Steven Greer's Rant Re: Kevin Randle

I think Dr Greer is still doing a great job, he has conducted research into the ufo phenomena with an extrinsic perspective and has presented what could very well be fact, and will continue to do so. I think its a bit harsh to label him as a cultist... I mean look at how people jump on the band wagon on what I believe to be absurd stories Prophet Yahweh & Serpo to name two on this board.

Originally posted by Distortion
I think Dr Greer is still doing a great job, he has conducted research into the ufo phenomena with an extrinsic perspective and has presented what could very well be fact, and will continue to do so. I think its a bit harsh to label him as a cultist... I mean look at how people jump on the band wagon on what I believe to be absurd stories Prophet Yahweh & Serpo to name two on this board.

Greer's cultic mindset is demonstrated in many ways nowadays. Rigid
ideology is one example: the notion of only "good" aliens. But, his crazy
rant which mischaracterized a good faith investigation into Lovekin's background certainly seems to be the fruits of a cultic mindset. What
people are missing is that Randle asked publicly way back last June for
help in vetting Lovekin's background. He sought help from Salla, a
Lovekin cousin and others (such as all of us via the high profile setting
of ufoupdates) in clarifying the issues he raised. And, in the process,
it turns out his guesses were basicly correct. It also turns out that
the issues were clarified!

So, what is Greer's gameplaying all about anyway? IMO, he has insulated
himself from a cooperative and participatory process. He is out there
tripping away (via his two projects), in the company of his followers,
cut off from the greater community of people who devote themselves
to unraveling the mystery of UFOs. Calling Randle an enabler of secrecy,
in light of Randle's considerable contributions, merely says something
about Greer's character.

Originally posted by MikeJamieson

Greer's cultic mindset is demonstrated in many ways nowadays. Rigid
ideology is one example: the notion of only "good" aliens. But, his crazy
rant which mischaracterized a good faith investigation into Lovekin's background certainly seems to be the fruits of a cultic mindset. What
people are missing is that Randle asked publicly way back last June for
help in vetting Lovekin's background. He sought help from Salla, a
Lovekin cousin and others (such as all of us via the high profile setting
of ufoupdates) in clarifying the issues he raised. And, in the process,
it turns out his guesses were basicly correct. It also turns out that
the issues were clarified!

So, what is Greer's gameplaying all about anyway? IMO, he has insulated
himself from a cooperative and participatory process. He is out there
tripping away (via his two projects), in the company of his followers,
cut off from the greater community of people who devote themselves
to unraveling the mystery of UFOs. Calling Randle an enabler of secrecy,
in light of Randle's considerable contributions, merely says something
about Greer's character.

MikeJamieson

You are confusing self confidence with a mental illness. You say this as if you were some doctor in psychiatry.

Greer is just a very confident man, he sees things in a way that you and I will probably never understand. Him knowing the information that he does and having all those witnesses increases his self awareness and makes him stronger in his beliefs. This in no way means that he is a Prophet Yahweh, or Raelian kinda guy.

Yes, sometimes he appears to have to much confidence in his research, and that can sometimes get a person in some troubles. But this in no way means that he has gone "crazy" or anything like that.

He is just fed up with the attacks on the subject. He has a personal fight with people who do such things. They want to keep the truth hidden and he won’t let them. He gets angry at those who want to hurt his purpose, and makes sure that they are put in their place. As simple as that, this is a human mechanism; it does not mean that he has gone bunkers.

I will prove this theory with you; I bet you will lash back at me with some thoughtful writings. You will want to put me in my place because I just directed my thoughts at you (mike Jameson). I guess, now it's your turn right? Does this mean that you are a cultist?

MikeJamieson

You are confusing self confidence with a mental illness. You say this as if you were some doctor in psychiatry.

Greer is just a very confident man, he sees things in a way that you and I will probably never understand. Him knowing the information that he does and having all those witnesses increases his self awareness and makes him stronger in his beliefs. This in no way means that he is a Prophet Yahweh, or Raelian kinda guy.

Yes, sometimes he appears to have to much confidence in his research, and that can sometimes get a person in some troubles. But this in no way means that he has gone "crazy" or anything like that.

He is just fed up with the attacks on the subject. He has a personal fight with people who do such things. They want to keep the truth hidden and he won’t let them. He gets angry at those who want to hurt his purpose, and makes sure that they are put in their place. As simple as that, this is a human mechanism; it does not mean that he has gone bunkers.

I will prove this theory with you; I bet you will lash back at me with some thoughtful writings. You will want to put me in my place because I just directed my thoughts at you (mike Jameson). I guess, now it's your turn right? Does this mean that you are a cultist?


Greer promotes a closed (Ideological) system. He denigrates those
who feel that the abduction cases have validity and refuses to work
with those people. (Example: he has also ranted about Salla and
exopolitics because Salla proposes a spectrum of alien agendas and
ethical characteristics. And, I mean he RANTS.....I've seen the personal
communications.) