And that was it.
	I couldn't, okay, after that, the only thing I remember is the guy who was making the double seals, I mean the bread bricks, came up and brought me back home.
	And took you home?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	My arms, okay, you see you have little hair over your arms?
	It looks like somebody just came up and burned me all over.
	It wasn't, you know, like when you come up to... Oh, no, I understand.
	You're saying you were burned, like a sunburn?
	Mm-hmm.
	Yeah, I mean, my eyebrows... Again, you know, that sounds just like close encounters of the third kind.
	Remember when they interviewed the guy in the beginning and he said the sun came up?
	Uh-huh.
	Sounds like that.
	Yeah, but okay... But this also sounds like a very good excuse for having lost the little ones on a date.
	Yeah, the thing is they couldn't find her.
	See, here we are.
	I mean, she was last for, okay, we couldn't find, okay, they couldn't get out of me, where was she?
	Okay?
	And the only thing I could tell them, it was the light who took her.
	Well, the light who took her.
	Now, what did the parents say about this?
	They couldn't have been real wild about that explanation.
	Oh, no.
	Sure, all right.
	Well, listen, I've got to go because we're moving toward the bottom of the hour, but that was a good story.
	And I've got to think about that a little bit.
	Is that a tradition in Mexico?
	You have a teenage daughter, you send all the little ones along with her if she goes out on a date?
	That'll do it, all right.
	All right, well, we're going to pause here.
	Hey Ma, she was taken by a light.
	That's all we know.
	When we come back, Steve Bassett joins us.
	I'm Art Bell from the High Desert.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	Why don't you ask him what's going on?
	Why don't you ask him please don't go so far?
	Don't say that you love me Just tell me that you want me Don't say that you love me
	Don't say that you love me Just tell me that you want me
	Why don't you ask him what's going on?
	Just tell me that you want me Take a trip through the city lights
	Take a trip to the city lights Take the long way to home Take the long way to home You never see what you wanna see
	Make your long way to the moon Make your long way to the moon
	Never see what you wanna see.
	Rail a train to the gallery Take the long way to home When you're up on the stage It's so unforgettable
	Unforgettable I may have owned you And I've seen the big illusion inside You're a reality
	Take the long way to home Long way to home
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	Coming up in a moment, the nation's only UFO lobbyist, Steve Bassett.
	And we'll ask him about many things.
	Then at the top of the hour, we'll be joined by Dr. Steven Greer, who heads An organization known as C-SETI, and he is a very, very intense individual.
	So all of that, directly ahead.
	All right, here from our nation's capital, where I guess he does that kind of work, is Stephen Bassett, our nation's only UFO lobbyist.
	Stephen, welcome to the program.
	Thanks, Art.
	It's been a while.
	I'm glad to be back.
	It has been a while, hasn't it?
	As a matter of fact, there's a lot of water, so to speak, under the bridge since we last talked, so there's a lot for me to ask you about.
	But I know that you want to say something about Sarah McLendon's article, which I read several times on the air, and of course we had on the website.
	It's up there someplace.
	Oh, there is much that I want to talk about tonight, and a great deal of that I think really we're not going to be able to get into until I think after Steven Greer, she said, has come on.
	But we can allude a little bit to some of these things.
	But very quickly, Sarah McClendon is continuing to look into the issues, and it's likely that we will see follow-ups of that article.
	She continues to get calls from all over the country.
	She has had people who have actually traveled a couple of thousand miles, in a sense, not totally to see her, but not insignificant to see her, just to pay their respects.
	And so, there is a lot going on there, which I want to touch on later.
	Why don't we have more Sarah McLendons?
	I mean, she is such a feisty, independent, if there's a story here, I'll go after it kind of person.
	And, of course, she's still going strong at, what, about 88?
	87.
	Soon 88.
	And where are the new Sarah McLendons?
	seven eighty-seven uh... soon eighty-eight and uh... what we where are the new
	sarah mclendon's where where are the where are the uh... the new everett dirksen
	and uh...
	and uh... andrew jackson we are we have become a we we are in an age of
	great success and great wealth and We're having a great time.
	We've all got cable and we're enjoying ourselves.
	It's a little harder for people to put their comfort on the line.
	There's a lot more to lose, I think, on the part of people, particularly people who have success and power and accomplish things.
	So maybe that's part of the reason.
	Who knows?
	Maybe it's just bad TV.
	But Sarah McLendon has the ultimate journalist heaven.
	Perhaps the greatest story of all time is bubbling right up underneath the surface.
	And of all the White House correspondents and all the gin joints in the world, she is the only one who will address the subject.
	That's right.
	She has it all to herself.
	She is fearless.
	Exactly.
	This is sort of like walking into a casino, and all of the staff have gone home, and the place is empty, and you're just there all alone.
	So, she's in a very unusual position, but she's earned it, because she's just a fiercely independent, wonderfully focused individual who is afraid of absolutely nothing.
	Well, it seems as though, A, you have to stay independent to be able to do what she does.
	B, you have to be...
	Well, that is, beholden to nobody, and have a very inquisitive mind, and, frankly, be the kind of person who doesn't give a damn.
	But before we go further, I think we better educate some of your audience, maybe a few million new people out there who don't know what we're talking about here.
	First of all, Ms.
	McClendon is the longest-serving White House correspondent.
	Absolutely.
	Still active, 51 years, 11 presidents.
	She went to a news News conference today that Mr. Clinton gave and asked him a question on China, as a matter of fact.
	She has covered just about every story there is.
	She had great focus on women's rights and veterans issues.
	She was a veteran herself, an officer in the war.
	Right.
	But one of her absolute core issues from the day she became a journalist was the issue of open government.
	And government which simply does not use secrecy as a way to leverage itself over citizens' rights.
	So, it's hardly surprising that when this issue was brought to her attention that she was so willing to look into it.
	So, that's the first thing your listeners need to know.
	And the second thing is that she examined some of the evidence regarding Philip Corso's allegations in his book, The Day After Roswell, as well as the allegations and statements that were made by Steven Greer on your show for the first time, January 5th of this year, and began doing a story at that time.
	That story would have come out in early January, except we all know what happened then, and it didn't.
	In fact, it came out on March 30th of this year, somewhat, I think, prompted by the Mars developments.
	Things were starting to get very interesting, and some attention was being diverted from the ongoing Washington Passion play.
	So that article went out, and it was a simple statement that the lid was coming off the government cover-up, and it talked about Corso and Greer and some other issues.
	It attracted a great deal of attention.
	It went out to all of the media in the United States, all of them, and most, virtually all of the media in the United States did not pick it up.
	The New York Times and the Post and all those things didn't pick it up.
	But one media picked it up, a gentleman by the name of Art Bell, He runs this late night show out of a small place in Pahrump and put it up on his website.
	That article probably got about 100 times more attention than some of those fiercely written articles that appear in the New York Times every day.
	As a result, that issue did get spread far and wide.
	It just didn't have the informator of Sam Donaldson or Cokie Roberts.
	She has been getting calls ever since.
	She's thrilled about that.
	I know.
	Any journalist wants their work to be received and wants to have an impact.
	But more importantly, she's giving a message to the rest of them.
	I'm 87 years old.
	I need a wheelchair to get around.
	I've got a bad hip that's been replaced.
	But I work every day, and there isn't a story that I'm afraid of.
	No issue.
	No government agency.
	Nothing.
	It's really quite true.
	If you look at, for example, Barry Goldwater, there's a guy, whether you agree or disagree with him, He doesn't give a damn.
	He'll say exactly what he wants to say, look into what he wants to look into, and doesn't give a damn.
	So, it seems like age is a valuable asset.
	Well, he's kind of that way when he was a younger man.
	I have to plead guilty to not being fair or appreciating Barry Goldwater when I was a younger man.
	I was one of those kids that was out in the streets.
	You know what I'm talking about?
	Remember those days?
	Yes.
	And he was a right-wing conservative.
	Well, I'll tell ya.
	I would really love to have his right-wing conservatives back in play, and have that be the counterpart to the Democratic-Liberal agenda.
	I didn't appreciate him then, but I do now.
	Unfortunately, he's quite aged.
	But yes, he is of that ilk.
	It is a quality that America has had in its past for a long time, but I've got to tell you, it's just seeping through the cracks.
	In the saloon floor like the gold dust in Paint Your Wagon.
	I don't know if you ever saw that.
	Sure.
	It's slowly draining away.
	Politicians and journalists and actors and entertainers who seem to all pretty much be interchangeable now are just doing so well and making millions of dollars that why on earth would you want to really take on a dangerous, difficult, risky, complicated, Well, because it's fun, and because it's... You see, I'm beginning to get that way myself.
	I'm getting older.
	I'll soon be 53, and I find the older I get, the more I don't care.
	I'm willing to go after anything.
	And I wonder why that is.
	Now, you're not being dissuaded by those millions you're starting to pack into the bank, are you, Art?
	No.
	No?
	Okay, well good.
	Look, my attitude about money, and it's not millions, my attitude about money is that as long as you have enough to be comfortable, I'm happy.
	Beyond that, it's all just money stacked somewhere, right?
	I don't care.
	I enjoy what I do and I'm noting that as I get older, I'm more willing to go after things that are very likely to get me in trouble.
	And I don't care.
	And I think that that is exactly why you appreciate what she has done and appreciate her so much.
	And you are certainly somebody that is about the least likely to be changed by whatever success comes your way.
	This is what we want.
	We want to be able to have a nation where people can be very successful and remain still independent and remain true to values and not be corrupted.
	It's possible.
	It doesn't have to be the other way around.
	To some degree, I'm going to give this to you really straight, Steve.
	I already gave you my attitude about money, but the other side of the coin is, if you have enough of it, then You don't give a damn.
	I mean, it's not like somebody can squeeze you financially and point you in the direction they want.
	You know, screw them.
	You've already got enough money.
	So to hell with them.
	You do what you want to do.
	It's true.
	There's a certain truth to that.
	But remember, you're a man who is quite comfortable and quite contented.
	Living in Pahrump out there in a pretty modest situation.
	Yeah, I'm not driven by money, Steve.
	Americans have a wonderful capacity to double, triple, and quadruple their income and still remain right on the edge.
	In other words, you're making a million a year, but now you've got an $800,000 townhouse, a country house.
	And even though you're respected, famous, and quite wealthy, the fact is that one wrong turn and suddenly you've got serious trouble.
	And so whatever.
	I mean, we're kind of going afield here.
	Let's just say... No, no, not really.
	In other words, I don't live that kind of lifestyle, so I don't risk that kind of problem.
	In other words, one wrong turn and I'm in deep doo-doo.
	It's not like that.
	It is like there's enough money so that I don't... It's not even a consideration.
	And it frees me.
	I can go after anything I want.
	I am exactly the same way.
	I totally agree with you.
	We need many, many more people that are taking this approach to life.
	Now, systemically, if we're speaking about politics, which is more where I deal, you see it classically in the campaign finance issue.
	When you get to a point where even Congress people running for office are having to spend a million, a million and a half dollars in some podunk district out in the boonies, and senators from large states are having to spend $20 million, and presidents $150 million.
	When you have your politicians having to spend that kind of money, which means they've got to go get a lot of it from a lot of people and say a lot of things and pat a lot of backs and make a lot of promises, when you have that kind of politics with that money dependent, then when you go to the politician and say, look, I want you to speak up on one of the most difficult issues in history and risk everything, can I count on you for that?
	Obviously, they're likely to then say, sure, no problem.
	It goes lower and lower because they know that if they alienate by really getting aggressive in their politics, And I'm walking away from politics, Stephen, in a lot of ways.
	I am and I'm not.
	that's why so many fairly good people like our baker others simply walked
	away from the house and senate the last ten years and i'm walking away from
	politics as steven in a lot of what i am and i'm not uh...
	the two-party system is a failure
	uh... in terms of accomplishing something for the american people today and i
	mean both the democrats and the republicans
	I'm getting ready to leave the Republican Party.
	I'm a registered Republican, and I'm about to become a Libertarian, I think.
	There's got to be another way, because I have virtually, I'd say, given up.
	But I've almost given up on the President's system, and I'm very disenchanted.
	Well, I've been listening to you all week.
	This has been your intellectual week.
	You really, really just went right up the ladder here, in terms of your guests and the discussions.
	I've been listening all week.
	It's quite interesting.
	You've touched on some very complex and difficult subjects.
	Let me say that what I'm going to be talking about tonight is going to touch on that, too.
	Before we get totally to the bottom of the hour, let me take a little segue here.
	A lot of the focus of what I'll be talking about centers around the fact that the Paradigm Research Group official website was published to the Internet tonight at midnight.
	It's a long time in the making.
	And many of the things that we're going to talk about tonight are going to have links associated with them.
	And those links are available to people who go to that site, and of course they can go to that site, but come into your site.
	Go to my site, go down to the name Stephen Bassett, and you'll see two links there.
	And then when they go over to my site, they will see links for the Bell Show.
	And they'll go to the link that I'm referring to during the show, and then they can kind of follow what's going on.
