Censored Truths and Conscious Contact: My Take on Dr. Steven Greer’s Inspire Nation Interview

Screen capture of interview on Inspire Nation

Dr. Steven Greer’s interview on Inspire Nation is more than a conversation—it’s a collision of suppressed truths, spiritual urgency, and systemic control. From claims of media censorship to the ethics of contact with Non-Human Intelligence (NHI), Greer presents a narrative that demands scrutiny, not just belief.

As someone who’s spent decades studying history, psychology, and the architecture of power, I approach this topic with both skepticism and conviction. I don’t rely on titles or institutions to tell me what’s real—I rely on patterns, plausibility, and personal discernment.

In this article, I break down each major segment of the interview by timestamp, offering my own analysis and reflections. This isn’t just a reaction—it’s a reckoning.

01:43 – Is Disclosure Being Deliberately Stalled?

Dr. Greer opens the interview with a direct accusation: that disclosure is not simply slow—it’s being actively suppressed. He suggests that governments, media platforms, and covert interests are deliberately managing the narrative to keep the public intrigued but uninformed.

My Take: This isn’t just a delay—it’s a strategy. After years of watching content creators, government hearings, and media coverage, I’ve seen the same pattern: tease the public with vague confirmations, but never commit. It’s like watching a magician reveal the trick without showing the mechanism. The ambiguity keeps us engaged but disempowered.

Since 2017, we’ve seen a ramp-up in attention—Pentagon footage, congressional hearings, whistleblower testimonies—but no resolution. The narrative is designed to maintain curiosity without offering clarity. That’s not transparency—it’s control.

And let’s be honest: the expectation that governments or institutions will deliver “official truth” is naïve. These are entities built on secrecy, power consolidation, and strategic ambiguity. They don’t just stall disclosure—they shape it. They decide what’s safe to reveal, what’s profitable to conceal, and what keeps the public in a state of suspended belief.

As someone who values independent thought, I don’t wait for permission to believe what I already know. I examine patterns, weigh plausibility, and trust my own discernment. Disclosure isn’t something we receive—it’s something we reclaim.

05:55 – Atrocities of the Secret Government

In this segment, Dr. Greer discusses disturbing claims about covert operations, human experimentation, and systemic abuse carried out by unacknowledged entities within the military-industrial complex. He suggests that beneath the surface of national security lies a shadow network operating without oversight or accountability.

My Take: This is where anecdotal data becomes more than storytelling—it becomes preliminary evidence. Much like Dr. Garry Nolan has argued, the sheer volume and consistency of these accounts across decades and platforms—whether from military personnel, intelligence insiders, or civilian experiencers—amounts to a body of circumstantial evidence that cannot be dismissed.

In criminal law, circumstantial evidence can convict. It doesn’t require a smoking gun—just a pattern strong enough to point to a reality. That’s how I view this segment. The atrocities described may lack public documentation, but they echo across hundreds of interviews, podcasts, and whistleblower testimonies. From The Shawn Ryan Show to Richard Dolan, the themes are consistent: secrecy breeds abuse, and silence protects power.

But I don’t accept every claim at face value. I think critically. I ask: What do we know about human behavior—past and present? I absorb the data, compare patterns, and try to strip away bias. I consider the source, the context, and the motive. And when I do, I see a picture that’s not just plausible—it’s disturbingly familiar.

The truth is, we’ve demonstrated as a species our inability to be consistently truthful—especially when power is involved. So when I hear claims of atrocities committed under the veil of secrecy, I don’t dismiss them. I interrogate them. And I treat them as signals—not noise.

08:10 – The Power of the Secret Government

Dr. Greer outlines how unelected entities—military-industrial players, intelligence networks, and corporate interests—hold more sway than elected officials. He suggests that real power operates behind the scenes, beyond democratic oversight.

My Take: As someone born in the mid-1970s, my awakening to these realities didn’t come from a single moment—it came from decades of watching, reading, and reflecting. I’ve studied the warnings of President Truman, the farewell address of Eisenhower, the assassination of JFK, and the unraveling of Watergate. These weren’t isolated events—they were signals. Signals that power doesn’t always wear a name tag or stand behind a podium.

When I hear claims about a “secret government,” I don’t dismiss them—I interrogate them. I ask: What do we know about human behavior—past and present? I absorb the data, compare patterns, and try to strip away bias. I don’t need every detail to be proven beyond doubt. I need it to be plausible within the context of history, psychology, and systems.

And when I apply that lens, the idea of unelected power brokers shaping global narratives doesn’t sound far-fetched—it sounds familiar. It’s not just about conspiracy—it’s about continuity. The same mechanisms that shaped Cold War secrecy and corporate lobbying now shape the UFO/UAP narrative.

I’ve also seen how credentials are used to sell legitimacy. Former intelligence officers, ex-CIA operatives, NASA directors—they’re presented as truth-tellers, but I always ask: What’s their agenda? Many of these individuals have previously made claims that later expand, shift, or conveniently align with book releases or media appearances. That’s not disclosure—that’s branding.

So yes, I’m skeptical. Not cynical—but discerning. I believe there are puppet masters. I believe pressure is applied to silence voices. And I believe that integrity is measured not by titles, but by what someone is willing to risk. If someone has nothing to lose and speaks from moral obligation, threats mean nothing. But if someone’s career, wealth, or influence is on the line, then we must ask: Are they protecting truth—or protecting themselves?

13:40 – The Courage to Disclose

In this segment, Dr. Greer calls on insiders—military, intelligence, and corporate whistleblowers—to come forward with the truth about UFOs, UAPs, and Non-Human Intelligence. He frames disclosure as a moral imperative, urging those with knowledge to risk their careers and safety for the greater good.

My Take: Let’s be honest: if the courage to disclose truly existed within these institutions, disclosure would have already happened. We wouldn’t be stuck in this endless loop of speculation, recycled interviews, and vague promises. The fact that we’re still debating whether disclosure will be “catastrophic” or “guided” tells me everything I need to know—this is a managed narrative, not a truth movement.

I’ve seen enough. I don’t need a government official, a decorated general, or a PhD with a podium to tell me NHI are real. The preliminary data is overwhelming—both in volume and consistency. Whether it’s advanced human tech or native non-human intelligence, the distinction doesn’t need to be quantified. The point is: it’s happening. And anyone willing to think critically, examine patterns, and question the source of their information can see that.

I’ve spent decades absorbing this material—watching, reading, listening, and reflecting. And I’ve learned that titles don’t equal truth. In fact, the more grandiose the credentials, the more likely the message is filtered through institutional bias or personal agenda. That’s why I ask: Where is this information coming from? Who benefits from its framing?

The idea that humans are part of a galactic or universal neighborhood of beings and cultures is traumatic—no matter how you slice it. It challenges our identity, our history, our religions, and our sense of control. And human nature, as history has shown, doesn’t handle paradigm shifts gracefully. We’ve proven our addiction to power, secrecy, and manipulation. So spare me the sanitized debates and the slow-drip “official” narratives. I’m not waiting for permission to believe what I already know.

8:40 – Asymmetric Disclosure: A Call to Action

In this segment, Dr. Greer emphasizes that disclosure will not come from governments or institutions—it must come from individuals. He calls for citizen-led contact, awareness, and a shift in consciousness, arguing that waiting for official permission is a dead end.

My Take: This is where I’ve drawn my own line. I’ve decided that I take personal accountability for how I engage with this reality. I don’t need to be led by governments, institutions, or branded movements. I follow laws, I live as a human being among other human beings—but I refuse to let any authority dictate what I should fear, what I should believe, or how I should prepare.

I choose peace. I choose purpose. That’s my call to action. It’s not a $5,000 retreat, a curated CE5 experience, or a membership tier. It’s a personal commitment to live in alignment with what I believe is true. And I believe that some of the technology we’re seeing is human-made—suppressed, withheld, and criminally hidden from the public. If it can liberate us from energy dependence, environmental collapse, and systemic scarcity, then its suppression is a violation of human rights.

I also believe NHI is real—and that communication with other civilizations is being actively blocked. That, too, is criminal. Whether NHI are benevolent, neutral, or hostile, withholding that information from the public is a violation of our right to self-determination. We are not children. We are not subjects. We are participants in a shared reality, and we deserve to know who else is in it.

