Are Secret Space Program Disclosures Prelude to a False Flag Alien Invasion?

secret-space-program-disclosures-prelude-to-alien-false-flagOn November 13, Dr. Steven Greer, founder of the Disclosure Project, gave a public lecture where he warned about an impending false flag extraterrestrial event. He said that the final stage of planning for a false flag event that dates back to the 1950’s is about to be rolled out, and that recent disclosures about aliens being involved in a galactic slave trade of humans is part of a deception campaign. The goal is to condition humanity into accepting a scenario of evil aliens intent on conquering humanity.

Greer stated that advanced electronic weapons using psychotronic holographic technologies were used in order to produce ‘scripted memories’ which could be downloaded into individuals. The implanted memories, according to Greer, could be so realistic that the targeted individuals would swear that the experiences were genuine.

Greer says that he was first told about these advanced psychotronic holographic technologies around 1994, by a senior scientist familiar with classified programs. More recently, a retired Lt. Colonel from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations warned that the psychotronic holographic technologies had laid the foundation for the alien false flag event that was imminent.

Greer did not name the Air Force intelligence officer, but said that his testimony was part of the upcoming documentary Unacknowedged, and that the Air Force officer’s testimony would be released in full soon after the documentary’s release.

Greer’s claim of the existence of psychotronic holographic technologies used for psychological warfare operations that began in the 1950’s is supported by documentary evidence. It is known that psychological warfare was used as an important means of deceiving the public about the reality of flying saucers and extraterrestrial life.

The 1953 CIA sponsored Robertson Panel release the Durant Report recommending debunking the flying saucer phenomenon by using the mass media in what was the beginning of a psychological warfare program against the general public.

The 1975 Senate Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, chaired by Senator Frank Church, revealed that the CIA’s MKUltra experiments dated back to the early 1950’s and that various psychological tools were used to implant false memories into targeted individuals. Indeed, the first Manchurian Candidate movie, starring Frank Sinatra was released in 1962 and depicted military personnel being subjected to early brain washing methods in order to create sleeper assassins.

As computer technologies subsequently became more advanced in the classified world, it became possible for very realistic holographic images to be electronically downloaded into people’s brains to produce “scripted memories.” It is the development and widespread use of such technologies that Greer warns against when it comes to whistleblower and abductee testimonies that describe evil aliens and their alleged nefarious activities.

Greer discusses military abductions (MILAB’s) and how sophisticated technologies have been used to give the appearance that aliens are the ones behind the abductions and the various abusive actions used against the victims.

Greer provides as a notable example the November 1989 abduction of the United Nations Secretary General Perez de Cueller during a secret UN initiative to officially disclose the existence of extraterrestrial visitors to the world. Greer, in a November 2015 lecture, says that he was told about the abduction incident by Crown Prince Hans-Adam from Lichtenstein at a meeting they had in 1994:

He said what happened was that Perez de Cuellar … was coming back from a 3 am late night planning session for this event when he was abducted by aliens from his motorcade in Manhattan … Perez de Cuellar was taken somehow out of the motorcade onto an ET craft where he was threatened by the ETs and told: If you disclose this information, we will abduct every world leader involved, including the President of the United States.

According to Greer, the world leaders were allegedly so intimidated by the alien threats that they backed off the disclosure plan.

Greer gives this as an example of how military abductions are used to create staged alien abductions to prejudice not only the general public about extraterrestrial life, but also world leaders. This is where a major problem with Greer’s method and analysis of alien abduction events begins to emerge.

I’ve discussed Greer’s analysis of the alleged “staged” alien abduction involving de Cueller in a December 2015 article. What is important to mention here is that Greer’s analysis that this was an example of a ‘staged alien abduction’ based on what he was told by Prince Hans-Adam, is contradicted by multiple witness interviews and correspondence conducted by famed abduction researcher, Budd Hopkins, with key figures in the abduction event.

hopkins-witnessedHopkins book Witness, The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions provides abundant witness and documentary evidence that this was a genuine abduction incident witnessed by a world leader and other senior diplomats. He interviewed an extensive number of both witnesses and participants in the abduction, which reveals that some of the individuals involved had been regularly abducted by the aliens since their youth.