	I want to get that out of the way, and that includes, and hopefully it'll be up fairly soon, the March 30 story written by Sarah McLendon that went out nationally.
	They will be able to link to that over there.
	They may be able to do that on your site if Keith is able to get something up.
	In any event, that story will be available to them.
	But if I just may toot my horn a little bit, this is an idea that had been in the works for almost two years.
	It was originally conceived by me while I was working up in Cambridge with the Program for Extraordinary Experience.
	It did happen sooner because my webmastering skills, unfortunately, are somewhat limited.
	But I got very lucky.
	I got the support of some people who really know what they're doing, and through the supremely over-the-top efforts of my webmaster, Jim Boca.
	who founded Pulsar that works out of Gaithersburg here in Maryland.
	He is a site creator and manager and a very good one.
	He's worked himself to a frazzle to help me get this site up in a reasonable length of time.
	And I've also gotten a lot of support from a host server out of the heartland of the country in Springfield, Missouri by the name of Rick Thompson and OzarkNet.
	So between OzarkNet and Pulsar, by the way, which have links over at my site, I was able to get this site out.
	It is called the Paradigm Clock, and it is based upon a concept that was originated in 1947 by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.
	And that year... That was the Atomic Clock.
	It was called the Clock of Doom.
	Eventually it was changed to the Doomsday Clock, and it became one of the great Semiotic metaphors of our time.
	Didn't it get up to about 10 minutes before midnight?
	It started out at 7 minutes to midnight, and the closest it ever got was 2 minutes, I believe.
	Really?
	And now, of course, since the Berlin Wall fell, it is a neutral position of 15 minutes.
	Now, for those people who don't know what the Doomsday Clock was, it's really quite simple.
	The scientists that were working on the atomics back then had a lot of concerns about where this was taking them.
	Not hard to understand that.
	And they had actually made political efforts, talking about the politics of UFOs, talking about the politics of atomic energy.
	There were many scientists that had made efforts during the Manhattan Project to bring the political issue into play.
	They knew that this couldn't just be science.
	That if they didn't think politically about this, that there was going to be some real trouble.
	And they made approaches to Roosevelt regarding not keeping the Russians out of the loop on this, that they were allies.
	They made approaches about not using the bomb at all.
	And a lot of other things, which were purely political and ethical and social issues.
	But the clock basically was a political illustration of how close they thought we were to destroying ourselves.
	Nuclear war.
	Nuclear war, yeah.
	Midnight on the doomsday clock meant we had just launched a nuclear war.
	Right.
	And over the years, it was changed about nine times.
	Depending upon what was going on in the world, it would be either moved closer to midnight or further away.
	And so now you have constructed its counterpart, the paradigm clock.
	Exactly.
	And the paradigm clock obviously doesn't go back to 1947, but what I have done is I have created a retroactive timeline so that it sort of began hypothetically in 1947, which, interestingly enough, is exactly when it should begin.
	There's a wonderful parallel to this.
	They are not accidental.
	And midnight on the paradigm clock is very simple.
	We have crossed the paradigm line at that moment, and when it turns midnight, that is when We as a people are formally informed, one way or another, by the authorities that we put our trust in.
	Disclosure.
	That the alien presence is here.
	Yeah.
	It is the moment of disclosure, right?
	The real disclosure.
	Archaeology on Mars is a major disclosure, but that's not midnight on the clock.
	Midnight o'clock is a major moment in, obviously, human history, and it obviously is not quite as negative as nuclear war.
	No, but I bet the Monica Lewinsky scandal and all the rest of that moved it away from midnight a little bit.
	Yes, it did.
	I did.
	And so what I'm doing is I'm, from now on, going to be chronicling those things which take us closer or further away.
	And I've also kind of put the retroactive chronicle there for people to get a sense of how it's worked in the past.
	All right, Steve, we're at the top of the hour, so we've got to pause right here.
	Stay right where you are from the high desert.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	The Coast to Coast AM concert was held at the San Francisco International Airport on April 30th, 1998.
	The concert was held at the San Francisco International Airport on April 30th, 1998.
	Premier Radio Network presents Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight's program originally aired April 30th, 1998.
	Good morning.
	In a moment, C-SETI's Dr. Stephen Greer, taking time out from a very, very busy medical practice to spend some time with us this evening.
	We'll tell you about CZEDI in a moment.
	Alright, back east we go now to Dr. Stephen Greer.
	C-SETI's Dr. Stephen Greer.
	Dr. Greer, welcome to the program.
	Thank you, glad to be here.
	Stephen Bassett is with us as well and may have comments from time to time.
	Doctor, I guess the best thing we could do in the beginning, since I have a lot of new listeners, is for you to explain to people sort of a, what is C-SETI 101?
	What is C-SETI?
	Well, CSETI stands for the Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence, and we call it CSETI because it's easier, of course, and it's a 501c3 nonprofit that was founded in 1990, about eight years ago, by myself.
	And what we have are two essential parts of our program.
	The original one was a program to train people to go out to areas where UFOs have been seen And to try to observe them in real time and to, if possible, signal to them or in some way try to communicate with these objects.
	And we have trained teams throughout the world and there are now dozens of such teams that are up and functioning.
	In that regard, we're having actually training expeditions in Colorado in June.
	From the 12th to the 18th or 19th, I think it is, and then in England this summer and in Norway in July.
	Essentially what that program involves, which is called the Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind Initiative, is an attempt to establish some type of communication with these life forms whom we know are extraterrestrial in origin.
	and try to do this in a real time setting rather than always trying to research things in a retrospective model, which means looking back and going back in history.
	This is really quite exciting.
	We've had some major encounters in Mexico, Belgium, England, throughout the United States and elsewhere.
	It's an experiment which we are continuing to expand.
	The other part of the project is called Project Starlight.
	This was initially a code name used internally.
	For a project where we were identifying top-secret military and aerospace witnesses, as well as other evidence related to UFOs, and then briefing senior White House, Clinton administration officials, U.N.
	officials, and members of Congress in an attempt to set the stage for a global disclosure of very, very high-level And first-hand whistleblowers and witnesses to UFO projects, events, and programs.
	Doctor, may I ask you, how sure are you that you are not trying to force disclosure of something that does not exist?
	Well, we're very sure of it.
	Frankly, the evidence and the witnesses are so overwhelming and so compelling.
	Now, it doesn't mean that it's all a clear picture.
	There's a lot that we don't know.
	However, certainly, for example, a man that I'm working with now who's quite elderly, who's a former captain of a ship in the South Atlantic in 1963, actually retrieved extraterrestrial life forms from the water after an object had decompensated in the South Atlantic during the Titan Missile Test of that era.
	I can talk more about that later.
	These sort of people are extremely credible and have definitive information.
	In addition to that, I have personally been in areas where we have successfully been able to vector and signal to these objects and have them come within a few hundred feet of our team's location.
	There's no question in my mind that these objects are real.
	And that many of them are of extraterrestrial origin.
	Now, I will add that many of the things that are seen in the American Southwest near large military installations are prototypes of what we call ARVs, or alien reproduction vehicles, which are basically things that look like UFOs, but are actually of human manufacture, but they're based on extraterrestrial technologies, which have been studied since the 30s.
	I've heard a number of recent reports about aircraft called teardrops and that sort of thing that are seen flying out in this area and increasing numbers, tremendous numbers of reports of triangular objects.
	Reports of objects traversing our atmosphere at 24,000 miles an hour.
	Right.
	And better.
	These so-called fast walkers.
	But, you know, a skeptic doctor would say, For all of this, why do we have not one single clear, unambiguous photograph?
	Well, we do.
	There are a number of them.
	In fact, the photographic evidence that we put together for the briefing we conducted
	for members of Congress last April, a year ago, has quite a number of clear daylight
	photographs and videotapes and old movie footage that are quite clear of objects that you can
	see the structure of them.
	This, of course, has been something that many of these people get on.
	I had a debate with an astronomer once on a TV station in Denver, Colorado, and he was
	saying, well, you know, why are there none?
	Of course, I had some with me and I held them up.
	I said, well, here they are.
	And these have been studied by the scientists that I'm working with at NASA, people at very
	good computer firms and agencies.
	And there's no question that they're legitimate.
	So my point is that if you haven't looked at the evidence, you might think that there
	is none.
	And you might be inclined to think that, oh, there are anecdotal sighting reports.
	But that's far from the case.
	There are thousands of landing trace cases.
	There are, Dr. Haynes at NASA and I have looked at over, he has now, I believe, 3,500 landing Pilot reports, and many of them with radar encounter.
	Oh, yes.
	There are very good photographs and videotapes of these objects, which have been analyzed and cannot be explained away.
	Even the Air Force could not explain away the daylight disk taken at McMinnville, Oregon in 1951.
	In addition, I played for this audience about a 30-minute segment of the sightings back in the Holland, Michigan area.
	Right.
	And the communication with the weather radar fellow and all the rest of it.
	I played that for the audience.
	I mean, these things are rather unambiguous.
	But somehow, even in total, even when you have hearings, it doesn't bring all of this to a crescendo with somebody saying, OK, you got us.
	Here's the truth.
	Well, see, there haven't been hearings since 1968.
	And this is one of the things that we've been calling for.
	We held briefings as a civilian organization for members of Congress, and there were members of Congress, chairmen of committees, etc., who were there.
	However, what we recommended at the closure of that briefing process, at which they heard more than a dozen top-secret witnesses recount what they had seen, was that they should hold official open hearings.
	Now, that has not happened, and because it has not happened, My own sense, and in fact the advice I'm getting from actually members of Congress that we have spoken to personally, is that they feel that a privatized civilian disclosure that would bypass the government is going to be required.
	And of course it's a little self-serving because I think these people in Congress are terrified of handling this issue.
	They certainly saw how Congressman Stephen Schiff was ridiculed I have had members of Congress and their aides tell me that, you know, that is not something that anyone would want to go through.
	Of course, now Congressman Schiff is dead, as is my right-hand assistant, Sherry Adamek, who died in January.
	But, you know, many people in Congress are keenly interested, but there is not a lot of courage right now to take it on.
	It may well be that we will have to do this as a civilian coalition.
	In a very, very definitive way, a sort of media blitzkrieg that would pull together all of these top-secret witnesses in a series of primetime documentaries.
	And this is, in fact, what we are proposing to do because we cannot allow the bureaucrats in Washington to obfuscate and delay this process forever.
	We have very diligently attempted to provide very good evidence and briefings for these people, for White House people, for the CIA Director that I briefed, for the U.N.
	Secretary General, and others.
	And at some point you have to mark time and say, look folks, you either need to provide leadership on this issue or it will be provided for you.
	And I should say that from the very beginning, from my first meeting with CIA Director Woolsey back in 1993, We had stated very clearly that if the government did not find the resolve and the courage to take this issue on, that we would have to find a way to do it and simply bypass the government.
	But that, of course, opens on another whole Pandora's box.
	Well, I recall a very dramatic moment, Doctor, when you said that you had presented the former CIA director with all the evidence and he literally had his head in his hands going, Yes, and he said, my God, what are we going to do?
	And, of course, the reason he was saying that, in large part, was because he not only knew the subject was real, but he could not get any straight answers when he made inquiries through channels, even though he was the director of the CIA and the NSA and the NRO and all those agencies that the Director of Central Intelligence has purview over.
	And, interestingly, of course, this is what Webb Hubble said.
	It is what other people in the administration have told us, the science advisor to the president, and other people.
	And in fact, I have to tell you that I can't say with whom this meeting was with, but we had a meeting with a very senior Joint Chiefs of Staff fellow recently, and the comment was, this subject has never crossed my radar screen.
	And he was saying this.
	Well, also acknowledging that the subject very likely existed.
	So the way that this thing has been managed, the covert, ultra-secret black project that this thing has been wrapped in, is such that the American public has to realize that our leaders, and even our senior intelligence and military leaders, frequently will be lied to about this if they are not in those projects.
	And it doesn't matter if they have authorization or even oversight over an entire branch of our government.
	They may still be deceived, and so this is part of what Eisenhower, I believe, was warning us about in 1961 when he said, look, you're going to have to be very careful of the potential for abuse in an ever-growing, super-secret military-industrial complex.
	And this was not to vilify the military, because he was a five-star general, a World War II hero, but he was warning us in 1961 when he left office that this was a very serious problem.
	And by the way, we know that Eisenhower Uh, was concerned about the UFO issue when he made that statement.
	How do we know that?
	We know that because we have two witnesses who had been with and worked with the president, uh, Eisenhower, who have told us point blank that he knew of the subject, but also, and one witness in particular, uh, that he was being, he was very angry that he was being deceived about the extent to which some of the technological breakthroughs were occurring.
	And a lot of the programs that were surrounding this issue had taken on so much secrecy that he was being left out of the picture, and he knew it, and he was very upset about it.
	By the way, this is why he appointed something called the Doolittle Commission, the findings of which have never been released to the public.
	But Jimmy Doolittle, who was of course an ace pilot in World War II, was put in charge of this in 1955.
	I happen to know Jimmy Doolittle.