And when push comes to shove, I will not bear arms or treat NHI as a threat unless I am directly threatened. I do not need a government to tell me what danger looks like. I trust my own discernment. I choose to meet the unknown with open arms—not blind fear.

Asymmetric disclosure means we act without waiting. We choose without permission. We prepare without panic. That’s the path I walk—and that’s the path I invite others to consider.

27:48 – The Secret Government’s Control

In this segment, Dr. Greer expands on how media, tech platforms, and even independent creators are influenced or silenced by covert forces. He claims that major figures like Joe Rogan and Shawn Ryan have been pressured not to interview him, citing financial incentives and career threats as tools of suppression.

My Take: This is where the illusion of independence begins to unravel. I’ve spent years watching podcasts, interviews, and media cycles—and I’ve noticed the repetition. The same voices, the same titles, the same credentials. Yes, credentials can lend legitimacy, but they can also be used to sell a narrative. When testimonies expand over time, when claims align with book releases or monetized platforms, I have to ask: What’s the agenda?

I don’t blindly trust anyone—especially not former intelligence officers. Why should I? These are individuals trained in deception, narrative control, and psychological operations. That doesn’t mean they’re lying—but it does mean I approach their claims with discernment. I consider the source, the motive, and the patterns. And when I hear that elected officials or even NASA directors fear losing their jobs for speaking out, I believe it. Because threats are control. And control is the currency of those who fear exposure.

Greer’s claim that Joe Rogan was told he’d lose a million-dollar deal if he interviewed him? That’s believable. It’s the principle of least resistance. Keep the influencers compliant, and the public stays confused. Shawn Ryan recently stopped his show, citing personal reasons. I felt the weight in his voice, the pain in his eyes. I won’t speculate—but I respect the man. He showed integrity, asked hard questions, and didn’t play the game. He may be flawed, as we all are, but he was more authentic than most.

As for Rogan—I admire his ability to challenge guests, his athleticism, his platform. I don’t judge him. It’s not my place. But everyone has a pressure point. And when that point is squeezed, only pressure is applied. The question is: Who’s doing the squeezing? And when will they be held accountable?

And I’ve felt that pressure myself. I’ve tried to launch my own YouTube channels—multiple times. Not to monetize, not to build a brand, but to challenge the inconsistencies, call out the BS, and spark a civilian-based movement that demands truth. I wasn’t regurgitating headlines or spinning confusion—I was trying to provoke thought. And every time, I was banned. Cited for “community guideline violations.” Silenced for refusing to play nice.

Even commenting on mainstream media platforms—just pointing out flaws in their articles—gets me flagged, shadowbanned, or locked out. So yes, censorship is alive and well. And it’s not just about protecting people—it’s about protecting narratives. When you challenge the frame, you’re denied access. And that’s not just suppression—it’s a blockade against the evolution of thought.

I’m not afraid. I don’t want outside influence. I want truth—raw, unfiltered, and unapproved. And if that makes me a problem, then so be it. Because the real problem is a system that punishes clarity and rewards confusion.

41:49 – The Buga Sphere: An ET Artifact?

Dr. Greer discusses the mysterious Buga Sphere—an object discovered in Colombia that some claim is of extraterrestrial origin. Its design, energetic behavior, and alleged responsiveness to ancient frequencies have sparked debate about whether it’s alien tech, reverse-engineered hardware, or something else entirely.

My Take: Is the Buga Sphere an ET artifact? It certainly looks like it could be. But I have to consider the possibility that it’s man-made—or derived from reverse-engineered NHI technology. I’ve watched multiple analyses, including MIT Physicist Reviews Grok 4's Buga Sphere Model — The Energy Spike Is Real and MIT Physicist Reviews Grok 4's Buga Sphere Model — The ..., which present compelling breakdowns of its energetic anomalies. But even these feel curated—designed to guide perception rather than invite open inquiry.

As a civilian, making an educated guess is incredibly difficult. The complexity of what’s presented—the layers of speculation, the lack of transparency, the controlled release of information—opens the door to countless possibilities. And those in control of the truth know this. They understand that ambiguity breeds confusion, and confusion breeds dependence. That’s why I never settle on one direction. I constantly examine all angles, all patterns, all plausible motives.