Hopkins produced transcripts of interviews and letters by the participants detailing these life-long abductions that culminated in the 1989 incident. His conclusion is that the abduction was a genuine case of extraterrestrials abducting a prominent world leader, who he did not identify in the book but revealed later was de Cueller, with other senior diplomats watching in order to send a warning. He reproduced a portion of a letter from one of the victims to the abduction who was part of the security detail for de Cueller:

It was too coincidental for people such as ourselves to just happen to stumble upon such a sight [UFO abduction]. Remember, there were five important figures with us at the time (Two US Government Officials, two foreign statesmen, one World Leader (de Cueller). Six more of us included as US Government enforcers. If the occupants of the craft wanted to get a message out to the world, they’ve chosen the right group of people to do it for them.[Witness, p. 263]

Hopkins book validates much of what Greer was told by Prince Hans-Adam that world leaders witnessed and were involved in an alien abduction event in 1989.

However, Greer dismissed the portion of Prince Hans-Adams’ testimony that the abduction was conducted by extraterrestrials, by insisting instead that it was a ‘staged alien abduction’. Greer based his conclusion solely on his overall analysis of multiple whistleblower reports revealing the existence of false flag alien abductions in general, and of advanced technologies making this possible.

What’s vital to point out here is that Greer does not identify one witness or whistleblower referring to the 1989 event being a staged military abduction. The obvious problem here is that Greer offers nothing but his conjecture that the 1989 alien abduction was a staged event.

In contrast, Hopkins spent several years researching his book, which was published in 1996, where he methodically interviewed multiple witnesses and participants that conclusively reveal that the event was a genuine extraterrestrial abduction after all.

The important fact to keep in mind here is that Greer had nearly 20 years to consider Hopkins data on this vitally important case, which he had been privately briefed about in 1994 by Prince Hans-Adam. After all, it involved major world leaders discussing a plan for official disclosure of extraterrestrial life that was aborted at the 11th hour by an alleged alien abduction. Hopkins data could help considerably in determining what had really happened. Instead, Greer decided to ignore Hopkins investigation entirely.

The 1989 abduction incident involving Secretary General de Cueller, is a clear example of where Greer dismisses or doesn’t even consider information that runs contrary to his analysis of such abduction events. After all, Hopkins book was published in 1996, which gave Greer plenty of time to analyze Hopkins data and compare it to his analysis of the de Cueller abduction which he publicly discussed in his 2015 lecture.

This is where it is fair to raise the question of whether Greer is an impartial analyst of human extraterrestrial encounters as he claims, or deliberately filters out egregious cases of alien actions on humans, in order to promote his own cosmic world view.

There are other examples of Greer dismissing data that does not fit in with his hypothesis that negative or intrusive alien abductions, are really staged military abductions using advanced classified technologies. I discussed this in a 2006 article where I responded to Greer’s critique of my exopolitics research which he had taken the unusual step of publicly publishing.

The conclusion reached in my 2006 response was that Greer is not an impartial analyst of human extraterrestrial encounters, but a firm advocate of the view that all such encounters are positive and beneficial, and that witness reports of encounters to the contrary are in fact a result of staged military abductions.

Pageflex Persona [document: PRS0000039_00001]

The way in which Greer removes contrary data in his analyses of human extraterrestrial encounters raises legitimate questions over his intellectual honesty, and ultimate agenda. Given his status as a leading figure in the extraterrestrial disclosure community, Greer’s questionable approach requires critical scrutiny when it comes to his critique of others offering analyses of human extraterrestrial encounters that differ to his own cosmic world view.

To illustrate the problem here, it is worthwhile examining the next part of Greer’s November 13 lecture. He named two individuals that have recently come forward to reveal their knowledge about secret space programs, Corey Goode and William Tompkins. Greer declares both are victims of these psychotronic holographic technologies where they have been given scripted memories of negative human extraterrestrial encounters.

In his lecture, Greer said the following about Goode and what he believes are the scripted memories he was given as a child:

There are some very, very good people out there speaking about information, experiences, that they have had that they do believe to be extraterrestrial… I’m thinking now of a man I haven’t met who is a wonderful gentleman from all accounts, a guy named Corey Goode, and is doing the “Full Disclosure Project,” and he and I are like hand-in-glove supportive of many things, but some of the things he’s recounting like slave trade and slave planets and things that he experienced as a six or seven year old … taken into the military abduction program… I have no doubt that he believes those events were extraterrestrial but … what I want people to understand is that we have to be very careful about our assessment of what’s out there in the universe based on people that have been in these programs who … have been victims of this.

Greer goes on to criticize Gaia TV which has provided a highly respected media platform for Goode’s testimony to enter the public arena through the Cosmic Disclosure show:

I’m concerned that places like Gaia TV or Conscious Evolution could be given information out there that is being scripted and being provided, unwittingly from these folks… If it is true, let’s say that the slave races are out there and the slave planets and the slave ships and all this is going on that you hear in some of the accounts from Corey Goode and others. If that were true and that then is put out … into the public domain, so that millions and eventually billions of people. In the minds of most people out here on the streets that would justify interplanetary war.