	Uh, nephew, who confirmed to me that Jimmy Doolittle, on a deathbed confession, stated that he had investigated the UFO issue and even the Foo Fighters that were reported in World War II, and had concluded that they were extraterrestrial.
	But we also know that Eisenhower trusted him, as did Roosevelt, and he was to look into this whole question of, how do you contain this Medusa?
	You know, this thing that sort of gets out of control.
	Where the leadership in the Congress and the presidency, never mind the American people, can be left out of something very, very important.
	So I think that is an issue.
	I mean, of course, this subject crosses so many disciplines because it certainly is a big constitutional issue and an issue for democracy when you begin to entertain that you could have senior officials in the President's entourage and inner circle being deceived about something that's important
	uh... our current president president clinton is consumed by scandal
	presently uh... doesn't comment on it but is consumed uh... how does
	that affect any chances of
	any sort of uh... a paradigm shift anytime soon well i think that it
	it doesn't bode well but i don't know that it makes that much difference
	either because quite frankly you know one of the things that the uh... c i a director of
	that with that well you know we cannot disclose no matter how much we
	might want to information which we don't have
	have.
	And this was sort of my coming of age in this whole business, where you're sitting with someone of that rank and stature saying, and by the way, people have said, oh, well, you've just been deceived by this man.
	It was not.
	I mean, Jim Wills is a very, I think, honorable man, a man of great integrity.
	I have no reason to think at all that he was lying.
	In fact, I'm certain he was not, because I've gotten the same picture from people who desperately want this subject disclosed, but who have been in senior position and lied to, such as Lord Hill Norton in Great Britain, who told me the exact same story.
	Five-star admiral, head of the Ministry of Defense.
	And he told me the same story, that he later found out the subject was legitimate and real, but the whole time that he was head of the Ministry of Defense, the subject was always kept from him.
	He never heard anything about it.
	So CIA Director Woolsey is, one, convinced the subject is real, correct?
	Right.
	And two, is telling you he cannot disclose information he does not have, which is just like telling you, look, there's another government, there's another controlling agency or group, And I can't break through it.
	Now, that says that our whole Constitution is not what we believe it to be.
	Well, our Constitution is, but there have been processes that have been put into play that have subverted it, and I think that's why there needs to be a renewal of the entire promise of America.
	I think we need to have a renewal of our The integrity of the democratic process and a return to openness and a truly open society.
	Granted, there will always be some areas of confidentiality and secrecy, but the kind of secrecy that exists today where an entire subculture, or if you wish to call it a parallel process exists, which can bypass senior officials, this is very frightening.
	By the way, I also sat in the Senate Appropriations Chamber With the senior counsel to the Senate Appropriations Committee in person, sitting there with me, who had a top-secret clearance and subpoena power, who told me, Dr. Greer, good luck.
	This is the varsity team of all covert projects.
	and he stated to me that he knew that there are projects related
	to the ufo matter but he could not penetrate them
	with the top secret clarence at the request of the chairman of the senate appropriations
	committee and with
	uh... a you know i i think very good knowledge of how to maneuver
	and and covert areas and by the way he also has subpoena power
	so that that matter he still said that what you're dealing with the something
	that's wrapped up the tightly that he could not penetrate it
	although he knew that those projects were there he could not
	uh... penetrate the uh...
	secrecy surrounding them All right, Dr. Greer.
	No problem.
	We are at the bottom of the hour, and I also have a comment to make about all of that.
	And I'll let everybody think about it during the break, and that is that I certainly applaud the efforts of Dr. Greer and others to bring very well-informed witnesses, secret witnesses, in front of representatives of our government.
	But if everything he said is true about who controls all of this, Then I wonder if he still feels that effort has merit and could even possibly succeed.
	Here's where we'll break.
	We'll be right back.
	I'm Art Bell.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	This is a story about a man who was a sailor and a sailor's wife.
	He was a sailor and a sailor's wife.
	You're listening to Art Bell Somewhere In Time.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	Dr. Stephen Greer, he said he's Dr. Stephen Greer as my guest along for the ride at the moment.
	steven bassett the nation's only ufo i guess representative of the lobbyists probably is a
	better word in washington all right back now to spell doctor steven career taking
	time out from a very very busy medical moment uh... in his medical career
	to spend time with us uh...
	And I know, Steve, you have a question, but I want to ask one, and it is as follows.
	Doctor, everybody applauds what you did in terms of getting the witnesses in front of representatives, but if everything else you said is true, Isn't it, though, a valiant effort doomed to failure?
	Well, I don't think so, because we always have viewed it as a process, not as something that was going to immediately result in the result everyone would like to see.
	for example there have been tremendous
	uh... learning curve for some of the members of congress that we've been
	meeting with and for people in the administration and we think that's very
	very important that they'd have a an alternate advisory
	uh... entity the five the just denials coming out of the black program pete
	does a covert program so
	uh... i think that's very important democracy to provide that kind of
	education dialogue but in addition to that we have to remember that
	if the uh... if enough people contact certain key committee chairman and say
	look we really need the doing hearings on that
	then the subject would be disclosed because even if they are lied to and
	they make an inquiry for example steven ship congressmanship certainly with the the and so it did you know and others
	when they made inquiries into the
	nineteen forty seven mexico ross will crash however
	a hearing which does not depend passively on on the cooperation
	uh... covert program but has
	ready stage bill through a congressional hearing process
	to have dozens and dozens of top secret witnesses stand up and say
	i would have lost well and here's what i found it or i would add
	atlantic command in an underground facility and this is what i thought
	that's what we handled or i would that send the international laboratory and these
	are the materials of extraterrestrial origin that i personally
	we have the kind of witnesses so if the congress would hold open hearing
	it did will not then be dependent on we've done the work we've done our homework so this means that if the hearing
	could be held the subject would be disclosed there's enough
	uh... top secret whistleblowers and government witnesses who do not want to
	take this story to their grave who would testify.
	Now, if the Congress will not hold hearings, and if the Executive Branch, meaning the President, CIA Director, SecDef, and others, are being lied to or being told, look, we closed Blue Book in 1969, yada, yada, yada, then it is incumbent on us to go to The other parallel track that we've always said existed, and that is the track of a civilian-led disclosure process, which is exactly, if you look at what we've recently put up on our website, which by the way is www.cseti.org, because we're a non-profit, you will see that what we're beginning to outline is a strategic approach that can bypass the U.S.
	government.
	In other words, would not be dependent on them.
	Of course, then you're talking about something that's a very large, global effort that is going to be a huge undertaking, unlike anything in the history of the UFO field.
	But I think that the one will feed the other.
	I have had people in the Pentagon at meetings within the last year, in the Joint Chiefs offices, as well as in Congressional offices, who have said, We don't doubt this is real, but we can't get to the bottom of it, and we don't see that there's the political courage to hold the hearings that the American people deserve to have.
	So why don't you and your group of people find a way to just forget about the government, and if the people lead, the leaders will then have to follow.
	So that is where we think this may all be heading, because we have given them a very good chance and certainly good information.
	And there have been thousands of people who have written and called Congressional Chairman Committee, Chairman and what have you, suggesting these open hearings, and they haven't committed to doing them.
	And we said a year ago that if they would not do that, then what we would have to do is begin to put a tremendous amount of pressure on the process by privatizing the whole disclosure momentum.
	Now, the question is, can that be done?
	Well, quite frankly, yes.
	The assets are there to do it right now in terms of evidence and witnesses.
	The financial assets are not there to do it because you're not going to do it by renting a ballroom at the Holiday Inn and inviting a few minor media.
	It's going to be a very extensive project.
	If you had all the money you wanted, Doctor, how would you do it?
	Alright, here's how it would be done.
	And by the way, this is not just a pipe dream concocted by me.
	We have had discussions with We've had major, major think tanks and PR firms meet with us to discuss how this needs to be done.
	What we know would have to be done to make a difference, and I have to emphasize, there's no point in these top secret witnesses taking the risk of coming forward unless it's going to be efficacious.
	I agree.
	So what we know would have to take place is the following.
	A series of prime time expose documentaries done in a very serious light, keeping the
	far out stuff out of it for now, and dealing with the hard evidence, the metal samples,
	the top secret witnesses, the whistle blowers, the colonels, the lieutenant colonels, the
	majors, etc. and so on who want to come forward from all over the world, including the Soviet
	Union and the United Kingdom where we have these witnesses.
	That would have to be preceded the day that the first one begins to air with a worldwide
	news conference.
	That would have to be orchestrated with a very good PR firm.
	Then you would have a couple dozen of these witnesses there and some major VIPs that are
	household names in America and in other countries standing up and saying, here is the truth
	and this is what we think is true about this matter.
	You have that, you have these documentaries that would air consecutively.
	And then you have that followed up with a World Scientific Summit, where the evidence and all the materials are looked at by a large number of mainstream credentialed academic scientists for further evaluation.
	And that process would need to be going on relentlessly.
	Would all of that have to be going on at once, or could you approach it with a... For example, I've got a wide listening audience in the network in the Hollywood community.
	If you have the meat, they've got the interest, because this kind of thing would produce ratings.
	So if you say, look, I've got the witnesses who would come forward, if it's something at the network level, NBC, CBS, ABC, whatever, if they came to you, could you produce?
	Yes, we have the production company identified.
	We have the... No, I mean, could you produce the witnesses?
	Oh, yes, absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	We have several dozen of them.
	Now, there are over 150 now that we've identified.
	Not all of them are going to come forward in a privatized process where they will be testifying on camera outside of Congress, but there are dozens who will.
	Now, listen to what I'm saying here very carefully.
	We're not talking one or two Philip Courses.
	There are dozens who will, and these are first-hand witnesses to unambiguous events.
	So what I've said to people, I've really thrown down the gauntlet and said, all right, we're marking time now.
	And I've said this to people who say, oh, well, you know, I said, look, put up or shut up.
	At this point, we feel that the time has come for this information to be brought out, and the longer it drags on, the more dangerous it is for all of us.
	Yes.
	So what we're suggesting is that this should be done as soon as possible.
	The rate limiting thing here is basically the ability to create these products.
	And by product, I mean a multimedia blitzkrieg.
	And it would also include, by the way, compendium books so that the witness testimony would be spun off into manuscripts or monographs that would go along with the documentaries.
	And this certainly can be done worldwide.
	So that is what we're in the process of attempting to locate the support to do that.
	It will not be inexpensive.
	And, of course, people say, You know, why can't you just, you know, get $50,000 together and go around and film a few people?
	And people are very, very naive about what it takes to do this kind of production.
	And by the way, there's no point in doing it if it's not effective.
	And let me give you an example.
	We have several world heroes on the stage right now.
	So, of course, there was one.
	Right.
	Gordon Cooper is another.
	All right.
	Pavel Popovich in the Soviet Union has stated things publicly there.
	The problem is, you have this trickle effect, and it's a little bit like news being leaked about a financial development on Wall Street, and it gets pre-factored into the market, and then gets discounted, as they say.
	That is never going to work.
	If you have one, I don't care who it is, a Colonel Corso or an astronaut, coming forward, it will have very, very little effect.
	strategic placement and having multiple corroborating witnesses and other evidence all put together
	strategically with a multimedia global plan is the only thing that is going to move this
	thing.
	We know from past, if you look back retrospectively for the last 20, 30, 40 years, there have
	been some very fine people who have come forward and said, look, I've looked into this and
	this is real and I'm a scientist at this institute or I'm an astronaut or I'm a military.
	But those things dripping here or there, what have you, in an uncoordinated way is never
	going to move this thing out of the backwaters where it is now onto the radar screens of
	the national awareness and more importantly of policy makers.
	And I think that this is what members of Congress have said to us also, by the way, that you're going to need to do something like that to create enough of a Momentum for them to then justify holding hearings.
	So, you know, you sort of get into a catch-22.
	So at this point, we've concluded that we should be moving forward very aggressively with a privatized disclosure, but it needs to be done first class, very well, very seriously, and keeping sort of the lunatic, fringe, speculative stuff out of it.
	Our criteria, by the way, if you look at, and it's up on our website for anyone to look at, is very clear.
	No anecdotal material will be allowed during any of these proceedings.
	Yeah, I saw light, that kind of thing.
	I have a question for you that you are certainly welcome to refuse to answer or to sidestep, but I have information that there was, when you were presenting witnesses to our representatives, one witness who was spirited away from the congressional briefings And I wonder if you would be willing to talk about that.
	Tell us what he knew, what he would have said had he testified, and why he was spirited away.
	I will.
	Sit down.
	I'm down.
	Okay.
	This man... What happened is that the morning of the... We had these briefings from members of Congress on the night of the 9th.
	The morning of the 9th, We gathered all these witnesses together, really for the first time, to share in a circle, in a closed session, which we recorded, but was closed.
	There weren't any members of the government there, so that they could open up and share what they knew.
	Well, we went around the circle.
	Just about the time we were going to get to this gentleman, we had a break, because it was about that time of the morning.
	He stood up, and he shook my hand, and it was dripping wet with sweat.
	His was, not mine.
	And he said, Dr. Greer, I have been called by my, quote, handlers who want me to talk to them about what I'm about to do.
