Start of Interview
Kerry Cassidy (KC): Hi. I'm Kerry
Cassidy from Project Camelot, and we're here with Dr. Brian
O'Leary. He's a lecturer, scientist, ex-astronaut, and we're
very pleased to be with him today. And we're here in beautiful
Ecuador at
Montesueños, which is your retreat, I think you want
to call it. What we want to do is kind of get into your
background.
Dr. Brian O'Leary (BO'L): Yes. I'm afraid that at my ripe old
age of 69 that my background has been pretty eclectic and it's
kind of hard to pin me down, like, you know: Who is this guy?
But it all started back when I was a little kid and I wanted to
go into space. I wanted to go to the Moon. I wanted to go to
Mars, and there was no space program then. And then, somewhat
ironically, I got involved in the Apollo Program, twelve years
after I wanted to go into space and nobody thought there would
ever be a space program.
This was back in the late '40s, early
'50s. But when Sputnik
went up, then the whole world changed. And it was also around
then that there was more awareness of the
UFO phenomenon,
paranormal phenomena.
And so, what happened with me was that I went on one track,
which was a very ambitious career which was actually quite
fulfilled, because I became an astronaut after getting my PhD in
astronomy at Berkeley.
And then I got involved in planetary exploration, some of the
Mariner programs. I taught with Carl Sagan at Cornell University
and did research on planetary science.
Then I went to Washington, became an advisor to various
political leaders, various presidential candidates.
I was kind of like an “academic drifter” in many ways. Even
though on paper I was successful, I would be kind of hopping
from university to university, and this, I think, helped prepare
the way for the later half of my life, which was really quite
different from the first half.
The first half was more traditional, more being a physicist who
was very familiar with, for example, energy and environment
issues, having advised Congress and having taught courses on it.
I was also aware of atmospheric science and some of the things
that were ahead for the Earth which are now very familiar, such
as
global warming,
global climate change, and a number of other
human-related catastrophes that are happening on the Earth now.
So, in a sense, my own straight academic background was a good
one, good preparation for studying energy policy:
And so, the second half of my life, if you will: After I was in
the physics department at Princeton in 1979, I started to have
some unusual experiences -
remote viewing experiences, a
near-death experience, various healing experiences then that
opened Pandora's Box up.
I was at that time in the physics department at Princeton. My
colleagues, many of them Nobel Laureates, all men, thought I was
crazy to embrace paranormal phenomena.
Then later I got into the UFO phenomena. I lead a number of
scientific groups to get together to try to disclose the
research that was going on.
And it was around that time I began to get in touch with all the
“Black Projects”, not from the inside, but from the outside,
kind of peering in and seeing what was happening, that there's
been this massive cover-up.
Well, one thing lead to another. I spent a number of years after
I left Princeton - and now we're getting into the '80s - of
exploring various things like the “Face on Mars,” NASA's cover-up
of that, and looking further at the UFO phenomena.
I published a number of books, a trilogy, basically, in which I
kind of review the state of the art of “new science”, or
science-outside-the-box-of-western-thinking.
So we have, for example… In this book [Exploring Inner and Outer
Space] I talk about the state of the art of UFO research, but I
also talk about consciousness, the mind-over-matter interaction,
the fact that exploring outer space and exploring inner space
can lead to all sorts of new paradigms of reality.
Then, in
The Second Coming of Science, this book here, I did
some very careful studies that replicated the work of many
pioneers of new science - people such as Marcel Vogel. I would
go and visit various miracle-makers, like Sai Baba, and saw him
materialize things. I went all over the world. I went to Brazil
to visit Thomaz Green Morton, a very gifted psychic.
Then I began to get more interested in the environment. At that
point I published Miracle in the Void, which was a
photo-journalistic look at some of the best and brightest free
energy researchers all over the world - India, Japan, and so
forth.
I began to realize that we could solve our energy problem really
quite quickly if we only embrace these technologies. However,
they've been suppressed, and sometimes violently suppressed.
So in this book, Miracle in the Void, which was really a
collaboration with my wife Meredith, an artist… she was painting
her masterpiece, The Last Supper of Gaia, while I was writing
this book…
And what I discovered was that paradigm shifts are more a social/political phenomenon than a technological question, that it
goes way beyond the drama of outside researchers coming up with
breakthroughs which then are suppressed.
It has to do with creating
whole new structures which are
supported by the larger culture.
In fact, what's happening now on the planet is that we are
grieving the loss of Mother Earth. And even though this is a
subconscious thing, what happens is that, according to the work
of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, we go through various phases of
grieving - grieving the loss of our mother planet.
So Meredith and I became avid environmentalists. What I
attempted to do then - and now we're talking the middle 1990s
- was to examine what psychological effects come through each
of us as we begin to embrace the new paradigm.
Meredith and I collaborated on this project. What we were able
to identify - and this is based on the work of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross,
On Death and Dying - is that we've all grieving the loss of
Mother Earth. By all I mean those of us that are sensitive and
aware of the problems that are unfolding on the planet.
What Meredith and I figured out was that many of us are in
denial - most of us - about the severity of the problems, such
as global climate change, such as the possibility of nuclear
war, the war in Iraq, and so forth and so on… that these things
fly in the face of what we really need to be doing, which is
developing clean energy, making sure we have clean water, having
an international system of justice, depending more and more on
local resources, local rule, and…
But anyway, most people are in denial about everything,
including the UFO phenomenon and free energy, which are two of
my favorite topics, both of which I've found, for myself, are
very free.
So then we go from denial on to anger: The truth
will set you
free, but first it will piss you off.
Then we go into bargaining: How can we fit the new within the
context of the old?
A lot of people were stimulated by
Barack Obama's comments about
how we need change. Well, the kind of change that would be
implemented there is what I call incremental change, tiny little
things.
And then, meanwhile, the progressives that are trying to nip on
his heels are saying: Well, we need structural change. We need
to go back to the Constitution. We need to have a kind of
Rooseveltian New Deal and Keynesian economy. We need something
that is like going back to a point of reference, like the
Roosevelt or Clinton administration.
And that's not going to work. So when none of these things work,
then, according to the work of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, then we go
into depression.
A lot of people are depressed. I've noticed this. A lot of
people, especially in the US, they're just not very happy with
what's going on. That happens also when people lose their loved
ones. They get depressed after denial, anger, and bargaining,
and then, finally people get into acceptance.
The point here is that the Earth is getting ruined by human
intervention. I mean, it's so obvious.
And we need to seek the truth. So, part of what I did was
publish a book called Re-Inheriting the Earth, which was
awakening to sustainable solutions, and many of them lie far
outside the box of conventional thinking.
That's why I'm so interested in the free energy question, very
interested in some of the questions of ways of purifying water
in ways that have not been acknowledged before.
I'm very interested in the phenomena of
consciousness, how
Combined Positive Human Intention can really and truly change
the material world. These are ideas, now, that are proven by
quantum physics, and paranormal phenomena.
And so, this whole array of solutions
- in principle - could
work, if only we can change the system. Only if we could change
our governance, our public awareness, and education.
So, that's what I've been all about in the last few years. My
most recent book is called
The Energy Solution Revolution, which
is based on my 20 years of experience at examining the
proofs-of-concept of free energy devices. By
free energy I mean…
Free energy is sometimes a funny word. Maybe we could use the
word solution energy.
These represent quantum-leap breakthroughs from what we now
know. It's going way beyond solar and wind in term of
cleanliness.
It's actually… It's sort of analogous to “The Information Age.”
Who would have ever imagined that computers and internet would
have existed, even 20 years ago? It was only a small number of
people who foresaw that.
What I foresee, along with many colleagues who've been
suppressed, is that we can have a free energy, or a solution
energy, culture in the world.
By solution energy I mean vacuum energy
- energy from the
vacuum of space - which is well known to the yogis, that
everywhere has enormous amounts of potential energy, if we can
only tap into it. And there are ways of tapping into it.
So, some of my world travels, and the work of my colleagues, and
various professional organizations, has proven beyond any
reasonable doubt that these forms of energy are unprecedented.
They do exist. The Wright brothers have already flown on this
one. We're just not making practical use.
The reason why we're not making practical use of these energy
sources is because they are suppressed. Actively.
The people that work on these things are threatened,
assassinated. And manipulated. Bought off. When somebody gets
near realization, that's when the big boys go in, and this has
happened again and again and again.