Greer went on to point out that while he and Goode agree on a great number of issues concerning global peace, raising consciousness and spiritual evolution, that Goode’s testimony about secret space programs and egregious human extraterrestrial encounters are scripted and have no reliable corroborating data points:

Some of the things that are being shared as factual secret space program activities that have no other real good points of corroboration, and which I know given how he was in the military abduction programs, and what they are capable of. Some of the experiences he has had I’m concerned have been scripted, and may not reflect anything actually out there in deep space.

We have finally arrived at the crux of Greer’s critique of Goode, his testimony about secret space programs is contaminated by scripted memories introduced into his life during military abductions that began at age six.

It’s worth keeping in mind here that Goode acknowledges that from age six he was indeed trained through a military abduction program. When he turned 16 (1986), he says he was then taken to his final training and subsequent service in secret space programs up until 2007. Goode states that he was then age-regressed, sent back in time and had his memories wiped.

Goode says that the memory wiping process was not successful and he retained the bulk of his memories acquired during his “20 and back” program. He then lived the next 20/21 years as a normal civilian as depicted in the following timeline.

timeline-corey-goode

 

It is important to point out here that Greer’s critique that Goode was given scripted memories is consistent with events as Goode described up to age 16 (1986), when he says he recalled his memories of having served for twenty years in secret space programs. After all, how could Goode be sure that the 20 years of memories he now had, after being returned to civilian life, were genuine, or had not been contaminated by the scripted memories Greer was discussing?

By 1986, we know that classified computer technology was very sophisticated and could be used to implant false or ‘scripted’ memories into people involved in Military Abduction Programs thus making Greer’s assessment plausible. There are several reasons, however, as to why Goode’s memories of having served for twenty years in secret space programs may be accurate after all.

First, according to Goode, beginning in 2011, he started having contact experiences with a group of extraterrestrials he calls the Blue Avians, which belonged to what he describes the Sphere Being Alliance, and also with personnel belonging to an Ancient Mayan secret space program. It was Goode’s reference to this Mayan secret space program that got my attention when I first began investigating his testimony in April 2015 due to my own experience in Mexico City in 2010 which I wrote about here.

Goode says that in March 2015, he was taken to a secret moon based Lunar Operations Command, when he became the official delegate for the Sphere Being Alliance. He then began liaising with officers and personnel from the secret space programs he had previously served on from 1987 to 2007.

Importantly, Goode was stating that in 2015, the leaders of these programs that were part of a “Secret Space Program Alliance Council”, confirmed his earlier service. This suggests that Goode’s recollections as a 16 year old of having served for twenty years in several secret space programs were genuine, and not a result of scripted memories as Greer is postulating.

Second, there are many aspects of Goode’s testimony concerning contemporary exopolitical events that were based on genuine insider information he was receiving about secret space programs. I have written of the extensive circumstantial evidence supporting Goode’s testimony in the book, Insiders Reveal Secret Space Programs and Extraterrestrial Alliances.

An example was that Goode’s claims of slave labor being exploited on corporate colonies on Mars, which he began discussing in early 2015, was almost the exact scenario discussed later by the British Interplanetary Society at a meeting held in June 2015. The meeting was attended by approximately 30 prominent figures in the British academic community, aerospace industry and even members of the intelligence community.

Finally, there is the testimony of William Tompkins whose information first came out in a December 2015 autobiography. Selected by Extraterrestrials, which corroborated much of what Goode had previously revealed. Tompkins provided extensive documents to support his claims, which have subsequently been corroborated in part by Freedom of Information Act documents and the testimonies of three retired Navy officers. Since Greer also provides a critique of Tompkins secret space programs testimony in his November 2016 lecture, I will examine Tompkins claims and Greer’s critique in part two of this series of articles in order to reach a final conclusion regarding Greer’s critique of both Goode and Tompkins.

To conclude thus far, it’s worth noting that Greer has not provided one document or witness/whistleblower testimony to support his claim that Goode is revealing scripted memories about a galactic slave trade involving abducted humans. Greer’s criticism is based solely on his conjectures, which as evidenced in the 1989 Perez de Cueller alien abduction case, are highly questionable. This raises considerable doubt over Greer’s core claim in his November 13 lecture that Goode and Tompkin’s testimonies about secret space programs and egregious extraterrestrial activities, are a prelude to an impending false flag alien event.

Click here for Part 2

© Michael E. Salla, Ph.D. Copyright Notice

Further Reading

7 thoughts on “Are Secret Space Program Disclosures Prelude to a False Flag Alien Invasion?