	And he was a bit cryptic and he disappeared and went and made a phone call.
	He never came back.
	He was spirited away into the area outside District of Columbia in Virginia, and that's all I'll say.
	And he remained there until after midnight.
	He was returned to the Westin Hotel in Georgetown.
	Sometime after midnight, whereupon he left a note under the door of the now late Sherry Adamek, my main assistant, explaining what had happened.
	And what had happened was this.
	They were basically begging him not to stand up in front of these members of Congress and tell them what he personally knew.
	And it was the following.
	He knew because he had sat in on planning meetings.
	Where plans had been discussed to utilize assets that for all the world would look like extraterrestrial devices, what have been called alien reproduction vehicles, in efforts that can only be called deceptive and which are in the category of setting up sort of a cosmic Gulf of Tonkin, if you get my drift, where essentially Human-made devices based on extraterrestrial technologies are used to take out other human assets, made to look like an alien invasion scenario.
	He sat in on meetings where these kinds of programs were actually discussed.
	At the table were folks from various agencies.
	This guy was going to share what he knew about this.
	It's interesting, because when this witness first contacted me, he said, I don't really know anything about the extraterrestrial end of this.
	I said, what do you mean?
	And then he explained what I thought.
	I'm following you.
	Let me see if I've got this straight.
	What you're really saying is that back-engineered vehicles, things that we have probably out here at Area 51 or wherever they're kept these days, were going to be used to stage a mock invasion, destroying F-16s, or tanks, or whatever.
	Satellites, whatever.
	And there was going to be a mock invasion.
	Is that correct?
	They could be used for that.
	And that's just a backup scenario.
	And it's a control drama that has been played out that is, I think, a very dangerous one.
	And that is, look, if your own life support as a military industrial sector And, you know, peace is breaking out.
	The Soviet Union is no more.
	The, quote, evil empire has dissolved, and are now ostensibly somewhat allies of ours.
	You know, there's a point where you could be tempted to utilize these kinds of whiz-bang technologies to deceive not only the populace, but our leadership, and therefore justify multi-hundred billion dollar defense spending Way into the next century, and particularly as it relates to the creation of Star Wars technologies and a space force, I think that these kind of deceptive plans are real.
	I know it sounds very much over the top, but this witness was no joke.
	I mean, he was a very, very serious, legitimate intelligence officer who had been at these meetings, and I have other witnesses who have told similar Well, you said they begged him.
	They begged him not to disclose this.
	sure that the folks he had worked with did not want him standing up in front of
	members of congress and then people who are on the staff at the white house
	telling that kind of story but it put the fear of god and everyone at the world people
	were in a semi panic police and they begged him they beg him not to
	disclose this do you think they beg him with prejudice
	i suspect there was an element of that but uh... i think you know if he and i
	discussed that before he came uh... because we were very we've
	discuss the explosive nature of what he knew.
	So he was prepared for pressure?
	He was prepared for pressure, but what surprised him is that people that he had worked with years ago surfaced, and these were people who he says do not surface very often, if you get my drift.
	I do.
	And they were in his inner circle.
	Who really, basically, had really helped him out at various times in his life.
	And there is a certain camaraderie within these units.
	These guys go through a lot.
	You know, you can have enough compassion for all concerned.
	And I think that they appeal to his loyalty and friendship with them to at least delay.
	And I'll tell you the most extraordinary thing that he wrote, and we have this note that he wrote, was that They told him that they needed a little more time to reorganize things, that everything was in free fall, and that because of all these people we were briefing and all this stuff that was going on, that they were wanting to try to have a little more time to better organize and reorganize their operation and get some of this stuff fixed.
	So they basically appealed to him to delay coming forward with this information.
	Publicly, but not only publicly.
	In this setting, it was a closed briefing with members of Congress.
	Even in that setting, they did not want it brought forward.
	So I think it's very interesting that there are changes going on, I think, behind the scenes.
	I think that there is momentum in the direction of disclosure.
	What I worry about, and what keeps me up late at night sometimes worrying about, is that that disclosure could have a spin put on it that would be decidedly I don't know.
	xenophobic and militaristic because that would be very self-serving to the very military
	and industrial sectors that are now on life support with all the budget cuts.
	So I think that we have to be very careful not to jingoistically stampede into sort of
	gee, the sky is falling and there's alien invasion, much as Hollywood and the media
	and I think the military would like for us to have that kind of very predictable human
	I think we have to be very careful to guard against that.
	And I think the big message that this guy was going to bring to this meeting was a warning against that kind of reactivity.
	Doctor, anybody who would get in the way of something that would keep the military industrial complex going would be in, in my opinion, physical danger.
	Can I put a punctuation on this, Art?
	Punctuate quickly.
	We're here at... I know you didn't get to ask your question, Stephen.
	I'll tell you what, we're at the... It's a long punctuation, so let's wait till after the break.
	All right, done.
	The break is coming now.
	My guest is Seaside's Dr. Stephen Greer.
	Now that was quite some story, my mind.
	I'm Art Bell, and this is Coast to Coast AM.
	You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time, on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM, from April 30th, 1998.
	The world was on fire, and no one could save me but you.
	Strange what does I make foolish people?
	I never dreamed that I'd meet somebody like you.
	You are a fool.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	Dr. Stephen Greer sure did just drop a bomb on us regarding somebody who almost gave testimony in closed hearings that he conducted.
	What a remarkable story.
	Basically, it was that this person was prepared to tell The knowledge he had acquired, or knew, regarding a plan by a certain group to conduct a mock invasion.
	I repeat, a mock alien invasion.
	The reason for it?
	A renewal of the teetering military-industrial complex funding.
	Uh, if true, certainly this would be very, very, very dangerous ground to be treading upon, even if it was only a plan that was never implemented.
	Anyway, we'll get back to him in a moment.
	Back now...
	To Dr. Stephen Greer and Stephen Bassett.
	And Stephen, your turn.
	I'm sorry to delay it so long.
	You wanted to add something.
	I want to punctuate two things that Dr. Greer stated in the last hour.
	The first one, let's talk about the militarization of space situation that he referred to.
	Anybody who thinks that this is not real is not paying attention.
	A lot has happened since that January 5 show that took place with Dr. Greer.
	On the 29th of January, nine days after the scandal broke on the White House, President Clinton signed a unified command plan that designated the U.S.
	Space Command, yes folks, we have a U.S.
	Space Command for all you Starship Trooper fans out there, as the single force point for a far-flung military space operations and gave it traditional responsibilities shared by regional commanders.
	Now, on the 11th of March, the head of the U.S.
	Space Command, General M.F.
	Hal, rather.
	Hal M. Estes III.
	Testified before Congress.
	Now, the full testimony is available at a website, which is on one of the links that I have on my portal page, which you can get through the Art Bell site.
	You can go read the whole thing.
	But let me just read you just a few comments from his testimony, and you all can make up your own mind.
	Comment.
	The freedom to operate in space should not be taken for granted.
	Okay.
	One of the things they need to do is fully integrate space forces with land, sea, and air forces.
	They need to assure U.S.
	and Allied access to and freedom to operate in space, and denying the same to an adversary when required.
	What adversary are they referring to?
	Applying precision force from and through space?
	Leveraging civil, commercial, and international space systems to cost-effectively augment military systems?
	Global Positioning System and Navigation Warfare Assuring Military Access to GPS During Conflicts Selectively Denying Intuitive Adversaries and Minimizing the Impact on Other Users and on and on and on.
	They are actively militarizing space.
	Why?
	They don't tell us.
	This testimony was not covered by, this was covered by the Air Force News.
	Did you see anything on Channel 9 or on ABC, NBC?
	Nada.
	Nada.
	They are in the process of militarizing space, and they're not telling us why.
	And let me tell you, the cost of militarizing space is going to make the cost of building ICBMs in Missouri or Kansas look like a lemonade stand, right, operating down the street.
	So people had better get on this, and I highly recommend they go read the testimony of Hal M. Estes to the Congress on March 11th.
	Now, the other thing I want to punctuate, and then I'll turn this back over to Stephen, He was talking about the private process and doing it at a level that will guarantee that it will cross threshold, talking probably about a million dollars.
	The remarkable thing is that there are an extraordinary number of people in this country, quite extraordinary, which is to our credit, who make a million dollars a month.
	The numbers are not in the dozens.
	I think you're talking hundreds and hundreds of people who make a million dollars a month in income.
	We are basically right now If we were to follow the approach that he's referring to, $1 million away from putting this business behind us.
	$1 million away from disclosure using the private approach.
	That's not the only approach, but that one is potentially viable.
	Dr. Greer, do you agree with that?
	It would be more like $2 million, but it's in that ballpark.
	You could do certainly the prime time, a two-hour documentary expose and a significant global
	world press conference and a world scientific summit for that amount.
	It is not a lot of money.
	It is in the UFO's domain where a $10,000 grant is thought to make people fall over
	insane, but it's something that is very doable.
	Of course, if you're doing it through a commercial production process for network television
	broadcasts, it should easily be done.
	I think this is very doable.
	It's a matter of connecting up the right people to do it and who have enough interest in the
	subject to make that effort.
	I would encourage anyone listening to do that and to give us a call and to dialogue with
	us on how to get involved.
	If every one of your listeners contributed a dollar, you'd have ten million bucks and you'd have a disclosure thing and it would be done.
	It's absolutely doable.
	This is what's very actually frustrating is that there's a Maserati there or a Lamborghini that's been built that needs some fuel in the tank.
	You know, the sad part of it is that, meanwhile, a lot of these top-secret witnesses, they're not getting any younger, some are dying off.
	We feel that it needs to be moved forward as quickly as possible.
	I get a lot of extraordinarily naive suggestions from people who say, well, just hold a press conference and that'll be the end of it.
	Well, it won't be the end of it if it's not covered.
	So to strategically put everything in place so it'll be effective is not a simple matter.
	It is a huge global campaign.
	And for example, to accomplish it so that it actually is heard and not just covered by a few minor local stations is something which would be tantamount to a global multimedia campaign on a subject which currently is not on anyone's radar screen as being, quote, real, and by real I mean Well, you have alluded to some extremely hot stories.
	And as I said earlier, I have access, you know, to the major networks.
	I hear from them on a daily basis.
	And are you telling me, doctor, that you have got The meat.
	You may not have two million dollars right now, but if NBC, for example, came to Dr. Steven Greer and said, okay, lay it out, if you've really got the kind of documentary you're talking about, the kind of witnesses and proof you're talking about, the visual evidence, we'll do the program with you advising us all the way.
	Absolutely.
	You're ready to do that?
	Yes.
	We're ready to do it now.
	How would somebody Contact you for that, Doctor.
	Well, contact me through our website, which is www.cseti.org, or give us a call.
	Also, witnesses.
	You know, there's probably several hundred military witnesses listening to this interview.
	Sure.
	Seriously.
	And I can tell you that there's safety in numbers and there's credibility in numbers.
	But more importantly than all of that is that there's effectiveness in numbers, so that So that you don't have people taking huge risks by themselves, you have them doing it with dozens of other people.
	Like this older gentleman I was speaking to, who was the captain of this ship back in 1963, and this is a fascinating story, you know, I can't get into all the details, I'm sure we don't have time, but essentially he was there when one of these objects went down in the South Atlantic, and he personally retrieved an ejection pod that had Where was this?
	real life forms and then they were forty inches tall can describe them down to
	uh... how many fingers and how what their faces and everything else where
	was this this is in the south atlantic in a very remote area the
	south atlantic uh... during the titan
	to missile test back in nineteen sixty three when we were testing i cpm
	intercontinental ballistic missile and what kind of ship was it
	it was a contract that will to retrieve the the time to missile that were fired
	downstream and he retrieved something entirely unexpected and a lot of details within a lot of very important
	information with this and and of course many years more recent and then rosswell
	but my point is that these people Really want to come forward, but they want to come forward in a way that's effective.
	What we don't want to do is have it be another cheesy UFO genre documentary that airs on a minor tabloid sort of setting.
	I'm with you.
	Okay, and I don't mean to sound, you know, difficult.
	I understand.
	But one has to have certain... You know, we've had... I'm not going to name who, but we've had four deaths in my team.
	I know.
	Okay, and you know it.
	I'm simply not prepared to go forward on something just to entertain the UFO buffs.
	It has got to be something that will be effective, or we might as well go trout fishing at my farm out here in North Carolina, because there's no point, in my opinion, doing it unless it's done well and effectively.
	We know how to do that.
	We've got the brain trust.
	on board to do it, and we've got the military assets and witnesses, so if there are people out there who can help be part of this process, they should contact us.
	If there are witnesses out there, they should contact us as well.
	Ultimately, I really think this needs to be something where the people now assume the mantle of leadership.
	As far as I am concerned, the Congress and the White House and the United Nations and other governmental entities in Europe have been offered Have been briefed on this subject, have been asked to do the right thing, and they are just absolutely paralyzed like deer in the headlights of a car.
	They don't know what to do.
	They're afraid to touch this thing.
	And I think it's going to take a group of courageous people in the public sector, I should say in the private sector, civilian sector, to do this.