So, that's a very important part of the awareness training of
the general public. It's also part of the very important work
that Project Camelot is doing, which is to interview many people
formerly on the inside, maybe still on the inside.
I've never been on the inside, but I sure know how the inside
works, and what their agenda is, and their motivations, which
flies in the face of development, potential development, of free
energy.
And we all know also, and many people don't quite understand it
is: Well, if it's real, then we'd have it by now… just go down
to K-Mart and get my little solid-state power-pack. And we can
go off the grid system. Everything is clean. Everybody's happy.
But it doesn't quite work out that way. It takes money and time
to develop it. So we need an Apollo Program for new energy
-
new energy meaning,
-
vacuum energy
-
cold fusion
-
advanced hydrogen
-
water technologies
There's quite a long list of technologies, any one of which
would do it. But it's going to take effort to develop these
energy sources.
So, in The Energy Solution Revolution, I address less the
technical issues, because the internet and the general
literature's just full of information on the technologies
themselves. But instead, I've looked at the political and social
questions, and the educational questions.
You know: Why is it that otherwise intelligent people would not
embrace this possibility, if it's going to solve the energy
problem? And, of course, people don't do it for a number of
reasons. There've been a number of studies done. It's really a
social science question as to why there's such resistance to
this change.
Bertrand Russell one time said: The resistance to a new idea
increases as the square of its importance.
If we're talking about supplanting a four-billion-dollar energy
industry, highly polluting, with a clean energy that's cheap and
decentralized, then we're talking about a paradigm shift, and
The Powers That Be don't want that to happen.
KC: OK. Brian, that's a wonderful summary of everything you've
been involved in over the past few years. What I'd like to do is
actually go back in time and get something about, kind of, the
things that triggered you to become the man you are today.
Because clearly you've had a huge sort of arc, learning curve,
whatever you want to call it, in which you've really traversed
quite a gamut of things and concepts. And actually, as a
scientist, you've moved quite a distance from being sort of a
hands-on scientist, I guess, that is conventionally thought of
as a scientist.
You've actually become something of an innovative thinker, and
even maybe, loosely, a philosopher. But you've never lost sight
of the science. So, at this point you're really an interesting
combination of these things.
And so, what I'd like to do is talk about your background as an
astronaut. You were preparing to go to Mars, I understand.
BO'L: Yes.
KC: And yet you never went. If you could tell me a little bit
about what was going in your head back then, when you were… what
do you say… in the astronaut program. Where were you at, you
know, psychologically? So that we can kind of get the arc of the
change. Because I think that would be fascinating for people.
BO'L: Yes, Kerry. Yes. That's a good question, and a complex
one. But I think from a very early age I always… I've always
been a visionary; I've thought outside the box. When I was a
little kid I was drawing rockets and wanted to go to the Moon.
Even my high school yearbook says under my name: He wants to go
to the Moon. And people were laughing. [Kerry laughs] This was
before Sputnik!
KC: Wonderful.
BO'L: Everybody thought I was crazy.
KC: OK.
BO'L: Then I majored in physics. I didn't enjoy it. It was kind
of dry, but I realized that I'd better know some of that stuff
if I wanted to go to the Moon. And then, as luck would have it,
of course, John F. Kennedy in 1961 set the lunar landing goal,
and I got very enthused. I was in graduate school at the time.
A few years later I got my PhD at Berkeley in astronomy and
planetary science. So I had really prepped myself to go to Mars
because my PhD thesis was about Mars.
And indeed, I was selected to go to Mars. I was even asked by
the selection committee in my interview: Would you be willing to
submit to a hazardous two-year journey to Mars? And I said:
Fine. I don't know whether my wife would like it, but I want to
go.
I was gung ho. I had a crew cut. It was very different from the
way things are for me now. It was later I became a hippy, sort
of, you know… an alternative thinker, shall we say?
But I think all of this was inbred in me. I'd always had
problems with authority. I always had problems with rules.
That's one reason why I'd go from university to university. I
was recognized more for mediocrity and doing research on tiny
little specialties. I was well rewarded when that happened.
But when I had some visionary idea, such as space colonies, or
mining the asteroids for their raw materials, people would
scratch their heads and say: Well, this guy isn't quite with it.
[Kerry laughs] One colleague said: Brian, don't have such an
open mind that your brains will spill out. And it was only
later, though, that…
You see, I was still in the materialistic paradigm. I was still
assuming that anything and everything could be explained in
terms of matter, and in terms of reductionism, and everything
made up of little atoms.
KC: Right. The normal scientific paradigm.
BO'L: Yes.
KC: So what happened to take you from the astronaut program to
actually being a professor? I understand you were tapped, but
you also sort of left the astronaut program. So how did that
happen?
BO'L: Well, I left the astronaut program because they cancelled
the Mars program, and I felt that… And we knew that the Space
Shuttle was coming along, but the wait for that would have to be
at least 15 years.
We also had to fly high-performance jets. I calculated that I'd
have a one-in-five chance of being killed in a jet accident -
which is both Air Force and astronaut statistics - even before
I got to see a space flight, and it would just be into Earth
orbit in the Space Shuttle.
So I decided right then and there to
quit, and…
But there was an additional reason, and that is that the reason
why NASA had canceled the Mars mission was because we were
getting involved in Vietnam. So I really got pretty angry about
the Vietnam War, for me personally as well as for the whole
country, the whole world, and so I became a leading war
protestor.
Carl Sagan called me from Cornell and asked me to join the
faculty. I accepted the offer and spent many years at Cornell in
the astronomy department, planetary science department. And I
became very creative in research then, but still within the
bounds of western science, but in the planetary exploration
program. That was for a period of about a decade.
Then, after that, I got more politically involved and I advised
a number of presidential candidates - George McGovern, Morris
Udall. I worked for Udall. I was his energy advisor when he ran
for president. He was a very environmental congressman.
I advised Jesse Jackson on converting the huge aerospace
capability we have to peaceful purposes, like developing
solution energy and other programs that would be of use to the
public and not to just this hungry elite.
It was around then that I really became rebellious. I went from
university to university and I never was satisfied.
KC: But isn't there a time in which you and Carl Sagan sort of
had a falling-out, or a distancing? Can you describe what
happened there?
BO'L: Yes. Well, for one thing, Carl was very angry I left
Cornell when I did. It was… One very cold snowy day in May, I
landed in Syracuse, and there was a horizontal blizzard - in
May - and I said: That's it for upstate New York. And Carl
thought that was very frivolous. Because, of course, he was kind
of an empire-builder kind of guy; and he also had a huge ego.
It was only later, when I began to embrace the UFO phenomenon
and the cover-up, studying all these organizations that were
covering up, and having some direct experience, myself, as a
researcher no longer beholden to funding from NASA or the
university environment, that I began to double-check some of
Carl's work.
I saw, for example, the famous
“Face” in Cydonia on Mars,
photographed by Viking in 1975, which shows this gigantic mesa
that resembles a human face, about a mile across. Carl and I
debated this.
It was very, very disappointing to me, because not only was
Carl
wrong, he also fudged data. He published a picture of the “Face”
in Parade Magazine, a popular article, saying that the “Face”
was just a natural formation, but he doctored the picture to
make it not look like a face.
I began to realize, just directly from the scientific point of
view, not only hearsay, that this man was colluding with NASA,
that there might be more to this than before. And then, when I
started studying things like
MJ-12 and other organizations that
were covering up the UFO phenomenon…
Carl was on a committee with a number of notable people. There
was a
report issued by the Brookings Institution in 1961
- and
that's about when I knew Carl, during those years; the '60s
mostly was when I worked closely with him - that he and this
other group said:
Well, if any ETs ever showed up on the Earth,
it has to be covered up. That's the only way we're going to be
able to manage this, because if we can't, then it would be too
much of a culture shock.
So their recommendation to the government in 1961 was to cover
up the UFO phenomenon, and I think in a way that provided a
justification for the ongoing cover-up way back in '61 - was to
keep things secret. And of course they still are.
KC: So, at what point were you… Where did
Hoagland come into
this mix? Because once you were talking about the “Face” on
Mars, I have to assume that you had some interaction with
Hoagland.
BO'L: Yes. He… Actually, he's a great catalyst. He's very
articulate. He's very bright. He had some very good ideas. He
came to me in about… I think it was around 1980. It was a few
years after the Viking mission, and I was still involved with
the mainstream then.
So Dick Hoagland wanted me - still being a somewhat mainstream
planetary scientist - to listen to him, listen to his
presentation about the Cydonia “Face,” and he made a
presentation which I thought was very good.
