Art Bell hosts Stephen Bassett and Dr. Steven Greer, who push for UFO disclosure via Project Starlight and the Paradigm Clock, tracking government cover-ups since 1963’s South Atlantic Titan II incident—where a witness retrieved 40-inch extraterrestrial life forms—and credible pilot reports like McMinnville’s 1950 disc. Bassett warns of institutional bias ignoring witnesses like Philip Corso, while Greer insists $2M-funded documentaries or global press conferences could force transparency, despite Cold War-era "secret empires" manipulating public perception. Callers speculate about desensitization via Discovery’s UFO docs and potential societal collapse if disclosure isn’t handled carefully, urging proactive debate to prevent chaos. [Automatically generated summary]
I bid you all good evening, or good morning, as the case may be in your time, wherever you may be, and there are so many stretching from the East Islands of America.
Down there.
North all the way to the pole.
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...
The nation's only UFO lobbyist, Stephen Batson.
Stephen Batson.
And then, at the top of the hour, we will include Dr. Stephen Greer's deep studies, 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.
But 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 would change China.
And when everybody has finally joined NATO, what do we have?
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.
that's that i think modestly observant people are fully capable of drawing their own conclusions and 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 thought 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, John, that is how the second coming is intended to occur by man's own hand?
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...
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, oh, top ten, of the Ten Commandments, top ten, 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 fist together.
Imagine a fist-sized hailstone.
Anyway, it bonked 12 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-sized 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 am 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 you, 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.
I don't know if it's cry or not, but I you did the judge of it.
Okay.
I was about okay.
In Mexico, when when when kids are ready to go and take some parents go and find a little kid to get to the daughters and the daughters keep the little kids so they can be like a little chaperone for them.
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?
If 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.
unidentified
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 me what's going on?
Why don't you ask me what's going on?
Don't say that you love me.
Just tell me that you want me.
Don't say that you want me.
Take a long way to go.
Never see what you want to see.
Or everything to the gallery.
Take a long way to go.
Take a long way to go.
When you're up on the stage, it's so unbelievable.
Oh, unforgettable.
I may have known you.
Then your wife seems to take you losing the sanity.
Oh, calamity.
But there's no way to go.
Oh, yeah.
The End You're listening to what Bell Summer in Time on Premiere Radio Networks, tonight's an on-core presentation of Coast to Coast A.M. from April 30th, 1998.
Coming up in a moment, the nation's only UFO lobbyist Steve Batten.
And we'll ask him about many things.
Then at the top of the hour, we'll be joined by Dr. Stephen Greer, who heads an organization known as Steve Setty, and he is a very, very intense individual.
So all of that, directly ahead.
The End 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.
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.
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 Stephen Greer, you said he 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.
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.
But before we go further, I think we better educate some of your audience.
Maybe there's 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 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.
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 willing to look into it.
So that's the first thing your listeners need to know.
And the second thing is that she had 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 Stephen Greer on your show for the first time, January the 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 the 30th of this year, somewhat, I think, prompted by the Mars developments.
Things are 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 up, 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.
New York Times and the Post and all those things pick it up.
But one media picked it up, a gentleman by the name of Art Bell, who runs this late-night show out of a small place in Perump, and put it up on his website.
And so 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.
And as a result, that issue did get spread far and wide.
It just didn't have the informator of Sam Donaldson or Cokie Roberts.
And 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 am afraid of.
Well, I'll tell you, 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.
And 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 out of our seeping through the cracks in the saloon floor like the gold dust in Paint Your Wagon.
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 story that is going to bring you grief and suffering well because it's fun and I'm getting older.
We need many, many more people that are taking this approach to life.
Now, systemically, 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 podun 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, the likelihood of them saying, sure, no problem, goes lower and lower because they know that if they alienate by really getting aggressive in their politics a significant number of their money backers, well, they can't run anymore.
That's why so many fairly good people like Howard Baker and others simply walked away from the House and Senate in the last 10 years.
And I'm walking away from politics, Stephen, in a lot of ways.
I am and I'm not.
The two-party system is a failure 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 hate to say given up, but I've almost given up on the present system, and I'm very disenchanted.
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.
And before we get totally at 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 if they come into your site.
And then when they go over to my site, they will see a link for the Bell Show.
And then they'll go to the links 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 will be up fairly soon, the March 30 story written by Sarah McClendon 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.
And it didn't 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 at a 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 and 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.
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.