	And I'm quite convinced that the assets are in place, both the intelligence and military witnesses and other assets are in place to do that.
	Uh, and what we need now is the mechanism.
	So, uh, that's where we are, and I think it's something that is actually a very promising development, and all indications are, you know, one of the most astonishing things, I have to tell you, I was sitting with astronaut Ed Mitchell, and an Eisenhower-era top-secret witness, and my military advisor, and myself, and Sherry Adamek, in the Pentagon, in the Joint Chiefs meeting area, in a very relevant office, Uh, a year ago.
	And this guy, after hearing all this, said, you know, I have no reason to doubt this is true, but, and this is an admiral speaking, but I have never been allowed to have information on this subject.
	And if you have this, these kind of witnesses, bypass the US government and just bring it out.
	And here, I mean, this is a guy, and he knew that we were talking about people with top secret, you know, security oath and everything else.
	And he said, do it.
	You could have knocked me over and I looked at my team that was there and I went, well, it's coming here out of the Pentagon saying, go ahead and do it.
	So I sort of feel like after four and a half years and a couple million dollars of my own time and money and effort and all the effort we put into this, I sort of feel like the government of the United States has been fully apprised We have told them what we have.
	We have had witnesses.
	A great expense brought in from all over the country to meet with our officials.
	And I think at this point, it's really now up to us.
	We've got to do it.
	And I don't think that we should delay this much longer at all.
	Sherry Adamek was a very important part of what you were doing.
	Do you need help, Doctor?
	Oh yeah, we need tremendous help.
	But I have to tell you, Sherry was my closest friend My deepest confidant, she's the only person who knew everything I know.
	Every witness.
	I mean, she had absolute, and the fact that she's gone is, you know, devastating in a lot of ways.
	But, you know, you just have to go on.
	Of course.
	How, doctor, is your health?
	Well, you know, I have metastatic malignant melanoma, which is very, very deadly.
	type of cancer is much more aggressive than the skin cancer that Congressman Schiff had
	and he died a couple of weeks ago.
	But right now, thank God and I guess thank all the people who prayed for our health and
	what have you, I don't have any sign of the illness at all.
	So I'm doing very well.
	And you sort of get into the survivor's field a little bit with that because when you have
	a close friend that actually had cancer at the same time and died so quickly, it's very
	difficult.
	But now you're the only person who knows what you know, and is that safe?
	Well, there are documents, and there are things that are in safekeeping and multiple backup systems.
	At any rate, you could certainly use help.
	We need the help.
	We certainly need the help, and we need uh... helping out in a lot of ways uh... one of the things
	that that i did uh...
	big way that i think people can can help is uh... even if they're not a top secret witness for they don't
	know someone at npc or what have you
	is is that they can take an interest in the subject and do some little thing to
	network the right people into this effort
	uh... you'd be surprised how the grassroots effective process is really
	been effective uh... in in
	june i'm going to be personally training a group of people in Colorado.
	And those people, you'd be surprised, often go out and become the people who make the contacts at NASA, find the witnesses, do the research.
	And this retreat we're doing in Colorado and in England, we train people to literally go out and attempt to communicate with these extraterrestrial spacecraft in a way that Quite frankly, it bypasses the whole military paradigm and begins to build a bridge to these objects and life forms that is based on a sense of common purpose, that, hey, they're conscious and intelligent life forms, we're conscious and somewhat intelligent, to a greater or lesser degree, and that we need to find some common ground and begin to evolve
	I believe, and to a cosmic civilization.
	I think that's the destiny of the human race, is to become literally one of many civilizations out there, and to exist not only peacefully, but to flourish and to explore this fabulous creation.
	Well, as you all know, there is a big downside to the media with regard to ufology, but there is also an upside, and it is that All the major networks are ratings-driven, and so if you actually have the goods, I've got the contacts.
	Well, then we should do something about that, Art, because there are so many people ready to come forward.
	But I say this, so long as there is quality control, we do not want it to be another cheesy Um, sort of tabloid style show.
	There's been a lot of those lately.
	I think the networks, and one of the people I've spoken to recently in L.A.
	said, you know, the networks, they've sort of been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, and now they're dusting the house with it.
	Because, you know, there have been so many sort of tabloid-esque treatments of this subject, that I think that there is an actual growing interest in a serious, hard-hitting, investigative report, expose of the subject, using Extremely good, first-hand credible witnesses that have been vetted, investigated, etc.
	and so on.
	That's what we're proposing.
	And I think if there's a major media outlet somewhere around that would want to pursue that, that we should really begin discussing that.
	Interestingly enough, if the networks, there's been several that have been doing this, I doubt we'd have to put the same level of investigative power into this issue that they have put into the cigarette question.
	We've already done the investigation.
	That's the whole point.
	We've already done the investigative arm.
	It wouldn't even take that much effort, I think.
	As you know, primarily they succeeded in really changing the whole relationship between American people and the tobacco industry.
	That's true, and I think the privatization of secrecy is a very important issue.
	but nevertheless there was serious problems there and guess what?
	They mostly revolved around secrecy.
	Well, you're right.
	That's true and I think the privatization of secrecy is a very important issue.
	I mean what happens when you have vast industrial private companies, aerospace and other companies,
	that hold these vast secrets, including the technology?
	Doctor, when we began, you said that you could give us about an hour and a half.
	It is about an hour and a half now.
	So we either have to close out your portion now or do another half hour.
	That's up to you.
	Well, we can do another half hour and then I'll have to close it out.
	All right.
	Another half hour it shall be.
	Gentlemen, stand by.
	By the way, everything you're hearing tonight, you can read more about it.
	If you want to know more about CCETI, then go to my website.
	Right now.
	It is www.artbell.com.
	When you get there, simply scroll down the list until you get down to the guest area.
	You will see the name Dr. Stephen Greer.
	See setting.
	Click on that.
	Go take a look.
	You will also see Stephen Bassett's name.
	Click on those sites and take a look.
	And maybe, just maybe, we can actually make it happen from the high desert.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	La dee la da da...
	La...
	La daa deer...
	Make sure to take this licenses movie out of your pocket!
	La da da da...
	you Premier Radio Network presents Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight's program originally aired April 30th, 1998.
	Yes, and we have As he said, he's Dr. Stephen Greer here.
	He's a very serious man.
	He's a physician who spends most of his time doing what physicians do, and carves out the rest of it, trying to get somewhere, really get somewhere, with this whole UFO question.
	also steven bassett who is a lobbyist on the same question in washington and we'll
	get back to them involvement
	all right back now uh... to my guests doctor career I'm going to just lay this out for you.
	I do have network contacts.
	Now, I think that if you look at it from their point of view, here's what they're concerned with.
	They're concerned that they're going to come to somebody like yourself, and they're going to examine your material, and they're going to find what so many times is found, a bunch of fuzzy photographs, people who say, They saw lights, or even they saw craft, or they were abducted, or God knows, implants, all the rest of it, but nothing that appears to be conclusive.
	And if you had the goods, I'm absolutely certain they would come and take a look.
	So what would you offer?
	I mean, what would you, if you were talking to a network exec right now, NBC, ABC, CBS, one of the big ones, what would you say to them that you could produce?
	Well, I would say that there is a huge pool of more witnesses than you could fit into a reasonable documentary that are ready to be interviewed who have been up close and personal with these things in their capacity as military, intelligence, aerospace workers, and what have you, and that these are legitimate people Who would be tantamount to being dozens of sort of like the deep throats that Woodard and Bernstein had for Watergate.
	And they are exactly the kind of people that were at the briefings in Washington, but even more so.
	Now, their cooperation is contingent on the subject being treated honestly and fairly.
	And that, of course, is something that the major media rarely does.
	But if they would do it in a fair and honest and fair reported sort of fashion, I'm certain that there would be more people coming forward with definitive information than they would have time to put on their airways.
	In addition to that, there are significant collections of images as well as metal samples I agree.
	government document some of which are not legally declassified but which we have
	which are smoking gun so i don't i think that
	there is ample material now the question is whether or not they would be willing to
	take it off and i think that they would be one face off how it could be
	positioned and and put together and i think that the dialogue we need to begin
	having that is what the uh... the
	for the state of all about and i think that that is something that that maybe it could
	not have been done ten years ago but i think it could be done today
	And I know that we have identified adequate resources to do that.
	I think someone sitting in front of the camera describing his personal handling of these extraterrestrial life forms would be very compelling.
	And I think that, you know, someone from Sandia National Laboratories who worked on materiel of extraterrestrial origin would be very compelling.
	These are people we have, and I think that those people, however, need a fair hearing.
	If the Congress won't give them a fair hearing, what they really need to have is an honest, serious, investigative report.
	Look at what they know in a way that would be honest and fair.
	And I think that is something which has not been done to date, because there's a deeply held prejudice within the media that, gee, this can't be true.
	I had a meeting with a 60 Minutes producer in Washington who looked at me.
	He was sitting across the table from an Eisenhower-era witness who literally saw the remains from Roswell, and the physical characteristics of the material and everything else, and had been involved in other aspects of the UFO question.
	And he looked at me, and he looked at him, and he says, well, I just can't accept that this could be true.
	If it were true, I would know about it.
	It was this unbelievable hubris and arrogance that many people in the media have.
	and i think that that one of the problems that if you can get beyond that
	you get beyond the sort of incredulity that goes with the kind of idea g
	a story that big certainly i would know about program so important you know
	that the kind of thing you get from media people a lot
	uh... i think that if you get beyond that you would find that
	uh... there's a really compelling story but it would need to be reported on a
	plea and i think in a very forthright fashion All right, Doctor.
	How carefully have you vetted these witnesses?
	And the reason I ask that is because one thing that would scare the hell out of the network would be to put together the kind of program you're talking about with the witnesses you have, and then have one of them turned upside down.
	It would be, in the end, more destructive than constructive.
	Oh, I agree with you absolutely, and that's why, I mean, while we have had limited funds to do the full vetting, any documentary that would be done on this would have a line-item budget for a CID, a criminal investigative division type investigator to go into the background of each and every one.
	For example, there's one witness that we were about to utilize Uh, but we found out that he had a felony record.
	Now, he was a legitimate witness, but he had been convicted on an unrelated thing.
	I'm not talking about Bob Lazar.
	I'm talking about another one.
	And that disqualified him.
	So we've tried to do that as best we can.
	But ultimately, if you're going into a commercial production, usually you're going to spend $750,000 to $800,000 per hour.
	for a broadcast-quality, high-end documentary.
	You bet.
	Well, if you have a million and a half dollars, you can certainly spend $80,000 or $90,000 to put on people to vet every single one very, very thoroughly.
	Now, we've vetted them as well as we can with our limited resources, but I think that certainly that is part of what our proposal contains, is a very rigorous vetting of each and every one of these witnesses.
	Alright, good.
	Stephen, anything?
	Well, this dilemma simply goes on and on.
	If you produce an absolutely credible person or impeccable photograph, it must be fake.
	And if it's fuzzy, then it's not meaningful.
	And in some cases, something can be so awkward that you just pretend it's not there.
	And that's, of course, the Philip Korso problem.
	He's so credible, his background is so impeccable and already proven, that they can do nothing but just ignore it.
	I can assure you they are trying so hard to ignore Philip Corso, it's not even funny.
	Eventually, they're going to have to deal with him.
	I know the questions you're asking are totally appropriate, Art, but the fact is that the evidence is overwhelming.
	It's a done deal.
	It's proven.
	The issue is not proving anything anymore.
	The issue is simply getting the institutions that we look to to do their jobs.
	It's really not so much a matter of proof.
	It's a matter of somehow opening their minds up and getting them where they're going.
	It's like a church in Galileo.
	The issue wasn't proving something.
	The issue was having an institution change its approach to things.
	And it's not a matter of proof.
	It's a matter of commitment.
	They either do it or they won't.
	And if they don't want to, they will find whatever excuse they need.
	This game has been going on a long time.
	And I think one way you stop playing it is you really You go in very strong and you're very firm, and you don't let those silly arguments dissuade you very much.
	I want to reiterate that.
	You're very right, Steve, because there are all kinds of naysayers and negativists out there who throw a million landmines in your path, and I've had probably ten billion landmines thrown in our path in the last four and a half, five years of doing this with the government.
	The evidence will stand on its own.
	It's very compelling, and these witnesses are very compelling.
	But let me emphasize something that's strategically significant.
	One Philip Corso, no matter how impeccable and how real, because it's one person, people can always go, Well, it's just one person saying this, and then a year later you trickle out one other person, or a year before you have an astronaut that came out.
	That is not ever going to be effective.
	I want to re-emphasize here the value, and this is why I'm putting out a call.
	Witnesses out there hearing this, or people who know military witnesses, should contact us, because when you have dozens of these kind of witnesses, it becomes so compelling.
	If you could have seen the faces at this congressional briefing that we held, When one military person after the other, incredibly just down-to-earth, regular guys, very credible, stood up and told matter-of-factly stories that dealt with everything from ETs being shot on the tarmac at Fort Dix and McGuire Air Force Base to people in command centers where they were chasing these things, trying to shoot them down off the Atlantic seaboard.