He asked me to check his work. I thought a great deal of the
work was extremely well done and which I vindicated enough to
say that, Yes. I, too, would like to get into this research, and
then the research started to snowball. So that was the good
news.
The not-so-good news is that he also made a lot of claims that
were certainly not correct. They were scientifically not well
grounded. He was arbitrary in picking some of the points in the
region as control points for various geometric alignments, which
were simply not true. So I also had somewhat of a falling-out
with him because…
You see, most scientists, people trained in science, as a
scientist… In a way I still defend mainstream science in terms
of methodology, that you have to have your work subject to peer
review in order to get it published. And I think that's very
good. You know, it's really good to preserve the scientific
method.
So I found myself in this odd middle ground between people that
were outside the system making claims, such as Dick Hoagland
did, some of which are very, very substantial and good, on the
one hand; and on the other hand, using strict scientific methods
to approach these questions.
Eventually some colleagues joined me and a number of us now have
worked together, such as Dr. Mark Carlotto, an imaging
scientist; Professor Stan McDaniel, Chairman of the Philosophy
Department at Sonoma State; Doctor Horace Crater, Professor of
Physics, University of Tennessee; the late Dr. Tom Van Flandern.
These are all mainstream scientists, trained in the mainstream
just like I was, and also open to the questions, such as the
“Face” on Mars.
So, in a way, it was kind of a roundabout way, because now that
I was out of the main stream… Because all I have to do is stick
my neck out a little to be totally ostracized by the mainstream
scientific community and that happened around 1980.
KC: Was that when you were at Princeton?
BO'L: Yes.
KC: OK. So what… because I know there are some parallels between
you and the late John Mack. I know you knew him, and how he was
treated by Harvard. And so, can you talk a little bit about what
happened to you at Princeton?
BO'L: Well, yes. Actually, I think I left before they threw me
out [Kerry laughs] because I saw the handwriting on the wall. I
was in the physics department. All men. Nobel Laureates, about
five or six Nobel Laureates. And every other Tuesday at the
Joseph Henry Luncheons, we would swill a thimbleful of sherry,
and the most common topic of discussion was how ridiculous
claims of the paranormal were.
Meanwhile, I was sneaking off to workshops on the weekends. I
did a Life-spring training. I did a number of other healing
seminars, and so forth. I started to step outside of the box and
I found that they were very wrong. But my colleagues were also…
they had more power than I did at that time. So I felt the most
prudent thing to do was to simply leave, and that's what I did.
KC: But how did their antagonism towards you manifest in that
setting?
BO'L: [laughs] Well, for one thing, when I left, there were no
regrets because the word got around that I was going off
half-cocked here, in embracing paranormal phenomena.
They were looking askance anyway because at that time I was
working with Professor Gerard O'Neill on space colonies, and
even those concepts were a bit far-out for the other physicists
there. So it was like a double whammy. And so, in my case, I
left before they could have caused problems. Whereas John Mack…
KC: And where did you go? When you say you left, where were you
headed? Did you know where you were headed, or were you just
leaving?
BO'L: No. I just left. I just left.
KC: Oh. Fascinating. Because that's huge. Wouldn't you say that
that's your major break with academia?
BO'L: Yes.
KC: From then on you kind of took a trajectory that actually
went like that, in a sense?
BO'L: Yes. Yes. I did… In the interim I had a near-death
experience in an auto accident which prompted me to go to
California. Go west, young man. [laughs] So I took all my
worldly possessions and bought a beat-up old Ford van and threw
it in there and drove to California in 1982.
KC: Wow.
BO'L: This was just after a near-death experience I had in an
auto accident, which was yet another paranormal indicator that
where I was and what I was doing was not working for me.
KC: When you say you had a near-death experience… You know, I'm
not sure how you feel about that, but is it possible to convey
to us what connected that experience with the paranormal? Did
you actually… meaning, did you die and see certain things?
BO'L: My near-death experience was during an auto accident on
slick ice that suddenly appeared and fortunately I was by
myself. I did several flips. I was going 65 mph. I ended up in a
ditch, accordion-style.
But my experience of the accident was not of the violence, but
instead, a brilliant light - first of all, bobbing spheres, and
then a brilliant light that I wanted to become at-one with. I
did become at-one with it.
Then, the next thing I knew, I was sitting in the driver's seat,
dazed, shocked, and a man was at the window of the car. He was a
professional auto insurance adjustor who had witnessed the
accident, and he said: I'm amazed you're alive, let alone
uninjured.
And that, to me, was a profound experience, because at that
point I hadn't studied the paranormal very much. I was still at
Princeton. I was just getting my appetite whetted about some of
these things, about human potential and about my own
experiences. I had remote viewing experiences. I had the
near-death experience. I had healing experiences.
And that was kind of my signpost to leave Princeton and to just
go on my own, and that was a risky thing. I ended up in
California, in LA, looking for a job in the aerospace industry
so I could get my kids through college.
But to do civilian work, I did find a position with
Science
Applications which turned out to be a… You know. It's one of the
“Black Budget Beltway Bandit” groups. [Kerry laughs] But I
didn't… I wasn't involved in…
KC: Is that
SAIC?
BO'L: SAIC. Yes.
KC: They're notorious, actually, for being part of
the black
budget.
BO'L: Yes. And I had nothing to do with it. I refused to do any
work for the military, even “peaceful” work, like satellites to
just sense threats, to defend themselves. I was even offered to
do that and I refused to do it.
After four and a half years, just before I got vested in my
retirement plan, they laid me off, and they had good reason to,
too. I didn't pull in any money! [Kerry laughs] So it was then
- and now we're talking 1987 - that I made a clean break with
the mainstream.
KC: OK.
BO'L: I got my kids halfway through college, and then I got on
the metaphysical church circuit, Unity and Religious Science
churches. And that's how I kind of made a living for about a
decade while I was just metaphysically exploring, just going
into so many modalities of alternative thinking.
What I discovered during that decade of the
'80s into the '90s,
and that's what created my books, was that you could use the
methods of science itself to verify, and to further develop,
metaphysical realities.
KC: Mm hm. Yes.
BO'L: And that's what really fascinated me.
KC: You can actually use the scientific method to investigate
the occult as well.
BO'L: That's right. Absolutely.
KC: It's a great method, regardless of where it's applied, in
some ways.
Bill Ryan (BR): While you were are Princeton before that, didn't
you find a kindred spirit in Robert John? His is a name that
many viewers of this video will probably recognize as being a
pioneer, and one of the trail-breaking “scientific heretics” in
the field of paranormal exploration with the rigorous
application of the scientific method.
I imagine that you
probably got along with him pretty well.
BO'L: Yes. Absolutely, Bill. I got along with him very well. But
the odd thing about it was that at the time when he was starting
to do his experiments at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies
Research Laboratory, Paralabs, he was doing a lot of the
research while I was there, but I didn't know what he was doing.
He didn't know what I was doing, either, because I didn't want
to share with my colleagues the fact that I was sneaking off to
workshops on weekends, or that I was having paranormal
experiences.
So we were both in the closet at that point. He didn't know what
I was doing. I didn't know what he was doing, although we were
colleagues on various mainstream projects, such as developing
propulsion systems to go to Mars.
His specialty was various advanced propulsion systems for
rockets. He was the chairman, well, actually the Dean of the
School of Engineering at Princeton. I would put on a number of
conferences with Jerry [Gerard] O'Neill on space colonies, space
settlements, and Bob John took part in those.
So I knew him pretty well, but not in this role of paranormal
research. That only happened later, when I visited his
laboratory and did an interview with him for one of my books,
The Second Coming of Science, that our whole relationship was
redefined.
It was around then that I also developed a relationship with
John Mack as I was learning more and more about the UFO
phenomenon and some of the more verifiable aspects of its
reality.
So, in a way, I've had a ball in my life because I was able to
be very independent. I didn't have to depend on anybody for
career purposes. I didn't get paid very much. I was, you know,
living very simply for a period of 20 or 30 years… still do in a
sense because, you know, we just do things a little differently.
The point is that for, I would say now almost 30 years, I
haven't had to be beholden to anybody to approve what I'm doing.
KC: That's incredible.
BO'L: But on the other hand, that can create problems, too, and
it did.
KC: Sure.