I’ve also considered the flip side: what if the Buga Sphere was deliberately placed by NHI? What if it’s a digestible piece of tech—basic enough for humans to understand, yet advanced enough to open the door? A peace offering. A signal that says, “You’re ready for this.” And what if governments already know this? What if they were told decades ago—perhaps during Truman’s alleged treaty meetings—that humanity was on a timeline? That contact would come, but only if we chose peace over power?

That line of thinking rolls naturally from one plausible idea to the next. It’s not wild—it’s patterned. It’s consistent with claims of suppressed tech, reverse engineering, and global secrecy. And yet, despite all this, there’s no transparency. No open dialogue. Just breadcrumbs and speculation.

Other videos like Quantum AI Cracked Open the Buga Sphere for the First Time and Buga Sphere Reacts to Sanskrit Mantras: Alien Tech or ... add layers of mystique, suggesting the object responds to ancient frequencies or defies conventional physics. But again, I have to ask: Is this organic truth—or engineered myth?

The truth is, humans have demonstrated a profound inability to be consistently truthful—especially when power, secrecy, and control are involved. That’s why I approach every claim with open-minded skepticism. I don’t dismiss possibilities, but I don’t blindly accept them either. I interrogate the source, the context, and the agenda.

So when I look at the Buga Sphere, I don’t see revelation—I see a test. A test of discernment, of independence, of our willingness to think for ourselves. And until we have full transparency, I’ll treat it as a symbol—not a certainty.

44:03 – The Coming Shift in Consciousness

In this segment, Dr. Greer speaks about a global awakening—a shift in consciousness that transcends politics, borders, and belief systems. He suggests that humanity is on the cusp of a transformation, one that involves not just contact with Non-Human Intelligence, but a redefinition of what it means to be human.

My Take: I’ve felt this shift—not as a dramatic event, but as a slow, persistent unfolding. It’s not flashy. It’s not marketable. It’s uncomfortable. But it’s real. And it begins with the decision to think for yourself.

This shift isn’t about ascension or mysticism—it’s about accountability. It’s about choosing awareness over avoidance, peace over panic, and truth over tribalism. It’s about recognizing that we are not the center of the universe, but one form of life in a vast, living sea.

And at the core of this shift is choice. Free will. That’s what I choose to practice here. My beliefs may challenge someone else’s view—and that’s okay. That’s freedom. I may be wrong. I have to consider that. But my values, my morals, are mine and mine alone. I try to be law-abiding. I try to love my neighbor. I’ve chosen to be grateful—to focus on what I have, not what I don’t.

This hasn’t been easy. The internal battle—call it spiritual—has brought me to the edge. I’ve stood at the abyss of taking my own life. But I chose to help myself. I chose to ask: What motivates me? What matters to me? And I chose to let go of the unimportant—defined not by others, but by me.

I can’t say it’s comfortable. It’s not. I struggle. And I will continue to struggle—because I’m human. But I’ve made my choice: to elevate myself in the way that feels true to me. That path may differ from someone else’s. And that’s the point. Consciousness isn’t conformity—it’s courage.

I have hope and only wish my fellow human the very best. I believe in our abilities, in our resilience, and I hope we make decisions that lift us past fear and into a universal community. It’s time to do away with old ideas, stagnant thinking, and the reflex to stand off from what challenges us. We must understand our role, make efforts to contribute, and take a leap of faith for the good. And if we face evil, then we defend ourselves—and our universal brethren—with clarity and unity.

Is it kumbaya? No. It’s uncomfortable. But it’s the discomfort we must adapt to—and strive to be better at.

50:10 – The Physics of Anti-Gravity

In this segment, Dr. Greer discusses the existence of advanced propulsion systems—specifically anti-gravity technology—that he claims have been developed in secret by military contractors through reverse engineering of NHI craft. He argues that this technology could revolutionize energy, transportation, and planetary sustainability, but is being deliberately withheld from the public.

My Take: Anti-gravity tech is the holy grail of the disclosure conversation. From Bob Lazar to Lockheed insiders, it’s a recurring theme across decades of interviews and whistleblower accounts. But here’s the problem: we never get reproducible data. We get claims, diagrams, and vague references to “black projects,” but no open-source science. And that’s not just frustrating—it’s telling.