	And you could see, I was watching the faces of the members of Congress that I knew were in the room.
	Well, it's also this wonderful act of common sense that one has to go through.
	We all know what a hoax is.
	was legitimate so i think the evidence in the witnesses will stand on their own
	if we're given a chance to have a venue where it can be dealt with and and a
	and a serious and and respectable respectable way well it's also this
	wonderful act of common sense that one has to to come through we all know what
	a hoax is you pull a stunt you you throw it out there you have some fun you have
	a reason an agenda There are far more people, and I'm including airline pilots and military people, who have spoken of these things privately than have ever spoke publicly.
	So what on earth is the motivation for retired military officers and Air Force people, and even astronauts, who are generally not considered to be flighty individuals or flaky, to make these comments privately, keep them private?
	Is it simply so they can be interesting over dinner?
	Common sense is thrown out the window the moment you are confronting somebody's worldview as opposed to simply a decision based on logic.
	Well, there is though, Stephen, some of that.
	And there are people who want to be interesting over dinner or want a few minutes of fame.
	True.
	And that's why I was talking about this very careful vetting that would have to be done.
	Absolutely.
	And Art, I think that that's a key.
	You see, the difference between a congressional hearing, where people are being sworn under oath to tell the truth, and a privatized process is that if the Congress holds a hearing, they're going to vet people before they put them on the stand, and they're going to have them under oath, and if they lie to Congress, they're at risk for going to jail.
	If you do something privately, you don't have that built in.
	You're going to have to build it into your budget very, very, very well.
	And we've done a first-level vetting, but there needs to be second and third-level triage, as we say in the emergency department, where you do that very, very, very thoroughly.
	But that's not a problem.
	I mean, most of these people, their stories can be checked out by a competent person who is a criminal investigator very easily.
	And certainly anyone that you put in front of the camera, you would do that vetting on, and we would certainly do that vetting on.
	Even more than we have now.
	We've done a certain level of it before anything would go out public.
	But I think the other point is that part of the problem with this is that we have to understand that what we're talking about here is a level 101 college course.
	This is sort of the fundamentals of this stuff.
	It's stuff that should have been known 50 years ago had we not had the military seize this thing and spin it every which way but Sunday.
	I think one of the reasons that I view it as that is that there are bigger issues that
	need to be discussed.
	What does this phenomenon tell us about the nature of reality?
	What happens when you go through the crossing point of light?
	What happens when you have computers that are actuated by a thought being sent to them?
	Now this is not science fiction.
	Our research teams have seen.
	In a way, the debate that people are having, is it real or is it... that is like kindergarten
	And what I would like to see us do is to get that out of the way and start having this other discussion, which really holds tremendous promise for the future of the human race and our understanding of not only the universe, but of ourselves.
	Well, the private sector effort, I think you're on the right track, Doctor, but I have one additional question, and that is, once you try to do all this in the private sector, You have one big problem, and that is you don't have the offer of immunity that you would have if it was public.
	Of course, and this has always been the hang-up, and that's why we have... You know, one of the things I promised these witnesses was that we would do everything within our power to get that subpoena from the Congress and immunity and release from their national security obligations.
	And, my God, we have moved heaven and earth and to sacrifice and Human effort in life and dollars is beyond what I can go into here.
	We've tried to do that.
	I'm at the point now where I think that we're going to have to have a level one disclosure.
	There may be a level two and three, but we need to do a level one disclosure with those witnesses who are fed up enough to not play that game anymore, to just simply step forward.
	When I had an admiral sitting in the Joint Chiefs of Staff's offices tell me, do it.
	I thought, all right, there it is.
	There are green lights coming on from those guys, from Pentagon people, and also, by the way, from people in the White House and people in the Congress.
	Members of Congress have said, why don't you just bypass the Congress and the government and do this?
	So, you know, I don't think there are going to be any negative repercussions to people who come forward.
	And I think that really every conversation I've had has indicated that they would like to see this just go ahead and be done.
	Uh, by a civilian-led operation.
	And really, perhaps that's how our democracy really should work, and it's time for that to be put into play.
	So really, you could only do it if they made an internal decision to allow you to do it?
	I think that internal decision, as well, has actually been made.
	Been made already, huh?
	And I think we just have to line up the resources to do it properly, and I think that the time has really come where that can be done.
	I'm cautiously optimistic that that can be achieved here in the coming months.
	Let's be careful, though.
	It's possible for one part of the government to make an internal decision to greenlight something, and it's possible for another part of the government to still be committed to see that that doesn't take place.
	Oh, sure.
	I'm certain there's opposition to it, but at the same time there's growing support for it, and I think that we have to go with that.
	And by the way, it's sort of a zen moment.
	When you look at all this and you say, look, ultimately I cannot control What MJ-12 or covert entities do.
	I cannot control what the President does or the Congress.
	What we can do is sit together as civilians and as citizens of this country and citizens of this planet and put our best foot forward and put the truth out there and then let the chips fall where they may.
	Do the best job we can in a non-alarmist, very sort of scientific and hopeful fashion.
	And the rest of it is just going to have to take care of itself.
	I mean, having gone through the last few months where I've had close friends die and all these other things happen, you just at some point say, life is short and you have to just do the best you can.
	I'd like to add something here.
	As you know, I still have very strong feelings about the needs of the government to be involved in this.
	There is a message that is part and parcel of what Dr. Greer is saying.
	The message goes like this.
	The potential for privatization process is there.
	There's plenty of money in this country.
	There's plenty of casual money in this country.
	You pay for it a hundred times over.
	If it does go that way, the politicians of this country and the agency people have to understand that if that's the way it goes, there's only one way the people are going to perceive it.
	As being useless, or ignorant, or gutless, or incompetent.
	Well, they're out of the picture.
	That would not be a change.
	Well, it'll get even worse.
	History will not treat them kindly, and their esteem isn't going to get raised, and their image in the minds of the citizens.
	There is a heavy price to be paid by the government as a matter of convenience, and as a matter of simply not wanting to take any chances and get out of your comfort zone.
	But you know, part of that is how quickly they respond.
	If this comes out in a privatized fashion and then there's a quick response from Congress to have an investigation at the bottom of it, I think that would be redeeming.
	part of the conversation i had over almost three hours with the the cia
	director if this is done
	side of government supporting cooperation it will prove to be in the short run
	at least extremely embarrassing to the u s government but they're
	going to either look like they were complicit
	in the secrecy or that they were totally out of the loop and therefore the
	emperor had no clothes as it were
	so i think that you know we made that point and he took it apart quite
	seriously but ultimately um...
	yet that there comes a point after as i said four and a half years of intensive and diligent
	briefings for the sort of people that i have had personally it's been a historic
	journey uh... i know it's uh... not happened uh... before in the
	history of the ufo field
	word this many meetings have happened uh... so intensely i think that the time of conference really to step forward
	with uh...
	with what we have with as many good witnesses as we can get together
	who ought to me are the the real heroes who are willing to step out there and tell the truth
	and let the chips fall where they may alright
	The end.
	Dr. Greer, I agree with you, and I will have some continuing discussions with Stephen Bassett here shortly, but I want to thank you for coming on the program.
	I think you're absolutely correct.
	I think that the only way to go now is the private sector, and that will force a public sector investigation.
	And toward that end, I will initiate some contacts and see what I can do for you.
	How's that?
	Doctor, again, thank you for being here.
	I know you've got to get up and go be a doctor tomorrow, or this morning, really.
	Thank you so much.
	Well, thank you, and I've enjoyed talking with you.
	Take care, my friend.
	All right.
	Those of you in the industry, and you know who you are, if you would like to contact Dr. Greer, And would like to do in the sweeps what nobody else could possibly do, if not these sweeps.
	The next one's coming up.
	You can contact Dr. Greer at www.cseti.org.
	I'm Art Bell.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	This is a presentation of the Coast to Coast AM concert.
	Every time you do, I wanna see you cry.
	Face the time Watching this whole world
	As you turn around and say Take my breath away
	Take my breath away Take my breath away
	I'm watching and I can't wait Still I'm not disappointed
	Never hesitate to become a famous Premier Radio Networks presents Art Bell's Somewhere in
	Time Tonight's program originally aired April 30th, 1998.
	Stephen Bassett will be back in a moment and we're going to begin to take your calls.
	That's immediately ahead.
	I guarantee.
	Here once again is Stephen Bassetts.
	Stephen, welcome back.
	Are you there?
	I am there.
	Oh, you are here.
	Okay.
	I would like to devote the best part of this hour to, and I'm sure we'll continue down many of the same roads, but I think we've gone down far enough that we could turn to the audience.
	What do you say?
	I think it's fair, but I believe there's much more that can be said about this article, but perhaps we can save for a better time.
	All right.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
	Hi.
	Yes, my name is Rick and I'm from Cookville, Tennessee.
	Hi, Rick.
	How are you doing?
	Fine.
	One of the last times you were on the program, I believe it was the same time Richard Hoagland was on?
	Possibly, yeah.
	You talked about the article or the press announcement or whatever that was going to be released in possibly a few major newspapers with signatures?
	Yeah, you're talking about the letter to the Congress and the President.
	Yeah, whatever happened with that?
	Oh, that's still there.
	As a matter of fact, it's going to be posted, I think, now up on my website, which you can get to at our site.
	That got put on the back burner because I was just about ready to start to gather the signatures on the final, completed statement, virtually to the day when the scandal broke in January 20.
	The sex scandal in Washington, and it virtually consumed all coverage for a while.
	More than that, it actually threatened the presidency.
	I mean, there were people like George Will indicating, stating publicly that they thought he would be forced to resign within two weeks.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, I understand all that, but when do you think you'll actually get it in a paper?
	I'd really like to see that in there.
	I know I've got a lot of faxes about that.
	The process is simple.
	I need to approach, and other people need to approach, anybody can play this game.
	Individuals who are pretty high up in terms of their accomplishments and are fairly well known, who will sign this, and sign it by sending me a letterhead signed statement that they wish to be a signature.
	Obviously, they need to see it, but they go to the website and see it.
	When I have sufficient signatures, then we will approach some funding candidates to simply purchase that ad.
	So you're saying you don't have enough signatures yet?
	No, I stop pursuing the signatures when that's business, and I put my attention elsewhere.
	The Varnheim Research Group is still behind the concept, and I think the timing may be much better in a short while than it was then.
	Because, as you know, we've still got a whole Mars thing going on here, which has not played itself out.
	That was the problem I had with Dr. Greer, because he talks about all these hundreds of witnesses he has, but if you look at his website, most of the pictures of the witnesses are, it says, this man or unidentified, and there's really no more than maybe about seven or eight people Listed on his website, they're even identified.
	Well, he doesn't list them all on the website, and that's understandable.
	The majority of witnesses, probably 80%, for a whole host of reasons, which are theirs and theirs alone, have no desire to be public on this at this time.
	They have approached people in the UFO field, because obviously we'd listen to them, but they have no desire to go public.
	And that's the way it is.
	I mean, that's just the way it is.
	And I'll tell you, I've heard enough stories and seen enough that I cannot question their desire for that.
	I can't say, oh, you have nothing to worry about.
	Just go on forward.
	Just kind of cruise on out here.
	I'm not the one that's going to pay the consequences.
	I understand that completely.
	But they exist.
	These witnesses exist, believe me.
	I run into people all the time.
	I'll be out doing something, and I'll run into somebody working a camera crew, and we'll get to chatting.
	And next thing I know, he's talking about a radar sighting he had when he was working for the Air Force.
	There's so many witnesses out there with evidence, it's not even funny.
	They're all isolated.
	They're kind of individualized, and they don't have a venue, and why should they mess up their life when probably it won't do any good?
	Just one more question.
	In the people you've talked to, are there any UFO ET related events that you've been told about that have happened in recent times?
	You know, all the stuff that's happened in Roswell and all that.
	That happened in the last few years.
	Contemporary evidence, in other words.
	When you say UFO-E.T., you mean just any kind of evidence toward that hypothesis?
	Yeah, something like Roswell, but closer to now than 1947.
	Well, we've got a five-year, we've got a seven-year Mexico flap going on with so much video footage, they could probably turn it into a 43-hour documentary.
	We've got plenty of new photos.
	We've got the Phoenix event, which, despite Richard Monster's certainty, is far from explained.
	We have, um, what have we got?
	Fireballs in the sky.
	Well, look, if you follow UFO Center and updates and many of the other simple sightings tracking, the sightings are pouring in by the thousands a week.
	Sure.
	They're all over the place.
	Sure.
	And you roll out 98% of them.
	All that means is you've got maybe, what, nine, eight, nine hundred thousand every couple of months of probably very significant anomaly sightings.
	In fact, what's happening, Rick, is that there are so many sightings now that they're simply Well, look, even I agree with that.
	I have, with the exception of ongoing current sightings, I generally don't take sightings on the radio anymore.
	It's pointless.
	Millions of Americans have seen something they cannot explain and they're willing to tell the story and it doesn't get us anywhere.