BO'L: When
Black Ops tried to recruit me once and I refused,
there were consequences and they were very serious. But without
sharing exactly what they were, suffice it to say that I began
to realize that at that time, and I'm talking 20 or so years
ago, I was pretty naïve. I was wanting to do all kinds of things
like organize conferences, get researchers together to speak in
a unified way about various issues.
But that was not well
appreciated by The Powers That Be.
KC: I want to get into that because that's a really interesting
part of your history. But before we do that, you did say you got
to know John Mack? I think he was a friend of yours…
BO'L: Yes.
KC: …and I was curious, did he ever, I don't know, regress you?
Did you have what he would consider a contact experience?
BO'L: Not to my knowledge. I didn't have that kind of
relationship with him. The relationship was more like…
When I was really heavy into UFO research during the 1990s, I
was attempting to piece together the best information that was
scientifically most grounded and also found out: Well, what is
the contact experience telling us?
This lead on his part and my
part to have a profound sense of colleagueship and deep concern
about the fate of the Earth, the fate of our culture, because
the environmental problems are so severe.
KC: And that's because the
contactees were coming back with this
message, basically, kind of almost across the board. Is that
right?
BO'L: That's correct. His book, Passport to the Cosmos, which
was his latest book before his untimely death, was really an
account of that. The most common denominator of the contact
experience was that the visitors were telling us, and doing
graphic, emotionally-charged images of what the Earth would look
like if we keep doing things the way we're doing them.
And so, John came to this issue from the point of view of
abduction research. I came to it from the point of view of just
looking at the numbers, at just how the state of the world is
just miserable, that we've got not that much longer before
tipping points will destabilize climate, and all sorts of
catastrophes.
That's even setting aside the possibility of nuclear war, of
bankrupt… well, everything is getting
bankrupt now anyway. I
mean, it's disaster ahead unless we change our ways.
John kind of saw the light. Robert John at Princeton saw the
light. And little by little, you see, as scientists, we as
colleagues came together. But it took a long time - we've been
divided and ruled.
KC: Would you say that in some ways you kind of became a figure,
or a central person, around which a lot of these people could
come together? On the one hand, the UFO researchers - I know
that you started setting up conferences. You would bring them
in. But on the other hand you were actually bringing scientists
to the table, such as John Mack and Robert John.
BO'L: That's correct. I co-founded an organization called the
International Association for New Science and we had annual
conferences between about 1989 and 1999. The other co-founder,
God rest his soul, Maury [Maurice] Albertson, who was a
professor of civil engineering at Colorado State, he and I and
one other fellow basically founded it.
We had conferences, and we'd convene people in various
disciplines in what we would call “new science”, which would
include free energy, UFO research, paranormal research,
reincarnation research.
We'd bring in some of the best scientists in those fields and
we'd create a collegiality and also do a public program of
lectures that would then pay for the travel of the people. We
kind of worked on a shoestring budget. I'm sure you're familiar
with that one. [Kerry laughs] But there was a lot of ambition
and motivation.
Maury just passed over, but at the ripe age of about 90. So he's
one of my heroes. A lot of my heroes have passed over, and some
of them more recently than others, so it's kind of like a lonely
business sometimes.
KC: So it was during the time when you were putting these
conferences together that you actually felt there was a hit on
you from the secret government, if you will. Is that correct? I
mean, I'm not sure how you would term it.
BO'L: Well, yes. [hesitantly] Let's say that I've had a
situation that was threatening to me and it was as a result of
some of my work. And also it's happened to many of my colleagues
as well, so that my efforts to unify, organize, scientists to
express freely was, like a lot of other researchers, was
considered not so good.
KC: But at that point… I understand that was sort of one more
brick in the wall at that point, but you didn't actually stop
doing that, stop doing the conferences because of that, did you?
BO'L: No. I kept going.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: I kept going and I've lived to tell the story, and I'm
very grateful for that.
KC: That was through the
'90s.
BO'L: Mm hm.
KC: OK. And at some point you also got involved with Mallove. Is
that right?
BO'L: That's right. Eugene Mallove was… just kind of to tell you
the story briefly… was the chief science writer for MIT. He had
a doctorate in education and was a brilliant writer.
In 1989
Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, two chemists from
the University of Utah, claimed that they'd made a breakthrough
called
cold fusion in which, when they put a palladium cathode
into a solution of heavy water, that, strangely enough, nuclear
reactions would occur on the cathode to create helium and the
release of thermal energy which was non-radioactive.
It was basically room-temperature fusion, which is quite
different from the traditional definition of fusion, which is to
simulate the hydrogen bomb, and build these enormous reactors
called Tokomacs - they cost tens of millions of dollars - and
would attempt to confine a plasma of hot hydrogen so that they
can fuse together to release that thermal energy for generating
electricity. Sort of like nuclear power, fission power, except
it's fusion, and it's even more powerful.
And so what went on was this kind of philosophical falling-out.
It was this typical “scientific heresy” type of thing where the
hot fusion physicists, which pretty much controlled the
Department of Energy at MIT and Caltech and places like that,
immediately banded together and they tried to discredit this
discovery.
So, Gene Mallove took an interest in this issue, and he at first
had the prejudice just like we all do, I think, on the side of
caution. [He] felt that: Yes, these guys at the University of
Utah are probably crazy, and he would join the physicists at MIT
and write a story about just what bunk and poppycock this cold
fusion breakthrough was.
What Mallove found out, much to his surprise, was that the
hot
fusion scientists at MIT who tried to replicate the experiment…
First of all, they didn't know the science. They weren't
chemists. They were nuclear physicists, very different field.
But also…
The point is that Mallove found that the MIT hot fusion
physicists were fudging their data to make it look like it
wasn't there, whereas as in fact the data showed it was there.
Their discovery was vindicated.
So this lead Mallove to write an article that was like an expose
on this, whereupon he was fired [laughs] from MIT. And then he
started Infinite Energy Magazine and became a leading organizer
of scientists and advocate of… at first it was cold fusion, then
he expanded his repertoire to vacuum energy and various forms of
advanced hydrogen energy.
KC: And you used to write articles for his publication? Is that
right?
BO'L: Yes. See, he started a magazine called
Infinite Energy.
Yes. Excellent magazine. I think it will go into history as one
of the seminal, breakthrough publications of all time.
He would write scathing editorials about how the scientific
community is stuck in the mud about questions like free energy,
and he, I'm sure, rattled a lot of cages in his work.
And then, of course, the rest is history. In 2004
some thieves
broke into his house and brutally murdered him. We don't know
the exact cause, but I think we know the motive. It's just too
much of a coincidence, because he rattled a lot of cages. His
loss was a great loss for me. He was one of my heroes.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: So when you see heroes living in your time, and people
with whom you have a close connection, and they're suddenly
dead, it does cause concern.
KC: And it was at that point
- because we're in Ecuador right
now - that I understand that you decided to actually leave the
States.
BO'L: Well, it was one of the reasons. Yes. One of the reasons
was just to “retire,” just to, you know, live out our lives in
peace and harmony but still do my work, you know, write books
and give lectures and organize conferences. And that I intend to
continue doing.
But I'm really very glad to be here. It's so very peaceful. And,
you know, I just hope that together we can create a bright new
future that has an opportunity to move ahead.
I think that's one of my bottom-line messages now, is that
people need to become more aware because logic alone, common
sense alone, says we should leave no stone unturned in seeking
clean energy sources for our future.
We should leave no stone unturned in our investigation of
the ET
phenomenon because there's a lot we can learn from this.
There's a lot we can do in the future to redirect us instead of
having this to be the sole territory of black budgets and people
who want to cover up things - but the general public is not
aware of this.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: They're not aware that free energy, or solution energy,
could be the Holy Grail of our time. And that's where the
Camelot theme comes in.
KC: Sure.
BO'L: It's the search for the Holy Grail. Well,
the Holy Grail
has been found. [Kerry laughs] It's just that most people don't
realize that.
KC: OK. Well, so you seem to be like such an enigma, in a sense,
because you were trained in the astronaut program. And then you
went through academia, and you had to be highly rewarded during
that time. Yet you still thought outside the box and you still
made all these adventurous changes in your life. And then, here
you are in Ecuador. Even that takes a great deal of courage, to
leave everything you know and start a new life.
And this has got to be like a slap in the face of the military /
industrial complex, that here you are, you've become this
incredible rebel, and yet you have all these degrees, and so on.
I know there was an issue where they tried to actually bury your
background as an ex-astronaut, which is unbelievable. I know
that there actually has been some attempt to change the
definition of what an ex-astronaut or an astronaut candidate is
so that they could actually wipe your record clean.