And over the years, it was changed about nine times, depending upon what was going on in the world, and it would Be either moved closer to midnight or further away.
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.
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 what is CSETI 101?
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 501 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.
And 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.
And this is really quite exciting.
We've had some major encounters in Mexico, Belgium, England, throughout the United States and elsewhere.
And it's an experiment which we are continuing to expand.
The other part of the project is called Project Starlight.
And 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.
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.
And I can talk more about that later.
But 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.
And 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.
In fact, the photographic evidence that we put together for the briefing we conducted from members of Congress last April, a year ago, have 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.
And 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, you know, 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, you know, 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 pilot reports, and many of them with radar encounter.
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 disc taken at McMinnville, Oregon in 1950, I believe it was 51.
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, okay, you got us.
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, chairman of committees, et cetera, 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 am 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 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 Adamack, who died in January.
But many of the 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 prime-time 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 another whole Pandora's box.
Well, I recall a very dramatic moment, Doctor, when you said that you had presented the pharmaceutical IA director with all the evidence, and he literally had his head in his hands going, oh, my God.
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 while also acknowledging that the subject very likely existed.
So the way that this thing has been managed, the covert ultra-secret black projects 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 was concerned about the UFO issue when he made that statement.
We know that because we have two witnesses who had been with and worked with the president, Eisenhower, who have told us point blank that he knew of the subject, but also, and one witness in particular, that 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 eighth pilot in World War II, was put in charge of this in 1955.
I happen to know Jimmy Doolittle's nephew, who confirmed to me that Jimmy Doolittle, on a deathbed concession, 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 and 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 this important.
Well, I think that it doesn't vode well, but I don't know that it makes that much difference either because, quite frankly, one of the things that the CIA director said was that, look, we cannot disclose, no matter how much we might want to, information which we don't 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 Wolves 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 this 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.
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 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.
He stated to me that he knew that there were projects related to the UFO matter, but he could not penetrate them with a top secret clearance at the request of the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and with a very good knowledge of how to maneuver in covert areas.
And by the way, he also had subpoena power.
But this didn't matter.
He still said that what you're dealing with is something that is wrapped up so tightly that he could not penetrate it.
Although he knew that those projects were there, he could not penetrate the secrecy surrounding them.
Well, 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 Arkbell.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
unidentified
You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
Music by Ben Thede
Music by Ben Thede
The End 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, C. Setti's Dr. Stephen Greer, is my guest, along for the ride at the moment, Stephen Bassett, the nation's only UFO, I guess, representative, lobbyist, probably is a better word, in Washington.
The End All right, back now to Dr. Stephen Greer, taking time out from a very, very busy medical moment in his medical career to spend time with us.
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 has been tremendous learning curve for some of these 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 have an alternate advisory entity besides the just denials coming out of these black programs, these covert programs.
So I think that's very important in a democracy to provide that kind of education and dialogue.
But in addition to that, we have to remember that if enough people contact certain key committee chairmen and say, look, we really need to see you doing some hearings on this, then the subject would be disclosed.
Because even if they are lied to when they make an inquiry, for example, Stephen Schiff, Congressman Schiff, certainly was deceived, and so was the GAO and others when they made inquiries into the 1947 New Mexico Roswell crash.
However, a hearing which does not depend passively on the cooperation of covert programs, but has ready a stage bill through a congressional hearing process to have dozens and dozens of top secret witnesses stand up and say, I was at Roswell and here's what I saw and did, or I was at Atlantic Command in an underground facility, and this is what I saw and this is what we handled.
Or I was at Sandia National Laboratories and these are the materials of extraterrestrial origin that I personally handled.
We have those kind of witnesses.
So if the Congress would hold open hearings, it will not then be dependent on, we've done the work, we've done our homework.
So this means that if the hearings could be held, the subject would be disclosed.
There's enough 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, CI 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, O-R-G, because we're a nonprofit, 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 who, as well as in congressional offices, who have said, look, Dr. Greer, 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.
And by the way, this is not just a pipe dream concocted by me or a couple.
We have had discussions with RAN Corporation.
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.
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 whistleblowers, the colonels, the lieutenant colonels, the majors, et cetera, 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 should 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, PBS, ABC, whatever, if they came to you, could you produce 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 Corsas.
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 say, 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 danger it is for all of us.
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 products, 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, well, you know, why can't you just 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 real heroes on the stage right now.
So of Corso is one.
Gordon Cooper is another.