	If, on the other hand, we have something massive over in American City, an ongoing situation, I'm on it like a fly's on stink.
	But to sit here and tell anecdotal stories is not going to move all of this forward.
	Yeah, we're way beyond that.
	We're way beyond that.
	Yeah, I agree.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Art.
	Good morning, Stephen.
	This is John in Scottsdale.
	I had the opportunity, actually the privilege, a few weeks ago of hosting a presentation given here in Phoenix in which Mr. Delitoso, Along with Francis Emma Barwood were featured speakers.
	We had Peter Davenport and we had Colin Andrews.
	And we also had Travis Walton and Mike Rogers.
	All impeccable people.
	Very nice people.
	Certainly your characterizations of them are very good.
	The question I'd like to ask you is because people, inevitably when I come up to people and present them with some bit of evidence, like say, Hoagland's pictures or something, they say, why isn't this on CNN?
	Meaning, of course, that Until and unless people see this on the major news media.
	We saw the Cat Box photo.
	Where are the other shoes that are going to drop?
	Where are the other pictures?
	You've opened up an interesting question, let me tell you.
	I have some restraints here, constraints, but let me say this.
	For those who haven't been paying attention for the last couple of weeks, we've got some photographs from Mars that are brand new.
	Oh, I've seen them.
	Let me make it quite clear.
	These photographs are filled with anomalies.
	Oh yeah.
	Let me be very clear about this.
	These photographs are filled with anomalies.
	Absolutely.
	Some of these anomalies are extraordinary.
	Absolutely.
	Now, I am personally in touch with three or four major media news operations.
	Meanwhile, Richard Hogan is out there.
	He's already popped a piece into UPN.
	He's popped a piece into MSNBC.
	He's talked to Fox.
	So he's working those media, and he's gotten a great deal of exposure, and they've covered it.
	I have not seen those, unfortunately.
	I hear they're okay, and they're giving a reasonable presentation.
	I'm dealing a little higher up the food chain.
	I'm also in relatively close contact with a number of the scientists, the independent scientists that are following it.
	I can only tell you that this story hasn't even started to get going.
	This is another reason why the paradigm clock is set at three minutes to midnight.
	It was originally set retroactively at 7 minutes.
	It got as far away at about 10 minutes.
	But it's at 3 minutes to midnight, and it's getting close.
	And this is part of the reason.
	You know, you talk about witnesses all day long, but then over here you've got something else.
	And over here you have this.
	Well, over here is the Mars photos.
	They ain't going away.
	They're still up on the mailing site.
	Anybody that takes them down and looks at them closely enough at Corel 6, 8, 10, whatever, is going to see the same things that we're seeing.
	Even though we have shown some of these anomalies to fairly high-end people in the media, their fundamental reaction is, you know, if you would just bring me something fuzzy, something inconclusive, something, you know, that clearly I can debunk because the person once was picked up for jaywalking when they were in high school or whatever, then I could just blow this off and we could get this over with.
	But you bring me this and it's so obvious, now I've got to make a decision.
	I can't do that!
	See, I mean, we have sponsors.
	We have corporate owners.
	We've got careers.
	We've got mortgages.
	You know, I can't do this.
	They're frozen solid.
	Let me tell you.
	They're going to thaw out eventually.
	This story will come out, and this story actually could take us where we have to go, and we may not ever have to have hearings.
	It would seem to me that this Berlin Wall is so weak.
	Yeah, it is.
	With the overwhelming evidence to present a prima facie case for the existence of all this.
	That all it would take is just a puff of wind to knock it over.
	This firewall between mainstream institutional worldview and the evidence that the good citizens of the UFO community and in the French communities have found will probably come down as fast as the Berlin Wall finally did come down.
	In other words, once it goes, it goes.
	They're not going to take it apart brick by brick over a period of five years.
	It was down in a couple of days.
	Everybody was shocked by that.
	The pressure is building and building and building.
	So the Mars issue is not dead.
	Trust me, it's going to be around.
	There's a lot of major media being talked to.
	Somebody's going to reach out and grab a Pulitzer Prize here at some point, even though they're probably going to hate the publicity and all, having to go to those meetings and pick up the awards and stuff.
	But somebody's going to do that, and we're going to move forward here at pretty rapid speed.
	Well, for the average man on the street, until and unless they do see it on, you know, CNN or... You're absolutely right.
	Or Peter or somebody's telling them this.
	Yep.
	They're not going to accept it.
	I agree.
	And the day they do, the paradigm clock will strike midnight.
	Right.
	What a domino effect that will be.
	Indeed.
	And then we can start having some real fun.
	That's when the really interesting and important stuff begins.
	Yep.
	These are the Rockies.
	You're on the air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	I'm Delana.
	I'm calling from Boston.
	So, I actually am not really getting you on the radio right now.
	Hi, Delana.
	Hi.
	Alright, my blood has been boiling for months since that debate between Jim Dilettoso and Cal Korff, and I'm afraid I've got to defend Cal Korff.
	He came across to me as cogent, thoughtful, and he was not a liar.
	Jim Dilettoso to me came across as a charmer, somewhat of a con, and he lied.
	He didn't sound like he was having a bad day.
	He sounded like he was caught chicken with his head cut off, and I didn't think that Cal Korff was trying to debunk the ufology he was trying to say he wanted truth he didn't
	want people like Jim Dillitoso to cloud the waters so that everybody who
	wants to explain what they see in the sky is considered a nutcase. And you know
	the fact is that McCarthy just wanted to rid the government and the
	entertainment industry of communists. I'm sure he did.
	I don't think it has much to do with the price of cheese.
	I mean, I'm an intelligent person.
	He came across as somebody who knew what he was talking about, and Jim Militoso was not credible.
	I think Richard Hoagland is credible.
	I think you are credible.
	Jim Delitosa was not credible.
	I can't argue with you.
	I think what you're trying to say is, look, I had a piece of Kalkor.
	I heard him on a debate.
	He came across okay.
	Well, I also want to take issue with you calling him whiny and high-pitched.
	I don't think that's the way to argue with somebody, to just make fun of the way they see you.
	Well, there were, on both sides, a lot of ad hominem attacks.
	And as I recall, you had to bleep out a few things that Jim said.
	You didn't have to bleep out anything Kalkor said.
	That is accurate.
	I have spent a lot of time listening to Mr. Korf, and I've read many of his posts, hundreds of dozens of his posts.
	I mean, I understand you don't like the man.
	Neither one of you comes across as liking him.
	No, this lady is absolutely right.
	Look, I don't like Cal Korf.
	That's fine.
	And I've had my own run-in with him, but my assessment of the debate, ma'am, is the same as yours.
	Don't call me ma'am, I'm only 24.
	Okay, young lady, mine is the same as yours.
	I thought Kalkorf ate Delitoso alive.
	Yeah, he did, and he won the debate, but the fact is, there's nobody in the field... He didn't come across as malicious.
	Ma'am, I have read plenty of this man's posts.
	There is nobody in this field, no debunker in this field, who goes after people personally more than Mr. Korf.
	And if you go to my website... He lied!
	He lied.
	Alright, so does that mean he can do anything?
	Say anything?
	Do anything?
	Does that mean he can attack other people associated with him?
	No, that means that Jim DeLaTosso lied about something.
	So does that give Mr. Korff a license to do anything?
	That gives Mr. Korff the license to let everybody know that he did lie.
	Does it give him the license to say that Jim DeLaTosso is defrauding his investors?
	I don't, obviously, I don't know the facts of what happened, but I do know that he won the debate.
	Yes, he won the debate.
	I will tell you this, this young lady may not be aware of the vicious nature of the Corf posts on the internet.
	the debate and i will tell you this is not a person agree with this young lady
	but he needs to promote this young lady may not be aware of the vicious nature
	of the course posts on the internet i'll check out his
	say uh... right after the debate wins he said so many days
	then jim dilettante refused to admit he doesn't have a degree from such-and-such
	ma'am, Jim Delitoso admitted that four years ago then how come it took him so long to admit it on the air if
	he had done it already?
	the reason he went on the air is because rather than...
	Calcorf wouldn't accept his admission, he knows that he can get media points
	Calcorf is one of the biggest media hounds in the business he knows he can get media points by beating up on Jim
	but he's been for a long time excuse me, excuse me
	Stephen, Stephen, Jim could have preempted all of this He could have pre-empted it by simply coming on the air before, or said one word, and saying, I did the following for the following reasons.
	He could have done that, but he didn't.
	Instead... Jim did not handle it well, and he made mistakes, but that doesn't change the fact that Mr. Korff handles himself, and that's just the way it is.
	When Cal Korff brought up the fact that he had lied.
	Jim Delitoso did not even immediately then come out and say, yes, I lied.
	He hemmed and hawed.
	He waited.
	I think a break went by.
	You advertised the snappy.
	Finally.
	Okay, so we've established that Jim lied about his credentials back in the early days.
	That's not a bad day.
	Well, there was more than that established.
	You'll recall Jim also was pushed into a corner and finally admitted that he also falsified documents.
	Yes, and then Cal Corp came up with the documents.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I'm an intelligent woman, and I can recognize a con artist.
	In fact, I've been taken in by a con artist.
	Jim Johnson came across as a charmer and a con, not as somebody I can trust.
	Jim Delitoso is actually a very nice guy.
	I believe he's nice, and I'm sure he's a great showman.
	But he didn't come across as somebody I could trust, and I believe in UFOs.
	That's okay.
	But that doesn't negate my remarks.
	It simply confirms that you had that view of the debate.
	I think you're actually correct in that view, but it doesn't negate my remarks, because they're based on a total picture, not just one debate.
	No, it doesn't.
	And plus, I don't think he had such a terribly high-pitched voice.
	All right, uh, well, that's, uh, that's... I'm letting you get it off my chest.
	I've been waiting for months.
	All right, well, it's off, and I've got to go, because it's the bottom of the hour.
	All right, thank you, and, uh, indeed, we will be right back.
	Stephen Bassett is my guest.
	I'm Art Bell.
	And this, indeed, is a truly open forum.
	It's called Coast to Coast AM.
	Glad you're here.
	Stay right there.
	We'll be back and do a final segment.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	Thank you for watching.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
	Good morning, Stephen Bassett.
	will be right back as well this is close to close to you
	all right back now to steven bassett uh... in our nation's capital steven
	Thank you.
	You ready for more?
	Fire away.
	All right.
	Here it comes.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
	Where are you, please?
	Good morning, Art.
	I'm in Fort Smith, Arkansas.
	This is Marsha.
	Hi, Marsha.
	Listening to you on KWHN 1320 AM.
	Got to get a plug in for them.
	Thank you for that.
	Okay.
	Listening to Steve Greer and to Stephen tonight talking about the documentary they're wanting to produce.
	Yes.
	Brought something to mind that I discussed with my husband just a few days ago.
	You can't look at the cable guide, you can't look at the TV guide, you can't turn the TV on without finding at least one day a week UFO documentaries.
	Oh, I know.
	And sometimes it's three or four hours of the same old, same old, same old programs being replayed and rehashed.
	I agree.
	The same grainy, blurry photographs.
	Yeah, and the same dead people.
	Or even worse yet, abduction at Lake County or something like that.
	I haven't seen that one, thank God.
	Well, hold your breath.
	Anyway, my question is, could this constant rehash the several months of the same old documentary be an effort, a carefully orchestrated effort, to desensitize the public to a real, bonafide UFO documentary proving that they're here?
	You know, so the real thing will be blown off as another hackneyed You have stumbled on another angle that I hadn't thought about.
	There's always another one.
	This is such a wonderful house of glass.
	It's a great, great question.
	I'll be honest with you.
	I have made a considerable effort to try to get a meeting with John Hendricks, the Chairman of the Board of Discovery Communications.
	This is a major, major network.
	A lot of people don't realize how well they're doing, how much money they're making, but they're doing very well.
	They've got two or three or four channels in test on satellite.
	They just started another one called Animal Planet, so... The cable is going to have... Discovery Communications is going to be one of the major cable powers.
	Yeah, they're good, Stephen, but they're not in the class of an ABC.
	Oh, no, no, no, but I've been trying to get it moving, because I wanted to try to find out what was going on in their thinking in terms of why they were running all these, because they are having an impact.
	Oh, sure.
	They are raising the public awareness to these issues in a way that's never, never quite been seen before.
	It is becoming a little numbing.
	I think the reason they're replaying them over and over again is because they're getting the ratings and those things don't cost them anything.
	That's right.
	Pure money makers.
	That's right.
	So, it's an interesting question.
	I think if anything, I think it's more likely that these kinds of documentaries, some of which aren't all that bad.
	I mean, there's some of them that are good and they all have at least something in them which is, I think, reasonably good.
	They are desensitizing the general culture to disclosure.
	I believe that, again, I've made it very clear, I believe disclosure is eminent.
	I think it's within by March of next year.
	The time clock is going to be changing, though.
	The paradigm clock will change back and forth a little bit, but look forward to getting closer to midnight.
	And this is part of the process.
	It's desensitizing disclosure.
	I'm not a conspiracist.