I think you've had more than one experience in this way. And
there are certainly many people out there that have had similar
things happen to them, especially when they're rebels, free
thinkers, people that are going outside the box of the old
paradigm.
So if you could talk a little bit about what happened
to you?
BO'L: Yes, Kerry. Well, I was appointed to the astronaut program
in 1967, and my title then was astronaut. I even have hanging on
the wall here… I don't have the accurate date, but I'd say
roughly around 1990 it came to my attention…
Well, I'll backtrack a little bit. A reporter from the
San Diego
Union Tribune interviewed me after I gave a talk in San Diego.
Part of my credentials said “ex-astronaut”. And one of the
people on the board of the San Diego Union Tribune was Wally Schirra, one of the original seven Mercury astronauts who,
unbeknownst to me, formed what was called The Society for Space
Explorers, in which the term astronaut was redefined to “anybody
that went 50 miles above the Earth's surface.”
So in a way I was defrocked when Schirra hit the ceiling, and
apparently the reporter lost his position… just like the first
reporter that covered the first Wright brothers' flight was
fired from his position by his editor for not believing that
heavier-than-air flight was possible. So this is just, once
again, a reporter was fired for using the “wrong” credential.
Well, I found that out.
And then shortly after that, an organization with which I worked
some,
MUFON, the Mutual UFO Network in the US, also it came to
their attention that maybe in fact I was not an astronaut.
[Kerry laughs]
So they wrote to NASA, and NASA said: Well in
fact he wasn't.
KC: They said you were NOT.
BO'L: I was not.
KC: They actually wrote to NASA?
BO'L: Well, I think so. I'm not absolutely sure of the details,
but I can tell you who would know is Bob Bletchman, who was the
lawyer for MUFON at the time.
KC: Uh huh.
BO'L: Anyway, Bob Bletchman wrote me, and it was kind of a
challenging letter that basically said: Many of us feel that you
misrepresented your credentials.
So I presented my credentials
to Bob Bletchman and he became convinced that, indeed, that was
my title at the time, and that indeed it was appropriate to use
that in my credentials.
KC: Incredible.
BO'L: Not that I used it all the time because, actually, I
wouldn't, because I was trying to get away from that
controversy. And, you know, there's much more about me besides
being an ex-astronaut that's kind of interesting anyway.
[laughter]
So it didn't matter to me too much one way or the other. But I
got vindicated because MUFON challenged me in public and then
later vindicated me, that indeed I was an astronaut. So that was
cleared up.
Now, on another occasion: For a year I had a visiting faculty
appointment at
Caltech during the Mariner 10 mission in which I
was deputy team leader of the Television Imaging Science Team
for Mariner 10 that went by Venus and Mercury during the 1970s.
Professor Bruce Murray, who later became the director of JPL,
appointed me deputy team leader during that time. I was at
Caltech and worked on the mission with him and some of the other
scientists.
So, fast-forward to the year 2000 and a very bright senior
honors physics student who knew that I was researching solution
energies such as cold fusion and so forth said: Gee, you ought
to come to Caltech. Would you like to speak at our Commencement
as a speaker for Alternative Future Science such as cold fusion?
And I said I would be happy to.
So they scheduled it. They started posting things and
advertising the event. Then this one professor that I had worked
for, who later became director of JPL, apparently actively tried
to suppress the entire gig.
And then it turned out that there was no record that I was even
at… Caltech denied that I was deputy team leader, denied that I
was even at Caltech. [Kerry laughs] But it was so simple because
I'd published papers, well, in Science and other journals, and
Caltech was the affiliation that was under my name.
KC: And not only that, you had to have colleagues who remember
you, you know, who are still there even, I'm sure.
BO'L: Exactly. Yes, absolutely.
KC: So it's an amazing thing.
BO'L: Amazing thing. They tried to erase it and I thought: Gee,
maybe I could find some paycheck stubs or something like that.
Because apparently I was wiped off the Caltech records that I
was even there - even in their Administration - because I
tried to follow that one up.
KC: So if somebody was doing an article on you and wanted to
investigate and called Caltech today, they will say that you
never worked there.
BO'L: Exactly.
KC: Amazing.
BO'L: Yes. [laughs]
KC: It just shows you how the machine works. And I think that
this is very instructive to many people who challenge a lot of
whistleblowers on the fact that their credentials have
disappeared, you know?
BO'L: Yes. Yes.
KC: So this is very instructive. Here you are, working in free
energy. You're an ex-astronaut. I know there's a video on Google
in which you are actually speaking before the White House during
the Bush administration, not so long ago. And you know, very
fiery, very impressive, very courageous, basically saying that
Bush should not be in office and talking to some degree about
the cover-up.
That's tremendously courageous, and yet I didn't know anything
about it until we started to investigate coming to see you and
all. Can you talk a little bit about that?
And then I know that you also did the same thing back in the
Nixon administration, but the number of people around you was
strikingly reduced. And I want to do that because I want to talk
about how times are changing.
BO'L: Yes.
KC: And what may be coming down the line.
BO'L: Yes. It's very sad for me to see this develop.
And, yes, you're right, Kerry, that in 1970 I was an
anti-Vietnam War protestor, and along with other people from
Cornell and many places there were about 100,000 of us. When
Cambodia was invaded, we marched on Washington towards the White
House. A number of us that were leaders of this protest locked
arms and tried to walk between a line of buses that was blocking
the White House from us.
We were fully expecting to be handcuffed and arrested
- which
was fine, you know; it was an act of civil disobedience.
Instead, we were invited into the White House to express our
outrage with some of Nixon's advisors.
And then just after that, some of us… I think the interview with
me was the lead story on CBS Evening News. It would have been,
and you can probably look it up, I think it was April 30, 1970.
KC: And there was also a certain number of people that attended
that.
BO'L: 100,000.
KC: Which is amazing.
BO'L: And by contrast, I joined a protest march onto the White
House in 2007. No… 2006. It was the fifth anniversary of 9/11
and there were a few, it was a motley crew of about 30 of us.
[Kerry laughs]
It was a beautiful day. It was September 11, 2006 and we marched
to the White House. Some of my 9/11 Truther friends and I gave
little speeches in front of the White House.
And what I felt there was that Washington had changed, that it
was no longer a place where there'd be any democratic discourse.
Instead, it was a locked shop. It was like people were
robotically walking around, business as usual.
To me,
9/11 Truth is sort of like a metaphor for what's going on
now. There are other truths, too, of course, like solution
energy truth, truths that are being covered up, but it's being
covered up also by people who are otherwise intelligent and
free-thinking and progressive. Those people aren't there either.
They're buying into the system.
The system itself has become kind of locked up. And this is so
sad to me. The reason why I guess I have what you might call
some degree of courage, other people might cause it naivety or
foolishness, is that I sometimes think: It's either the Earth or
Me, or anybody else that wants to try to make a difference and
bring in the new paradigm.
Because I happen to think we can have a new paradigm, but we
need to stand and be counted. We need to go to the White House,
bang pots.
I mean, we had a change in the presidency of Ecuador, a very
positive change, as a result of about a million people getting
out there in front of the presidential palace and banging pots
until the president left. That's non-violent. It's a method of
changing.
And what's happening now in the US is very scary because the
people in charge that are obviously pulling the strings of the
politicians, bribing them… and it's so obvious, especially seen
from here, to see the decline of the culture in just about every
respect, whether it's economic, ecological, peace vs. war… It's
locked up. It's a closed shop.
There are a few courageous people around that I know, friends
like Dennis Kucinich and, you know, some of the others,
Cynthia
McKinney. I've done some work with Ralph Nader, although I
couldn't convince him that solution energy was possible. There
are a lot of people that do stand on the good side of the force,
but they're very few and far between now.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: And I want to be joined by people. I need support. I need
to team up with more and more people who feel as I do and are
willing to stand and be counted.
KC: Well, can you talk… Just name a few names if you don't mind,
of the people that are actually in more or less the alternative
world but they're not willing to actually embrace the ideas of
free energy, even UFOs? You know, the idea that there might be
black projects out there? I mean, because we had talked briefly,
and I know that you talked about… Some of these people are
actually good friends of yours.
BO'L: Yes. There are many people in the progressive community. I
would say Kucinich himself is in this category. He's been on the
fence. I was able to script for him an interview he had with NPR
when he was running for president in 2004. I was advising him on
solution energy and trying to come up with the right words so
that he could become all-inclusive about, you know, leaving no
stone unturned in our quest for new energy sources.