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's 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, 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 policymakers.
And I think that this is what members of Congress have said to us also, by the way, is that you're going to need to do something like that to create enough of a momentum for them to then justify holding a hearing.
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.
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 and tell us what he knew, what he would have said had he testified and why he was spirited away.
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.
Well, 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 Weston Hotel in Georgetown sometime after midnight, whereupon he left a note under the door of the now late Sherry Adamack, my main assistant, explaining what had happened.
And what had happened was this, is that 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 a 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.
And he sat in on meetings where these kinds of programs were actually discussed.
And at the table were folks from various agencies.
And 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.
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 satellites, whatever.
And it's a control drama that has been played out that is, I think, a very dangerous one.
And that is, look, if you're on life support as a military-industrial sector and peace is breaking out, the Soviet Union is no more.
The, quote, evil empire has dissolved and are now ostensibly somewhat allies of ours, 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 parts of this, not quite the details he had.
And I'm quite sure that the folks he had worked with did not want him standing up in front of members of Congress and people who are on the staff at the White House telling that kind of story because it put the fear of God in everyone.
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, once you can have enough compassion for all concerned.
And I think that they appealed 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 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 reaction, I think we have to be very careful to guard against that.
And I think that was the big message that this guy was going to bring to this meeting was a warning against that kind of reactivity.
Now, 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.
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.
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.
you Back now to Dr. Stephen Greer and Stephen Bassett.
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. Estes, Hal rather, Hal M. Estes III, testified before Congress.
Now, the full text of his 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.
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 it to adversaries and minimizing the impact on other users.
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 I'll turn this back over to Stephen, is that he was talking about the private process and doing it at a level that will guarantee that it will cross the threshold.
You're talking probably about a million dollars.
The remarkable thing is that there are an extraordinary number of people in this country, quite an 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.
It would be a bit 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 all to make people fall over and faint, but it's something that is very doable.
And 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.
And I would encourage anyone listening to do that and to give us a call and to dialogue with us on how to get that.
This is what's very actually frustrating, is that there's a Maserati there or Lamborghini that's been built that needs some fuel in the tank.
And I think that 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 important, newsworthy, policy-making, legislatively important, foreign policy important, et cetera, and so on.
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 $2 million right now, but if NBC, for example, came to Dr. Stephen 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.
This was in the South Atlantic, in a very remote area of the South Atlantic, during the Titan II missile test back in 1963 when we were testing ICBM Intercontinental Ballistic Missile.
Okay, I mean, and I don't mean to sound difficult, 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 dealing with this.
And 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 may 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.
And 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.
And what we need now is the mechanism.
So 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 Adamak in the Pentagon, in the Joint Chiefs meeting area in a very relevant office a year ago.
And this guy, after hearing all this, said, you know, I have no reason to doubt this is true, and this is an admiral speaking, but I have never been allowed to have information on this subject.
And if you have these kind of witnesses, bypass the U.S. 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 security oaths and everything else.
And he said, do it.
He says, and you could have knocked me over.
And I looked at these other, you know, 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 at 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.
Well, you know, I have metastatic malignant melanoma, which is a very, very deadly type of cancer.
It's much more aggressive than the skin cancer that Congressman Schiff had, and he died a couple weeks ago.
But right now, thank God, and I guess thanks to 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 guild a little bit with that, because, you know, when you have a close friend that actually had cancer the same time and died so quickly, it's very difficult.
We certainly need the help, and we need help in a lot of ways.
One of the things that I, a big way that I think people can help is, even if they're not a top secret witness or they don't know someone at NBC or what have you, is that they can take an interest in this subject and do some little thing to network the right people into this effort.
You'd be surprised how the grassroots process has really been effective.
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, 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, you know, 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, into 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 together.
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 are quality control, we do not want it to be another cheesy sort of tabloid-style show.
I think the networks, you know, one of the people that 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, et cetera, 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 would have to put the same level of investigative power into this issue that they have put into the cigarette question.
So it wouldn't even take that much effort, I think.
And they, as you know, primarily they succeeded in really changing the whole relationship between American people and the tobacco industry, which is an illegal enterprise and has a right to go forward.
But nevertheless, there were some serious problems there.
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?
Yes, and we have a seat that is 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, Stephen Bassett, who is a lobbyist on the same question in Washington, and we'll get back to them in a moment.
Dr. Greer, 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 a 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 to 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 am 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 and government documents, some of which are not legally declassified but which we have, which are smoking guns.