	I believe that what conspiracies are going on here are very, are kind of tightly held.
	They're combalistic and they're inside the government.
	The media is not involved.
	There is a firewall.
	There is a worldview firewall.
	But it's, one, it's simply natural to the human being, and two, to an editor or to someone in a high position.
	But the fact that they're running those is a documentation is a good sign.
	And I feel encouraged by it.
	I'd like to see more and new material.
	And there is new material out there.
	I know people who have done documentaries recently, and there's others that want to get into the game.
	So the problem is we need more documentaries so that you're not going to get so bored with the repetition.
	But a serious, serious documentary, for example, let me just throw one out.
	For example, a primetime live.
	Devoted to an hour's worth presentation of the kind of quality, witnesses, and material that Stephen Greer says he has, then you're talking.
	You're talking about something entirely different.
	It is different, because you see, that's an internally produced operation that has to then carry the prestige of the organization and the risk.
	The attenuated risk goes with them.
	It's much different than a farmed out documentary, which the channel could basically say, look, we don't vouch one way or the other for it.
	So yeah, and I believe that's coming.
	Even though I'm frustrated.
	I believe it is coming, and I don't think it's too far away.
	Because they want to make money, and there's plenty of money to be made in airing these subject matters.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett, Nard Bell.
	Hi.
	Yes, am I on?
	You're on!
	Okay.
	This is Pat in Portland, and I had an idea as to how Stephen Greer and Mr. Bassett might be able to get some of this evidence out.
	Sure.
	It seems to me that if the witnesses that Mr. Greer has are really as credible as he says they are, it's going to be pretty unlikely that he'll succeed in getting it broadcast on a major network.
	I might argue with that.
	What was the reason why?
	I didn't catch the reason, though, that he would have trouble getting it on a major network.
	What was the reason?
	Well, networks can be leaned on and such to suppress this kind of thing, if it's thought to be that important.
	But in any case, failing a broadcast on a major network it seems to me the
	thing to do with the to just make a simple
	straightforward intelligent video and make it available to the public uh...
	on this program um...
	so if you were to advertise it art make it available on your show
	at least then if he does have such credible witnesses the evidence wouldn't
	be lost and it might still reach millions of people Well, I suppose if all else were to fail, that might be something you'd want to do before you passed away.
	Oh, I think it would be maybe your number two option.
	I mean, you reach so many listeners.
	I mean, I know I would purchase a video like that, and that could then create a groundswell that might potentially lead to I have sympathy with what you're suggesting, and it might lead to it, but there's so much of that material out there, it's like throwing one more conspiracy theory on the Kennedy business, you know?
	So, we need something of a larger magnitude, is my opinion.
	What he's saying is that, is there a relatively low cost, but definitive, It's a piece of manufactured documentation that would swing it.
	And the history of this whole field has been, again, this incredible, wonderful paradox.
	If you have the more irrefutable the evidence, whether it's a photograph or a video or the credentials of the individual, the more it has to be fake.
	And if it's not, if it is refutable, then you simply refute it.
	The issue isn't one of evidence or even logic.
	It is the risk-reward factor that every person and institution calculates, equations that they run in their brain as they decide whether they want to contemplate this.
	And it's not life and death at this moment.
	Now, if we are building up a militarized posture towards space, and if we are engaging these entities in a hostile way, that I will remind the audience again that all those Star War ray guns and stuff is all nonsense.
	You don't need those kinds of things to deal with planets that are being difficult.
	You simply use simple propulsion-type technology, and you simply reroute a meteor the size of Montana, and you plop it in the Pacific Ocean.
	So if we are doing that, then it could very well be life and death, and it's one of those things, like World War II and a lot of other things.
	Everything seemed fine until it wasn't, and then a nightmare descended.
	That's interesting you would mention that, because I've been tracking the of the Hollywood output with a reality and reality seems to either coincide with or conveniently precede a Hollywood output.
	A big new movie coming out is called Deep Impact.
	I have no further comment.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
	Hi, this is Ian from Calaveras County, California.
	Yes, sir.
	One quick comment and then a question for Steve.
	I guess I have two.
	First of all, Art, it's been a pleasure listening to you for the last couple of years.
	It's a great way to entertain myself instead of going to sleep at night.
	Second comment is, it seems like there's an awful lot of us out here that are interested in pursuing the truth, and in this case, I believe the truth is that they are out there.
	My question for Steve would be, jumping ahead, as a potentialist in life, I was wondering what his thoughts are on Where do we go when we finally decide as a human race that they are out there?
	What does he think we ought to be doing?
	Obviously, just a military posture seems like it's a little bit silly in this day and age.
	What would he do if all of a sudden everybody said, OK, they're out there?
	Well, I'll tell you, my friend, if you weren't on the other end of a phone line and weren't of the same sex, I'd give you a big wet kiss.
	You just touched my major button here.
	The work that I do and my fundamental interests are not really disclosure.
	I mean, it's something that has to happen.
	My interest is the post-paradigm world.
	This week we had some amazing guests on our show, Barbara Marks Hubbard and Al Harrison.
	I highly recommend people try to go to the archives and listen to these shows.
	You don't have any profound revelations about some super strange event.
	What you had was very smart people talking about the post-paradigm world, one in each in their own way.
	It is the lack of this post-paradigm discussion and intellectual structure that really has us at risk.
	We really can't wait until this happens.
	We need to get on the ball now and start really airing out, at the highest levels, What we have to do, now the Paradigm Research website, the Paradigm Clock, is in fact, that is the fundamental focus.
	The clock is the draw to get people to come and check and see are we getting closer to midnight or further away.
	What the site is really about is to provide a forum, a forum for printing commentaries from the finest minds in the world on the subject of post-paradigm reality and to build up an intellectual resource there and get this debate going on this subject.
	I don't know what the post-paradigm world is going to be like.
	It is highly uncertain.
	There are a thousand different ways it can go.
	There are a lot of bad things that can happen.
	There are a lot of good things that can happen.
	But America, particularly America, has a nasty habit of being surprised by major events.
	We've done this many, many times.
	Why?
	I don't know.
	It seems to be our nature.
	We don't want to be surprised by this one.
	We need to start the intellectual process.
	That's what that site is devoted to, and I encourage you to check it out.
	Go in and voice your opinions.
	There's a massive bibliography.
	Eventually, all those items will be reviewed, and we're welcoming reviews from people all over the country.
	They can submit reviews, and we will publish those after reasonable editing.
	We're also welcoming commentaries on this post-paradigm reality, and also pre-paradigm, the period we're going through now, analysis and discussion.
	Meaning, how should we be handling this?
	Not just disclosure drive, but how should we be educating the people?
	What kind of things should be said?
	What kind of ways should we interact with the general public?
	The people in this field are in a privileged position, Ernest.
	They have a special responsibility.
	They have found a way to see beyond the box that they live in.
	So they see over the hill.
	So they know that there's something over the hill.
	The rest of the people don't.
	So we have a special responsibility to those people.
	Not to leave them behind, and not to have them suddenly get smacked upside the head.
	Yep, I certainly agree with all of that.
	We could devote a whole show to the particulars of that.
	I'm sure we should.
	You're asking that question.
	Alright.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett, North Valheim.
	Hey, this is Curtis in San Diego.
	Quickly, I just wanted to say, Art, that I wanted to ask him if he believes that these people that know about UFOs and that are above the President, so to speak, do you believe that they may cause Tragedies amongst the people, like locally, nationally, internationally, to make the world be in mourning constantly, or in corruptness, or in evilness, just so that people won't find the truth.
	What are you referring to?
	Tragedies?
	What do you mean?
	Well, assassinations, etc., etc.
	When somebody's assassinated that loves the people and wants to help people, and when somebody's killed, all of a sudden everybody just You touched on a very important thing.
	The conspiratorial view of the world is a natural human instinct.
	It's wired into our genes.
	We need to think that way.
	It's our own self-preservation.
	I don't quite view the world that way.
	There are far less conspiracies in the world than we think are there, in my opinion.
	But how does great evil really come about?
	It really comes about because a particular point of view is allowed, is accepted by people without thinking.
	And usually that point of view is couched in a secret, with a secret, it has sort of a secret complex sitting behind it.
	In other words, a secret, I'm kind of going to feel, what I'm trying to say is that The way you get 20 million people destroyed in Russia, and 10 million in Germany, and so forth, and China, is that you have ideologies that are couched in secrecy, that the people kind of swallow without really understanding them, and then you sort of go off the deep end.
	It's more like a herd kind of thing, than it is an endless manipulation in an X-file view of the world.
	The biggest issue we have now is not some particular orchestrated conspiracy.
	The biggest issue we have now, in my opinion, in terms of our long-term stability, Is this massive secret empire that emerged out of the Cold War in our country and elsewhere, but because we won the Cold War, it's still here.
	It's being dismantled elsewhere.
	We're getting bigger.
	That massive secret empire is eating away at the constitutional republic, and it's causing a lot of problems, some of which you can't even tell.
	They're micro-problems, but they add up to a lot of stuff.
	If we don't do away with it, if we don't deal with it, then eventually we're going to end up going off a deep end, and there'll be a lot of pain and suffering.
	And that's that simple.
	And whether it's blindly stumbling into a hostile relationship with entities 10,000 years more advanced than us, or whether it's completely ruining the relationship between the people and the government, or getting into some very strange international issues over this extra-terrestrial issue, who knows?
	We know that we make big mistakes.
	So, my biggest concern is more macroscopic.
	What is the tenor of our culture?
	The tenor of our culture now is toward secrecy, it's toward violence, it's toward what I call the politics of nothing.
	We're losing our way, we're losing our scope, and yet there's still plenty of good things going on.
	But just having good things going on, I'm afraid, doesn't cut it, because eventually that stops, and then you deal with the other stuff that you weren't addressing.
	So the UFO issue really deals with an even greater issue.
	The issue that Sarah McClendon is concerned about.
	You either have an open government or you don't.
	And the cost of a non-open government can be very, very high.
	And the cost of an open one, a completely open one, could be high, too.
	It's like if everybody was suddenly forced to tell the absolute truth, we'd have bodies littering the streets.
	Yeah, but you see, Art, that's a tautology, because one of the reasons that sudden truth would be damaging is because we're 50 years alive.
	But what I'm saying is, a sudden absolute truth might be also difficult.
	Decompression.
	Well, but let's face it, it ain't sudden.
	We've been nipping at this thing for so long, and it's been pretty gradual by and large.
	It just seems to be accelerating now.
	Remember, E.T.
	is still the number one most popular movie in the world.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Stephen and Art.
	Hi.
	Yes, good morning.
	First, I want to agree 100% that the media does have a major influence.
	on people and to some extent may mislead society from the truth.
	My question is, if the government gave us the truth as to the discoveries and experiments they have discovered or conducted, what I want to know is, what was the purpose for them to keep the truth from the people from the very beginning?
	Well, I guess when we know what it is, we'll know why they kept it from us, but do you want to speculate, Steve?
	Well, it's a question that's been asked countless times.
	There's a reasonably fun, there's a basic theory, it's not too bad, and that is that Remember, this business, I think, non-accidentally started virtually right after the war, right at the beginning of the nuclear age.
	We were going into a nuclear standoff with Russia.
	We probably could have been avoided had we taken a different tack, but we didn't, so we ended up with it.
	Once you get those missiles pointed at each other, the stakes get raised way up there and everything becomes a big deal, right?
	Someone turns up at a base without the right pass, you know, carrying a pail, and 26 people come out of the bushes.
	Sure.
	So once you get that going, then suddenly ETs come into play, and everybody went nuts.
	They essentially said, my God, this is going to ruin everything.
	And they made a decision.
	OK, look, we're going to bury this one.
	We're going to deal with this one.
	In other words, we're writing ourselves a blank check on this one, and the people will forgive us later.
	And OK, fine.
	The Cold War is over.
	We've moved on.
	And now we're getting the... There may have been an upside at that point.
	There may have been an upside.
	I think it would have been destabilizing.
	I have no idea how... Remember, you had Khrushchev pounding on tables with shoes.
	I mean, things did not look particularly kosher and civil.
	So how would we have viewed each other as we, quote, vied for this special knowledge?
	I have no idea.
	But the good that may have been in place at the time they started this process has sort of run its course.
	And now we're getting into the bad side.
	So now is when you cut your losses.
	It's like playing poker.
	You know, you're winning money?
	Great.
	But just because you were winning money doesn't mean that when you start losing a lot that you just keep playing until it's all gone, because you once won, you have to know when to cut your losses.
	It's time for the government to cut its losses.
	All right, Steven.
	We are absolutely out of time.
	It has been a very good show and a very good, stimulating, productive discussion.
	And I want to thank you, and we will kind of update the audience whenever we have news with regard to Stephen Greer's plans or your plans.
	We'll have you back.
	So until next time... I will be back.
	Take care, my friend.
	Thank you.
	That's it, folks.
	We must abide by the clock, as you know.
	And it has been everything I just said.
	Very productive, in my opinion.
	And very honest and very open.
	That which we are calling for.
	So, for tonight, that's it from the high desert.

▲