And so Kucinich did a little of that, but then he kind of
retrenched some. There were a number of glitches that came up,
but he wanted to create some legislation that would provide
funding for New Energy research and development, which is what
we really need. We need an Apollo Program for this.
We need to
bring people under one roof to research it.
KC: Right.
BO'L: Or to somehow in other ways support the work. Well… which
is not happening now, of course. But there are other people…
KC: But there are other thinkers that are very… movers and
shakers in many ways, criticizing the current paradigm. They're
very courageous in that way. And yet they won't, they actually
won't go outside the box, to a certain degree.
BO'L: Exactly. They're what
Wade Frazier, a good friend, and I
call structuralists. These are people like
Noam Chomsky, Naomi
Klein, and they're also the kind of people that won't look at
9/11 Truth, so there's a pattern here. [Kerry laughs]
There's a pattern of various things that become what
David Ray
Griffin calls sacred myths. One sacred myth is the official
story of 9/11: It's true, and it's obviously true, and there's
no disputing it.
Another sacred myth is that there's no such thing as a
free
lunch when it comes to energy. So you have all of these
environmentalists that are just nay-saying even the possibility
of free energy, and this would be a number of notable people,
people on the cutting edge of environmental policy.
I've
broached this to many famous well-known people. I'll list a few.
KC: Please do.
BO'L: OK.
Amory Lovens. Lester Brown, formerly of the Worldwatch
Institute. Amory just walked away from me when I broached it,
and I've known him for years.
KC: Are they afraid? You know, can you actually sort of drill
down a little and tell us? Do you think that it's… are they
afraid? Or is it something else? Is it the matrix, that they've
actually bought into the matrix and that was it, they couldn't
get beyond that? They're certainly critics of the society, but
they don't, you know…
BO'L: Yes. That's an excellent question, Kerry, and I can't
second-guess their negative reaction because I'm not in their
skin, but it might be a blend of the two.
I know that it was politically correct and sort of de rigueur
when I was in the mainstream of science to nay-say and deny
anything that fell outside the box, and then I was accepted. So
some of it's cultural, for sure.
Somebody like Amory Lovens or Noam Chomsky or Naomi Klein, and
there are many other names too. I can probably pop for several
more whose bias, or let's say critique of the culture is
narrowly confined to certain areas. Now, on the other hand, I
have to grant them that maybe they just didn't have time to look
at these other things…
KC: OK. [laughs]
BO'L: …like the energy or 9/11 Truth. But on the other hand,
maybe they are in the matrix. Maybe fear has so captivated them
that they're in the box.
KC: Well, don't you have a story about “The Carrot and The
Stick”? I think that this would be a great opportunity to talk
about it. Because it may not be just fear but also the reward
system that they get, through ”normal society”, if you will.
BO'L: Well, yes. And I think that many people… and I've broken
free of it, but it took me a long time, and it took a lot of
truth-seeking.
But, yes, a lot of people… Yes. Yes, they basically realize that
their careers could be ruined by this. I don't think most of
them get to the point where there are threats, but yes, some
people are offered very lucrative opportunities to “join the
team” by The Powers That Be, to come over to their side. And
when that doesn't happen, then often they're whacked by the
stick.
John Perkins talks about this in his books, the first one of
which is the
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, that carrots
are dangled. Like, it could come in the form of a
World Bank
loan, or it could come in the form to buy you out, not to do the
free energy invention. Or it could be being recruited to be part
of their team, and becoming privy to some information that you
otherwise couldn't get.
KC: Well, certainly funding for experimentation. From the
point of view of a scientist, that's always the most seductive
thing, one would assume.
BO'L: That's right. And a lot of free energy inventors…
Now, for example, the Patent Office has a policy to nay-say
anything that smacks of free energy. Or the Department of
Defense has the Secrecy Law which says that if this device has
any defense application - [laughs] offense application - then
you're going to have your device confiscated and you can never
work on it again.
KC: Well, along those lines, let's actually move along to free
energy. And I know you've done a tremendous amount of
investigation here, but you've also investigated the cover-up of
free energy and the people that have maybe gotten to a certain
point and then been, I don't know, hit in one way or another,
the device stolen.
Do you have some anecdotes along those lines and some people
that you can talk about who've done investigations? I know you
traveled the world doing some… in one of your books talking
about that.
BO'L: Well, yes. I mean, first of all, there are
many inventors
who have been assassinated, threatened, had their funding
removed. And I can go through the list. Obviously you'll be able
to post the list and their stories.
KC: OK.
BO'L: And I've been able to authenticate many of these stories
myself, personally, and they're pretty much right-on.
But they're people like Tom Bearden. There's a man called
Gary Vesperman, who's accumulated many, many suppression stories of
all kinds, for free energy.
There's Wade Frazier and his excellent website
www.ahealedplanet.net in which he explores, in many hundreds of
pages, many suppression stories and some of his own experience
with the inventor and promoter, Dennis Lee. And there are just
so many others.
You know, that's one of the things I've said in my “Carrot and
the Stick” story, is that there are a thousand ways to suppress
an inventor or researcher. And there are also a thousand ways to
eliminate them or threaten them. And there are…
It's also, we're also vulnerable to forces because we have these
bodies and these bodies are very vulnerable to any kind of
attack or threat, and those of our loved ones.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: So in a sense,
The Powers That Be hold all the cards right
now, and most people are afraid to even venture into this
territory.
And that, in part, is also a psychological phenomenon. There's
been some really good research done on this, that the pain
center of the brain is hit as soon as you start to talk about
anything that smacks of conspiracy theory (which, of course, is
the dismissal that's really truth-seeking), that anything, any
painful new truth is going to reach the pain center of the brain
first.
Whereas, if you join the lynch mob, [laughs] if you join
The
Powers That Be, then everything is pretty comfortable. The
pleasure center. You can have fun with life.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: So in a way, it's “Me or the Earth”. [laughs] That's the
way it seems to be, and this dark agenda which is not really so
hidden now if people only take the time out and look at that.
But also look at the great promise and potential of solution
energy. It's really a one-two punch in education that's
necessary.
But at the same time I have many wonderful dear friends,
progressive people, otherwise progressive, who still can't get
their heads around the free energy question because they say:
Well, you know, if you show it to me then I'll believe it, but
until then it's not worth looking at as a question.
KC: Well,
George Green is a friend of yours and he's been
working with John Bedini. And you know, George is one of those
people who is certainly on the side of free energy and is
certainly aware of it. Have you seen a device, or have you seen
John Bedini's work? And what might you think of that? And so on.
BO'L: Oh yes. I visited many laboratories and visited a lot of
people and I took photographs of them, but I've also
investigated in great detail the concepts.
[Showing pictures in his book]: Like, for example, this man is
Sparky Sweet, or Floyd Sweet. I visited him in the
'90s. He's
passed over now. And this is a specially conditioned magnet that
he was showing. It produces free energy.
His laboratory was in an undisclosed location in the Mojave
Desert. He had before been in LA and was broken into, his
laboratory was broken into. He was threatened. They were spying
on him with infrared cameras. You know, all of this was well
documented.
This is Bruce DePalma, who invented the N-machine while he was
at MIT. And he was so suppressed by the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) when he tried to start his own company, he immigrated
to Australia. They didn't like it there, either, so he
immigrated to New Zealand and died young of a heart attack,
about a decade ago.
This is some of Bruce's apparatus. It's an N-machine. It's
basically a magnetic motor, magnets that go up on a wheel that
are spun up and then they interact with a hypothesized
zero-point vacuum energy field and you get free energy. You get
over-unity power.
This is Paramahamsa Tewari in India who had demonstrated a
version of the N-machine which is magnets on a motor, on a
wheel. Now, Tewari is a very prestigious physicist. He works for
the government of India.
He was chief project engineer of their largest nuclear power
plant, but they also… the government of India gave him
laboratory space and funding to develop this machine which he
demonstrated to me, and which was lighting light bulbs with the
machine being unplugged. It was just free-running for 20, 30
minutes. And the basic principles were very, very well presented
to me, photographed. It's there for everybody to see.
This is
Suji Inumata. He also passed over at a relatively young
age. He worked for the Tsukuba Space Center in Japan, also a
Ph.D. physicist and president of the Japan Psychotronics
Institute. And he had also one of these magnetic motors which
was spinning up and producing excess energy. And, again, he died
young.