If this technology exists—and I believe some version of it does—then it’s not just hidden. It’s weaponized. It’s locked behind layers of secrecy, corporate interest, and geopolitical leverage. And that means disclosure isn’t just about science—it’s about sovereignty. It’s about who controls the future, and who gets to benefit from it.

But here’s what I keep asking: Why not open the educational systems? Why not make this knowledge free, accessible, and unproprietary? Why hide behind economic limitations when money itself is a concept—not a necessity? Why not join forces with other countries to rid ourselves of fossil fuel dependence? It’s not rocket science. If there were no motivations, no power struggles, no dominance games—this world would be radically different. But it’s not.

And I feel this personally. I’m a Software Engineer. I want to learn. I hunger for knowledge. But I’m constantly blocked by the cost of education, the gatekeeping of institutions, and the elitism of credentialism. Why should only a select few be allowed to access the kind of information that could change the world? What gives?

Read about Tesla’s vision. What happened to his research? What happened to the many scientists in the early 1900s who invented life-changing technologies? Read about J.P. Morgan and the industrial revolution. You’ll see the same pattern: innovation suppressed, monopolies protected, progress delayed. The world is ass backwards—and that must change.

I’ve seen enough patterns to believe that some of what we call “UAPs” are human-made. Advanced craft, powered by suppressed tech, operating under the radar of public knowledge. And if that’s true, then the suppression of anti-gravity isn’t just unethical—it’s criminal. It’s a betrayal of humanity’s potential.

Imagine what this tech could do: eliminate fossil fuel dependence, collapse monopolies, decentralize energy, and open the door to interstellar travel. But instead, it’s buried. Because the current system thrives on scarcity, not abundance. On control, not liberation.

And I don’t need a government to confirm this. I don’t need a press release or a declassified memo. I’ve learned to think critically, to follow patterns, and to trust my own discernment. The physics of anti-gravity may be complex—but the politics of suppression are painfully simple.

59:00 – The Cover-Up and Mainstream Media

In this segment, Dr. Greer critiques legacy media and major platforms for their role in suppressing disclosure. He claims that even independent voices are being pressured, censored, or incentivized to avoid certain topics—especially those involving NHI, suppressed technologies, and covert operations.

My Take: Legacy media has shifted its tone—from ridicule to cautious curiosity. But the framing hasn’t changed. The narrative still revolves around threat, mystery, and control. Even independent creators often echo this lens, whether knowingly or not. And that’s not journalism—it’s performance.

Again, as mentioned previously I’ve seen this firsthand. I’ve tried to launch my own YouTube channels—multiple times. Not to monetize, not to build a brand, but to challenge inconsistencies, call out the BS, and spark a civilian-based movement that demands truth. I wasn’t regurgitating headlines or spinning confusion—I was trying to provoke thought. And every time, I was banned. Cited for “community guideline violations.” Silenced for refusing to play nice.

Even commenting on mainstream media platforms—just pointing out flaws in their articles—gets me flagged, shadowbanned, or locked out. So yes, censorship is alive and well. And it’s not about protecting people—it’s about protecting narratives. When you challenge the frame, you’re denied access. And that’s not just suppression—it’s a blockade against the evolution of thought.

I’m not afraid. I don’t want outside influence. I want truth—raw, unfiltered, and unapproved. And if that makes me a problem, then so be it. Because the real problem is a system that punishes clarity and rewards confusion.

And let’s be honest: media doesn’t inform—it performs. It’s not designed to empower—it’s designed to manage perception. Whether it’s legacy outlets or algorithm-driven platforms, the goal is the same: control the conversation, shape the consensus, and keep the public reactive instead of reflective.

We need to become our own journalists. Our own analysts. Our own archivists. Truth isn’t delivered—it’s discovered. And if we keep waiting for institutions to hand it to us, we’ll be waiting forever.

1:11:00 – The Peruvian Mummies

In this segment, Dr. Greer discusses the controversial biological specimens discovered in Peru—mummified bodies that some claim are non-human. These artifacts have been the subject of intense debate, media coverage, and scientific scrutiny, with opinions ranging from “hoax” to “historic breakthrough.”