So I think that there is ample material.
Now, the question is whether or not they would be willing to take it on.
And I think that they would be once they saw how it could be positioned and put together.
And I think that's a dialogue we need to begin having.
I think that is what the fourth estate is all about.
And I think that that is something that maybe it could not have been done 10 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 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, you know, 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 because 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's one of the problems.
But if you can get beyond that, if you can get beyond the sort of incredulity that goes with the kind of idea, gee a story this big certainly I would know about because I'm so important.
You know, that's the kind of thing you get from media people a lot.
I think that if you could get beyond that, you would find that there's a really compelling story.
But it would need to be reported honestly and I think in a very forthright fashion.
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.
And that's why, I mean, while we have had limited funds to do the full betting, 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 is one witness that we were about to utilize, 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.
And 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.
Well, if you have $1 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.
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 Corso problem.
He's so credible, his background is so impeccable and already proven that they can do nothing but just ignore it.
And I can assure you, they are trying so hard to ignore Philip Corso, it's not even funny.
And eventually they're going to have to deal with him.
So, you know, the thing is that 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 and conduct their business appropriately.
And 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.
Are they going to 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 don't, you go in very strong and you're very firm, and you don't let those silly arguments dissuade you very much.
You're very right, Steve, because you can't, there are all kinds of naysayers and negativists out there who throw a million landmines in your path.
And I've had probably 10 billion landmines thrown in our path in the last four and a half, five years of doing this with the government.
But I think that 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 Corsa, 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 reemphasize 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 E.T.s being shot on the tarmac at Fort Dixon-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, and there was this look of astonishment.
I mean, there was no question that they knew that this was legitimate.
So I think the evidence and the witnesses will stand on their own if we're given a chance to have a venue where it can be dealt with in a serious and respectful way.
Well, it's also this wonderful act of common sense that one has to go through.
We all know what a hoax is.
You pull a stunt, 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 I've ever spoken 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?
See, common sense is thrown out the window the moment you are confronting somebody's worldview as opposed to simply a decision based on logic.
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 going to get risked 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 can be checked, 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 betting 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, 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.
And 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.
This is something our research teams have seen.
So, I mean, you know, in a way, the debate that people are having, you know, is it real or is it, that is like kindergarten level.
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 the sacrifice and human effort and life and dollars is beyond what I can go into here.
And 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.
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.
And 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 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.
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, you know, 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's 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.
And I'd like to add something here that, as you know, I still have very strong feelings about the need for the government to be involved in this.
There is a message that is part and parcel to what Dr. Greer is saying, and the message goes like this.
The potential for a privatization process is there.
There's plenty of money in this country.
There's plenty of casual money in this country.
Pay for it 100 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 that people are going to perceive them as being useless or ignorant or gutless or incompetent.
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.
I mean, if this comes out in a privatized fashion and then there's a quick response from Congress to have an investigation and get to the bottom of it, I think that will be redeeming.
But you know, one of the things that part of the conversation I had over almost three hours with the CIA director was, you know, if this is done outside of government support and cooperation, it will prove to be, in the short run at least, extremely embarrassing to the U.S. government because 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 we made that point and he took it to heart quite seriously.
But ultimately, there comes a point after, as I've said, four and a half years of intensive and diligent briefings for these sorts of people that I have had personally.
It's been a historic journey.
I know it's not happened before in the history of the UFO field where this many meetings have happened so intensely.
I think that the time has come for us really to step forward with what we have, with as many good witnesses as we can get together who, to me, are the real heroes who are willing to step out there and tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may.
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?
So, 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.
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 ones coming up, you can contact Dr. Greer at www.cseti.org.
I'm Art Bell.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
unidentified
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.
Coast to Coast AM from April
Coast to Coast AM from April 30th, 1998.
30th, 1998.
Oh
On this air and ocean, finally lovers know the shame Turning every time you choose to see the face inside Watching this emotion as you turn around and say
Take my breath away Take my breath away I'm watching and I keep waiting Still the light is the pain of love
Never hesitate to become a flame of love Never hesitate to become a flame of love Premier Radio Network presents Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
Tonight's program originally aired April 30th, 1998.
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.
First time caller line, you're on air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
unidentified
Hi.
Yes, my name is Rick, and I'm from Cokeville, Tennessee.
How are you doing?
Fine.
Yes, Stephen, one of the last times you were on the program, I believe it was the same time Richard Hoagland was on, 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.
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 in a back burner because I 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.
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 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, so 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.
No, I stopped pursuing the signatures when that's business, and I put my attention elsewhere.
The crime 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.
unidentified
That was the problem I have with Dr. Creer, because he talks about all these hundreds of witnesses he has, and if you look at his website, most of the pictures of the witnesses are this man or unidentified, and there's really no more than maybe about seven or eight people listed on his website.
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 us at this time.
They have approached people in the UFO field because obviously we 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 close on out here.
I'm not the one that's going to pay the consequences.
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?
unidentified
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, let alone all the stuff that happened in Roswell and all that, like that in the last few years?
Well, we've got a five-year, we've got a seven-year Mexico flap going on with so much video footage they can 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 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.
Wildcard line, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett, Nard Bell, High.
unidentified
Yes, good morning.
All right, good morning, Stephen.
This is John and Scottsdale.
I had the opportunity, actually the privilege, a few weeks ago of hosting a presentation given here in Phoenix in which Mrs. De La Toso, 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 like to ask here 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.
Now, I am personally in touch with three or four major media news operations.
Meanwhile, Richard Hoagman 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, here 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 one of the reasons why I'm not so I'm very reason why the paradigm clock is set at three minutes to midnight.
It was originally set retroactively at seven minutes.
It got as far away as about ten minutes.
But it's at three 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 in Core L6, 810, whatever, is going to see the same things that we're seeing.
Now, 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.
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.
unidentified
It would seem to me that this Berlin wall is so weak 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.
This firewall between the 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 was 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.
unidentified
Well, for the average man on the street, until and unless they do see it on CNN or Ed or Peter or somebody's telling them this, they're not going to accept it.
This young lady may not be aware of the vicious nature of the Corf posts on the Internet.
unidentified
I checked out his site right after the debate when he said so many days since Jim De La Toso has refused to admit he doesn't have a degree from such and such.
It simply confirms that you had that view of the debate, and 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.
unidentified
No, it doesn't.
And plus, I don't think he had such a terribly high-pitched voice.
Listening to Steve Greer and to Stephen tonight talking about the documentary they're wanting to produce 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.
Anyway, my question is, could this constant rehash the several months of the same old documentaries be an effort, a carefully orchestrated effort, to desensitize the public to a real bona fide UFO documentary proving that they're here, you know, so the real thing will be blown off as another hackneyed, jumbled-up mess.
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.
Discovery Communication is going to be one of the major cable.
But I've been trying to get VMware 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.
But a serious, serious documentary, for example, let me just throw one out.
For example, a prime time 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 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 that the attenuated risk goes with them.
It's much different than a farmed-out documentary, which the channel can basically say, look, we don't bounce one way or the other for it.
So, yeah, but 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.
They want to make money, and there's plenty of money to be made in airing the subject matter.
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.
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 would be to just make a simple, straightforward, intelligent video and then make it available to the public on this program.
If you were to advertise it, Art, and 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.
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 eventually lead to the evidence being presented in a more mainstream way.
Yeah, I have sympathy with what you are 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 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 since 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.
I have 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 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, okay, they're out there?
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 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 kinds of things should be said?
What kinds of ways should we interact with the general public?
The people in this field are in a privileged position.
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 up the side of the head.
Wildcard line, you're on the air with Stephen Bassett and Art Bell.
unidentified
Hi.
Hey, this is Curtis in San Diego.
Hello.
Quickly, I just wanted to say that I think 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?
When somebody's assassinated that loves the people and wants to help people, and when somebody's killed, all of a sudden everybody just loses everything.
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 for our own self-preservation.
I don't quite view the world that way.
What I'm trying to say is there's 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 afield.
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, the ex-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.
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 extraterrestrial 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, you know, just having good things going on, I'm afraid doesn't cut it because, you see, 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.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Stephen and Art.
Hi.
unidentified
Yes, good morning.
First, I want to agree 100% that the media does have a major influence on people, and to some extent, they miss the 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, this question has 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, not 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?
I mean, someone turns up at a base without the right pass, you know, carrying a hail, and 26 people come out of the bushes.
So once you get that going, then suddenly ETs come into play, and everybody went nuts.
And they essentially said, my God, this is going to ruin everything.
And they made a decision.
Okay, look, we've got 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.
I mean, things did not look particularly kosher and civil.
So how would we view 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 is sort of run its course.
And now we're getting into the bad side.
And 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.