Most of all these people die young.
This is
John Hutchison, from Canada.
KC: Right. Well, we have had interactions with John and actually
we'd love to interview him at some point. Can you tell us, you
know, your take on his…
BO'L: Yes. John has personal psychic powers, but he's also
brilliant with machines. So this is John and he actually was
taking Meredith's Camelot sword, and then he took this bar of
what he would call al-u-min-ium which was thoroughly trashed by
one of his
Tesla coils. And of course the US Department of
Defense immediately took an interest in this, for reasons other
than John.
John is a loving, gentle soul and he basically has demonstrated
many times over how he can produce free energy just from
specially conditioned magnets.
KC: Yes.
BO'L: He'd be a good one to interview. He's a wonderful guy and
he's also done many experiments levitating objects and producing
free energy.
KC: Yes. Some of his videos are on Google.
BO'L: Yes.
KC: We've seen some of them.
BO'L: This is Yull Brown, who was doing a demonstration of
“Brown's gas” for me, which was, again, anomalous amounts of
energy, just brilliant light, in his welding system.
And
Tom Bearden. Moray King. These are leading theorists. So
these are people that I visited over the course of about ten
years and have reported on.
This was a meeting of free energy researchers that was convened
by a software billionaire in Estes Park, Colorado, in 1993 and
'94, and there are a lot of...
KC: And the software billionaire was? Could we name him?
BO'L: Well, I think I'd rather not because…
KC: OK.
BO'L: My comments weren't always positive but he convened these
people with the intention of trying to find out the best and
brightest researchers and the best concepts to fund.
KC: OK.
BO'L: And then he suddenly did a reversal and said: No, I'm not
going to fund any of this because my marketing people told me
that we were not dipping into the river of optimized profits.
[Kerry laughs]
In other words, when you're in the toe of the profit curve…
We're still at the Research phase of the
Research-and-Development cycle.
So that's what the government is supposed to be doing. The
Department of Energy is supposed to be funding these things. And
my god, they're hardly even funding solar and wind! They're
totally steeped in nuclear weapons, nuclear power, and fossil
fuel power.
But in this picture there are some people, really sad cases.
This was Stefan Marinov, who was Europe's leading free energy
inventor and researcher. He was a professor of physics at the
University of Graz in Austria. Jolly fellow, wonderful man, just
positive and upbeat.
And a few years ago, a few years after this
conference, he was seen jumping off the 10th story of the
library building, to his death.
KC: Incredible.
BO'L: Some people saw him going backwards. It looked like
he was
pushed off. And again, it's just another one of these cases.
There are many other people in this picture who are no longer
alive, but these were the leading free energy researchers from
all over the word. And Jim Carrey, who was filming Dumb and
Dumber, while we were trying to get smart and smarter. [laughs]
KC: [laughs] Yes. Interesting. So... OK. Let's go from here to
what kind of solutions you're advocating, or where you think we
can go for the future, just to sort of inspire all the people
that are listening to this. Because truly you are a very
inspiring man and, you know, your courage, your willingness to
think outside of the box, and then in the face of all odds, to
persist on this road. I mean, you just released this new book.
Right?
BO'L: Right.
The Energy Solution Revolution.
KC: Exactly. So what is it that your book is about? What are you
advocating? And how can you encourage, or give us an encouraging
word, about the future, if you have one?
BO'L: Well, I think the bottom line of this… This is the book
and I've been working on it for about 6 years. It's kind of
different essays, but they all come together because they first
talk about, well, just looking at the table of contents, that
it's being covered up at every turn.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: There is hardly anybody alive that's NOT covering it up,
either by commission or omission.
Orwell one time said:
The greatest lies are lies of omission.
And so a lot of people who are otherwise progressive and
enlightened and very bright just suppress it. And so this book is a study of the breakthroughs and the
suppression. Also the ecological mandate, the fact that the
problems with the Earth are far greater than you would be lead
to believe in the media.
Then I talk about: Well, what is this tyranny and how can we
overcome it? Well, we can certainly overcome it by education and
by revamping our political systems.
Right now I think
people are beginning to wake up to the fact
that
even Obama doesn't really represent change. He's great
rhetorically.
But all these people, and I would include in there a lot of
people that are otherwise progressive that we have already
talked about plus many others, leaders of the environmental
movement, for example - that the cover-up is fairly complete.
And in a sense it's very similar to the UFO/ET phenomenon, to
9/11, anything else where conventional wisdom denies it.
And so, I kind of pick this apart. I try to ask:
Well, who's
doing the denying? Scientists are doing it. They are the
guardians at the gate.
People who call themselves scientists are the number one
suppressors. And so they're in unwitting alliance with the Black
Ops people because, you know, if the scientists won't give it
the possibility, the yes-nod, then it probably won't get
anywhere. It's sort of like… Galileo's colleagues refused to
look through his telescope.
Then you have the environmentalists and I've talked with many
leading environmentalists.
Here's another example: Hazel Henderson, a leading progressive
economist, doesn't want free energy because she doesn't want
millions of helicopters in the sky and bigger power saws.
And I don't blame her.
So that then forces the question: Well, this has to be managed.
We don't want Dick Cheney running this one again. [laughs]
KC: Exactly. [laughs]
BO'L: So the environmentalists are suppressing it. I don't know
of a mainstream environmentalist that's even willing to give it
a moment of thought.
Al Gore. There's another example of somebody who… I've written
letters to him. He doesn't answer. So my battle is very lonely.
[laughter] And then… what else?
Well, there's the corporation. The CEO of General Electric wrote
this editorial for the Washington Post saying that we need the
courage to change to new energy solutions. And then he mentions
the conditions under which this has to happen.
One is the creative mind. He thinks yes, we have that. And then
the second one was: It must turn over a profit. And then the
third one was the American will. And he sees the third
ingredient lacking.
I see the second ingredient as interfering, because General
Electric's profits… and their shareholders depend on their
making nuclear power plants and gas turbine plants.
If you were to have a free energy gizmo that could fit in the
palm of your hand, just like your dictaphone there, that could
produce 10 kilowatts of power, which I fully believe can happen
some day, General Electric is not going to want to develop it
because it would take away from their business with gas turbine
plants and nuclear power plants.
So, the condition to turn over a profit… I kind of argue: Well,
how much profit is enough? Clearly General Electric is not at
all interested in this. And, you know, the multi-national
corporations and the government have been suppressing these
things anyway. That's obvious.
So this book is all about documenting the efforts not only to
break through but to suppress it. And even in light of what so
many people say…
When is there a day when you don't pick up a newspaper or hear
some sort of thing on the media that:
Al Gore says we need to do
something about this soon. [Kerry laughs]
We need to develop
alternate energy. And then, when it comes to the question of
“what”, the question is evaded.
KC: Right.
BO'L: Or at the very least it's lip service given to solar and
wind, which is very capital-intensive, materials-intensive. It's
not truly renewable. It's intermittent. It's diffuse.
KC: Isn't Obama also talking about, you know, going back into
coal?
BO'L: Yes.
KC: I mean, we're actually going backwards. Now the
Black Ops of
course, we document here in Camelot, are thousands of years
ahead and they've got free energy and they're using it as we
speak now. I think that you told us you wrote to Obama. Is this
correct?
BO'L: Yes. Recently. And it's on my website brianoleary.com.
It's right there on the home page. It's an open appeal to Obama
to really represent the change we need and not just in
rhetorical means.
For that you're going to have to bite the hand that fed you.
You're going to have to go against these very wealthy elite
people that are holding the puppet strings, including
his
strings.
And we have to become educated about what the possibilities are.
And what's happened is, as you say, he's gone backwards. He's
talking about “clean” coal. [Kerry laughs] There's no such
thing! That's an oxymoron. Or about advanced nuclear. Or
sequestration at coal power plants, which is not even feasible
and it's a gross technology.
So, he's just far behind in the curve. And so I'm just making an
appeal to him to say that, you know: Please for heaven's sake,
our planet is being destroyed. Will you please serve the public
interest because the public interest is not being served with
what's happening.
And even solar and wind, I hate to say, are half-measures
because the capital cost of a solar or wind economy is on the
order of 20 to 40 trillions dollars. We don't have that kind of
money.
Free energy is basically free, once we're able to develop the
hardware to the point where it becomes available. And then of
course, all hell will break loose.
But, you know, the suppression effort… There's two great quotes
here. Let me see if I can find 'em.