  1. There are additional issues to be considered here. Greer not citing Hopkins’ research into the de Cueller incident is not a reliable indicator that it was other than a staged military abduction. The timing of the entire incident and just how very perfect it was in stopping disclosure is still highly suspect in my mind. There was something deeply deceptive about that whole event and there’s no one person then, or now, who will give us the truth about it. If Greer doesn’t cite a specific whistleblower testifying that it was staged, imho, surely he has a very good reason.

    While Hopkins research is undoubtedly notable, it should also be pointed out that Hopkins himself disregarded that the experiences described under hypnosis could be distinguished as either real, physical experiences or psychological, “non-physical” experiences. Granted, it’s all real one way or another, but ultimately, the individual must determine where the “bad” is coming from.

    It seems to me that the many years of controversy over Greer’s perspective of there being only good et’s may stem from the actual definition of et’s. A being whose origin is not of this planet, who does not dwell in our dimension/plane of existence, can be defined as extra-terrestrial. A being, human-looking or otherwise, who exists physically within our dimension/plane can be defined as “terrestrial” no matter from what planet they originated.

    From this perspective, I agree with Greer – any extra-terrestrial that is able to travel to our dimension and make themselves appear physically would have no intention of harm whatsoever. They are far, far beyond the duality here. This is evolved consciousness.

    On the other hand, a being that is physical is in the process of evolving, and this is where the “bad” enters the drama. At least that’s my understanding of et vs. terrestrial.

    Greer has been on the “inside of the inside” for a long time now. His experience is vast, and he has produced more documented facts on the ufo issue than anyone else on the planet. If you have followed him, you’d know that he has never swerved from getting as much truth out there as possible.

    If Greer hasn’t provided any testimony supporting his claim about Goode’s scripted memories, can it be expected that he should accept the circumstantial evidence of Goode’s narrative? It may feel like an unwarranted dismissal to some, but then it has to be asked what you yourself have dismissed as unwarranted.

    Goode and Tompkins have independently corroborated many details in their storylines, but this would be inevitable with a cabal-sponsored disclosure. There is everything to be gained by the cabal from a “bad et” propaganda, something that’s been obsessively supported by movies and media for over 60 years.

    I don’t perceive Greer’s comments as an attack but simply his honest observation based on his knowledge and experience. Some possible perspectives that Greer may have: Goode has produced no hard proof, not even a photo of the blue orbs in his room, and in fact, he seems resistant to providing any proof. He’s aligned himself with slick media. And then there is David Wilcock who repeatedly tries to shove it down Goode’s throat that these Blue Avians are the originators of the Law of One, material that, for most people, has to be translated into understandable terms. Why?

    While Greer does tend to emphasize positive aspects to the exclusion of the negative, I can’t blame him. With all that he’s been exposed to, the average person would be hard-pressed to maintain their sanity much less keep focused on the positive. I respect and admire Greer – where would we be without his pioneering work?

    Maybe our best advantage in all of this is to keep a totally open mind about disclosure as it unfolds.

    Like

    • If one reads Budd Hopkins book, there’s no question that the detailed investigation he conducted was very thorough. Not all of the witnesses by the way had hypnotic sessions with Hopkins. That includes Javier de Cueller who did communicate with Hopkins. That’s what makes it difficult to dismiss Hopkins research and conclusions as tainted by methodological problems with hypnosis. However, the problem with Greer is that he totally ignores Hopkins research entirely. He might disagree with Hopkins and point out faults, but to totally ignore it and act as though your own insights and insider contacts makes you the authority on the 1989 Perez de Cueller abduction incident is both very poor scholarship and a manipulation of the data to promote his own agenda which is quite transparent.

      This is a problem I’ve noted before with Greer in my 2006 critique, but he continues to make the same error, e.g., the description of the Perez de Cueller case in his Nov 2015 lecture without noting the extensive research of Hopkins. and also with his clumsy attempt to debunk Corey Goode and William Tompkins without one iota of direct evidence that their secret space program disclosures are contaminated by scripted memories.
      Greer’s debunking of all providing evidence of egregious alien encounters with humans needs to be called out.

      Like

      • Of course, de Cueller’s account was not done under hypnosis, but the point about Hopkins is what else did he disregard in his investigations. He wasn’t even formally trained in hypnosis. So there is some question here – overall, was he “manipulating” data for his own agenda?

        I beg to differ that Greer’s comments were an “attempt” and had they been so “clumsy,” this topic would be moot. If it was an outright debunking, as is Greer’s style, he would have included specific details, but Goode and Tompkins were not the main topic of his discussion.