My Take: This is a textbook example of spectacle over substance. The Peruvian mummies have been paraded across headlines, documentaries, and YouTube thumbnails—but the discourse rarely moves forward. It’s the same cycle: dramatic claims, viral footage, vague analysis, and then silence. Rinse and repeat.

I’ve seen creators use these mummies as clickbait, not case studies. And that’s the problem. If they’re real, prove it. If not, stop using them as bait. Curiosity deserves better than sensationalism.

That said, I respect and value people like Dr. Garry Nolan, who publicly declined to examine the mummies—as he stated in a recent podcast with Joe Rogan. His stance reflects integrity. He values the scientific method, and so do I. But here’s the catch: the method itself depends on access to solid evidence. And when that evidence is locked away, politicized, or ridiculed, the method becomes a gatekeeper instead of a tool.

I also believe it’s dangerous to dismiss scientists who think outside the box—especially those who’ve been criticized or sidelined for challenging orthodoxy. It’s not crazy to consider other possibilities. Skeletal anomalies like three fingers or toes, unusual bone structures, or non-standard cranial features can be hoaxed—but why go to such lengths? And why now?

Then there’s the timing. The mummies. The ancient structures beneath pyramids. The sudden bursts of “new” discoveries that seem to challenge the dominant worldview. It’s overwhelming for many—and understandably so. But I have to ask: Is it all coincidence? Maybe not.

Level-headed thinking means I don’t jump to conclusions—but I also don’t shut the door. I take one thing at a time. I stay critical. I stay open. And most importantly, I make up my own damn mind.

We don’t need more spectacle. We need more science. And we need to stop mistaking noise for progress.

1:19:00 – The Truth About Free Energy

In this segment, Dr. Greer discusses zero-point energy and other advanced technologies that could provide limitless, clean power. He claims these breakthroughs have been discovered, tested, and suppressed—kept from the public by military-industrial interests and corporate monopolies.

My Take: Free energy isn’t just a technical possibility—it’s a philosophical battleground. It represents liberation from scarcity, decentralization of power, and the collapse of monopolies. And that’s exactly why it’s suppressed. Because the current system doesn’t thrive on abundance—it thrives on control.

I’ve seen this pattern play out across history. From Nikola Tesla’s vision to the early 20th-century inventors whose breakthroughs vanished under corporate pressure, the story is the same: innovation buried, access denied, progress delayed. Read about J.P. Morgan and the industrial revolution. Follow the money. You’ll see how the world was shaped not by what was possible, but by what was profitable.

And I feel this personally. I’m a Software Engineer. I want to learn. I hunger for knowledge. But I’m constantly blocked by the cost of education, the gatekeeping of institutions, and the elitism of credentialism. Why should only a select few be allowed to access the kind of information that could change the world? Why is transformative tech locked behind paywalls, patents, and proprietary systems?

Why not open education? Why not make these discoveries free, collaborative, and global? Why not join forces with other nations to eliminate fossil fuel dependence and build a sustainable future? It’s not rocket science—it’s common sense. But common sense doesn’t stand a chance against power struggles, dominance games, and economic manipulation.

If free energy tech exists—and I believe some version of it does—then its suppression is criminal. It’s not just unethical. It’s a betrayal of humanity’s potential. And whether it’s zero-point energy, gravity-based propulsion, or something we haven’t even named yet, the truth must be democratized—not monetized.

I don’t need a government to confirm this. I don’t need a TED Talk or a press release. I’ve learned to think critically, follow patterns, and trust my own discernment. And I believe that the truth about free energy isn’t just about physics—it’s about freedom.

1:21:00 – Elon Musk and the Secret Space Program

In this segment, Dr. Greer speculates that Elon Musk may be aware of covert space programs and suppressed technologies, but is either unwilling or unable to speak publicly about them. He suggests that Musk’s silence may be strategic—driven by pressure, incentives, or fear of retaliation.

My Take: This is where speculation meets celebrity. Elon Musk is a lightning rod—innovator, disruptor, icon. But when it comes to disclosure, I don’t care about personality. I care about patterns. And the pattern here is silence.

Greer claims Musk won’t speak out because he’s under pressure. That he’s been told to stay quiet or risk losing everything. Is that believable? Yes. Because we’ve seen it before. We’ve seen creators, scientists, and whistleblowers silenced, censored, and erased. And when someone has billions on the line, silence becomes survival.

But this isn’t new. Go back to Gary McKinnon—the British hacker who breached NASA and U.S. military networks in the early 2000s. He claimed to have found an Excel spreadsheet listing “non-terrestrial officers,” fleet-to-fleet transfers, and references to ships not registered on Earth. Whether you believe every detail or not, the implications are staggering. It suggests that covert space operations—possibly involving NHI—have been active for decades. And yet, no mainstream investigation followed. No public inquiry. Just extradition threats and silence.

So when Musk stays quiet, I don’t just see a business decision—I see continuity. A system that rewards silence and punishes revelation. I look at the Department of Defense budget—$850 billion projected in 2025. I read about $13 billion aircraft carriers and statements from military officials about the need for “dominance.” Dominance of what? Space? The moon? Mars? Read between the lines. Connect the dots. We’re not preparing for peace—we’re preparing for galactic warfare.

And that’s the real issue. If Musk is aware of suppressed tech, reverse-engineered propulsion systems, or covert space operations, then his silence isn’t just strategic—it’s complicit. I’m not here to judge him. .

So when I hear claims about Musk and the secret space program, I don’t dismiss them—but I don’t worship them either. I ask: What narrative is being shaped? Who benefits from the ambiguity? And I remind myself that disclosure isn’t a popularity contest—it’s a moral imperative.

We need to stop waiting for billionaires to save us. We need to stop outsourcing truth to influencers. And we need to start asking: What are we willing to risk to know what’s real?

1:27:00 – Final Thoughts and Call to Action

Dr. Greer closes the interview with a call to awaken—not just to the reality of NHI, but to the deeper truth of who we are and what we’re capable of. He urges listeners to move beyond fear, beyond manipulation, and into conscious contact with a greater reality.

My Take: This is where the narrative either liberates—or locks down. And I’ve seen how media plays a massive role in shaping that outcome. Films like Independence Day, Battle: Los Angeles, Elevation, and countless others portray alien invasions as existential threats—beings who come to wipe us out, enslave us, or harvest us. That’s not just entertainment. That’s propaganda. It’s psychological conditioning. A way to prepare the public for a threat narrative, a false flag event, or a militarized response to something we don’t yet understand.

What is a false flag event? It’s when governments or powerful entities stage or simulate a crisis—like an alien attack—to justify increased military spending, surveillance, or global control. Wernher von Braun warned about this decades ago through Carol Rosin. And when you look at the Pentagon’s budget—$850 billion in 2025—and the rhetoric around “space dominance,” it’s hard not to see the setup. We’re being geared toward galactic warfare, not peaceful contact.

Even the entertainment industry plays its part. Arrival was one of the few big-budget films that portrayed a peaceful encounter—where the real threat was our own fear, our own inability to communicate. Contrast that with Alien, Starship Troopers, or even Star Wars, which show the darkness, the violence, the endless war. These stories reflect our tendencies—but they also reinforce them.

And then there’s the theory I’ve heard: that NHI may be lowering our abilities—our cognitive function, our spiritual awareness—to make us more controllable. Is it true? Is it BS? I don’t know. But I do know this: truth isn’t found in fear. It’s found in intention. In consciousness. In the willingness to embrace the unknown without collapsing into panic.

I’ve studied abduction cases—some peaceful, some terrifying. Why both? Because humans respond differently to the unknown. Some are open-minded, curious, willing to engage. Others are terrified—of difference, of change, of anything that challenges their worldview. We see this in how people treat each other. Some fear skin tone. Others fear belief systems. But we are all one people. And until we understand that, we’ll keep projecting our own dysfunction onto the stars.

So here’s my call to action: Think clearly. Think critically. Think beyond fear. Look to intention. Look to consciousness. These are not unknowable things—they are the foundation of what it means to be human. But to access them, we must first embrace the unknown. Not as a threat—but as an invitation.