This is one:
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth
becomes a revolutionary act.
– George Orwell.
KC: Yes.
BO'L: And that's what's going on right now. We're being
deceived. Big time.
Here's another one:
When stupidity is considered patriotism, it
is unsafe to be intelligent.
– Isaac Asimov.
KC: Yes. And there you go. That's
Dumb and Dumber and the big
rush to have movies emphasizing how funny, how lovely, it is to
be stupid.
So… OK. This has been really amazing, Brian, and I have to say
that if ex-astronaut Brian O'Leary was writing to me, and I was
the president, certainly it almost seems like to you need to
write back. Or to Al Gore. Right? And isn't it surprising that,
with your stature, that these men would actually ignore you?
There's something to be said there, as well.
BO'L: Well, yes, there is something to be said there, and it
suggests to me that they're part of the overall dark agenda.
KC: Right.
BO'L: And it's just their wrinkle on it is a little different.
It's a little more benign-sounding.
KC: Mm hm.
BO'L: One could just even be so risqué as to say that they
advocate genocide by other means. I'm not really sure what's
going on in their minds. All I know is that their lack of
answers and the lack of answers from the people they surround
themselves with and people that espouse the conventional wisdom…
I mean, even
James Lovelock in England. He thinks outside the
box, but he's unbudgable. Amory Lovens. That's another one who
thinks outside the box, but not enough. Now: What's happening?
Now, these are also the kinds of people that show up at the
so-called Green Salons in Washington, DC. It's like the whole
Beltway of Washington is a fortress and that it's almost a sign
of prestige to interact with some of the folks at the DoD and
CIA because it might be your passport to… Something. [laughs]
And meanwhile outside the box there are all these wonderful
concepts waiting in the wings...
KC: Right.
BO'L: …that could really create a sustainable future for
humankind. And these people don't listen. I mean, I've had some
access to Al Gore through intermediaries that know him and they
won't budge. You know. I could name names there, too.
It's just that the
conventional wisdom pervades the entire
progressive community. It's like a big disease that's affected
everybody. And then most people are simply apathetic or they
don't know.
Wade Frazier says: You have to peel the onion of free energy.
And what that means is a combination of a certain degree of
open-mindedness, intelligence, sentience, spiritual development,
and on and on.
KC: Right. In other words, it's such a powerful theoretical
technology, or reality for those that are using it, its
possibilities are so grand, that you actually have to be on a
certain level spiritually to deal with that, as a planet. And I
think that that's also where we're going and where we're going
to have to come to terms.
BO'L: Absolutely.
KC: Because as long as war and weapons is our god, so to speak,
on this planet, free energy is just not appropriate to be used
by those people.
BO'L: You're totally right. You're totally right, Kerry.
KC: So we need a totally different set of leaders, a different
set of thinking. Right?
BO'L: Absolutely.
KC: And in many ways you're right on the
avant garde of that
effort. And I do believe you have many people behind you.
BO'L: Well, that's good, Kerry, and they're now kind of divided
and ruled. And of course part of your effort and your search for
the Holy Grail, which this is a part of, a significant part of,
could create more strength in numbers of people willing to stand
and be counted for proposing these alternatives.
Because I, too, would be actually opposed to the development of
free energy if
The Powers That Be continue to be in power,
because they would abuse it.
KC: Right.
BO'L: They would misuse it. They would… just like in the ET
phenomenon, back-engineering and so forth, they'd keep it in the
Black [Ops] and use it for their own purposes.
So the people of the Earth need to know about this more.
There are some hopeful signs here. One of them is the country of
Ecuador, whose president is a great deal more enlightened than
prior presidents, and whose government just passed a new
constitution which provides for the Rights of Nature - and
whose president has offered that if the world community were to
attract matching funding, that oil under the ground in a very
pristine bio-diverse national park would stay in the ground, if
the funds could be raised enough.
And so, you see, the whole thing is systemic. The whole world
system is decadent and disgustingly… I just… You name the
negative word.
Evil, I guess, is the right word for it.
More and more people are realizing that, but maybe what they
don't realize is that we can make a difference. We can create
another agenda, together.
I don't talk much about alternative agenda to the
Black Ops or
Illuminati agenda, but believe me, it's a lot more pleasant.
[Kerry laughs]
I don't even want to prejudice the question: Well, what is that
agenda? Well, I can see a world that's truly sustainable, a
world in which our knowledge expands to embrace the ET
phenomenon, a world where magic, what we consider as magic, can
now really happen. A world where combined positive intention can
heal ourselves and the environment.
KC: Absolutely.
BO'L: And where consciousness, which is really the science of
the 21st century, can burst forward in very dramatic
counterpoint to what now is happening.
KC: OK. Well, thank you Brian. That's wonderful. And more power
to you! It's been really educational for Bill and I to be here.
We want to thank you for being our host and Meredith, a lovely
hostess, and for opening your home to us.
We just completed a conference here that you organized and it
was very inspiring. I think a lot of people really enjoyed it.
We hope to do more of them. And certainly, again, here you are
on the avant garde of actually getting the word out, not only
about free energy but about, you know, what's been going on, the
cover-up, and the potential for the future that is there for all
of us if we just take hold.
BO'L: Yes. We're starting here, Kerry, an alternative
educational and conference center. It's called
Montesueños. It's
in the Andes of Ecuador. My wife, Meredith, and I have been
spending the last five years creating it and now blessed by your
presence and the conference that we just had.
We expect to have
many more. And we invite kindred spirits. And whistleblowers!
[laughter]
KC: Absolutely. The more truth-tellers, the better.
BO'L: Yes! And that's such an important thing. Your work is very
important. Somebody had to do the work.
Steve Greer has done a
piece of it and is doing a piece of it. And together we can then
enlighten ourselves and the public about, first of all, the
nasty truth, and then the potential truth of what could be in a
better world.
And then together create that world. There's no
reason why we can't do that.
KC: Absolutely. Thank you very much, Brian. Yes. I think we
covered it all.
BO'L: One thing, though, I've never been in Black Ops and I've
never been privy to it, even as an astronaut.
KC: Yes.
BO'L: So, it's funny because I know most of the people you
interview have been there. And that's a whole different order of
things.
KC: Right.
BO'L: I kind of come on naively.
KC: Right. But you skirted it. You've been affected by them.
They see you as a threat and in some ways that's just as good,
from Camelot's point of view. You know, you definitely qualify,
if you will, [Brian laughs] for better or for worse.
I think that the wonderful thing about your life is that you've
actually lived through all these experiences as an astronaut.
Right? So, as a person of respect, that garners respect, and a
person who people could rally around, at the same time you're
willing to have such an open mind and consider everything.
And
that's such a rare thing to get in a person of respect nowadays,
I'm sorry to say.
BO'L: Yes. And in my case I guess I just had to check it out as
I went along and my gestation of many of these things took a
LONG time. So now I'm hoping for others in the lay public and
just people, curious people…
The kind of people that came to the conference were just fine
people that want to get educated more about these things, and
who may not… we may not… have as much luxury of time as I had
when I was going through my process of decompression from the
mainstream.
It's been 30 years so far, and that process
continues to this very moment.
BR: I guess we could say that you're in
Green Ops.
BO'L: Green Ops. Yes. [laughs] That's great.
Green Ops. You
know, we ought to have an Earth Corps. We ought to have a “New
Deal” [that] Obama could lead that would get people out to clean
up the Earth. And have solution energy research and development.
And consciousness research and make it OK to do those things.
Why not?
KC: Yes. Absolutely. Why not?
BO'L: Yes. But it has to have public support. You can't do it
without the public. History has shown that throughout.
KC: Well, that's what doing this video is going to do. That's
the whole point of doing things like this. I mean, your book
coming out, and hopefully the video coming out very shortly,
it's the kind of thing that's going to start the movement and
gather the people. And that's what you need. We're going to have
the power of numbers. That's what we want.
BO'L: Yes.
KC: And I believe we're going to have it and it's already out
there.
BO'L: Right. It's already out there.
KC: It's a matter of focusing.
BO'L: And also then, the personal. It's both. It's the Earth and
then some of us in pioneering work. Personally we're safer
because then our work outlives us and there's no reason to…
KC: And safety in numbers. Right?
BO'L: Safety in numbers. Yes. I think so. I'm optimistic that
this can happen, that we really do have a positive future. And
that's why I'm on this planet.
That's why I'm alive, is to
express that vision.