        Call out who you will, but the bottom line is, we’re are all in this together, sharing the core intent of getting the truth out there. With love and respect — your extensive energy would be best put to use in other directions.

        Like

      • I’ve watched Dr Greer’s lecture and he didn’t exactly debunk Corey Goode and William Tompkins. What he actually said was that he had no doubt that they absolutely believed the information they had been given was true, but that it was possible that that information was scripted and presented to them in a way that made it completely believable to them. In other words, not deliberately misinforming people, just saying what they believed. Isn’t this something that could be feasible given a background in being indoctrinated in MILAB programs from a young age, as in Corey’s case?

        As always, each of us need to apply discernment to the information that’s being given to us by others. Seems to me that we’re better off listening to our own inner voice, rather than letting ourselves be distracted and influenced by the differing opinions of people – that’s exactly what the powers that be want. For the record, I like both Corey Goode and Dr Greer but I’m not going to take everything they say as gospel – only what resonates with me personally as the truth. Both are doing a good job in pushing for Full Disclosure – and that can only be a good thing.

        Like

      • Dr. Greer was very polite in how he debunked aspects of Corey Goode’s testimony that he didn’t agree with, and in his view were scripted with no basis in reality with the purpose of disinforming the public. In Greer’s own words:
        “Some of the things that are being shared as factual secret space program activities that have no other real good points of corroboration, and which I know given how he was in the military abduction programs, and what they are capable of. Some of the experiences he has had I’m concerned have been scripted, and may not reflect anything actually out there in deep space.”

        Like

  2. Dear LAF,

    As i do with everyone, i respect your views because you are sharing a perspective which is ‘true’ for you… and yet i feel a sense to point out a few observations concerning your two posts.

    Correct me if i am misrepresenting something here, but you seem to support Greer’s right to express his views which clearly denounce the experiences of Goode and Tompkins (as well as Dr. Salas’ research) even though ‘soft’ accusations of mind control and scripted memories are used to erode their combined credibility.

    You offer that Greer must have his reasons for his “inside of the inside” denouncing rhetoric based on his vast experience. And yet it was his camp which drew first blood, no? Again, correct me if i’m misspeaking, but i don’t recall seeing Salas, Goode or Tompkins ever accusing Greer of anything… and yet you, dear LAF, display defensiveness when Dr. Salas does what most would do: He responds… to accusations by sharing his views based on his own vast experiences.

    i don’t understand your defensiveness which seems critical of Dr. Salas’ right to merely respond to such grievous accusations. What do you, dear LAF, believe Dr. Sala’s should have done? Remain silent? Would you remain silent if someone denounced your professional efforts on such a grand stage? Should this not be a two-way exchange… or should your obvious bias towards Greer’s perspective while professing neutrality and suggesting we “…keep a totally open mind…” be our barometer for fairness and righteousness?

    “I respect and admire Greer”. Why do you offer this statement? Does it suggest personalization supporting your defensiveness rather than supporting the right of each individual to speak to the issues? Dr. Salas is offering cogent ‘responses’ to Greer’s non-supported claims which again you seem to defend based on Greer ‘having his reasons.’

    Personally, i want to hear from both camps… and so far i am resonating on a heart level with those Dr. Greer has publicly denounced- even if his rhetoric is meant to appear indirect.

    And suggesting “-your extensive energy would be best put to use in other directions” is pure arrogance, my friend. Telling another what they should or should not be doing is just that.

    This is not about personalities and/or heroes. Both Dr. Greer and Dr. Salas are beautiful Beings as well as experienced researchers. Imho, this issue of good vs bad ET’s is timely and necessary- and each should be allowed to share their views without defensiveness.

    Like

  3. Greetings, Dr. Salas,

    i wanted to run something by you concerning Javier Cueller’s abduction as it relates to his decision to abandon his efforts at disclosure.

    i believe you shared that the threat Cueller was confronted with involved the abduction of various world leaders/Heads of State, etc, if he continued in his participation towards imminent disclosure.

    Perhaps i’m not seeing something obvious in posing this question, but i have to wonder why Cueller buckled at what seemed a childish threat which would only have (greatly) supported the disclosure his group was planning?

    In other words, if Cueller has gone on with disclosure which was immediately followed up by the kidnapping of these talking heads of state, would that not somehow affirm to the global community that indeed what Cueller was professing might be true? And then the collective hunt could begin?

    If this abduction truly occurred as reported, it would seem Cueller’s camp dropped the ball at the proverbial goal line, no?

    Admittedly, i do not know all the purported facts in this case but based on the alleged threats and Cueller’s capitulation to fear, something feels disingenuous or missing…

    Am i equally missing something here?

    Blessings.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s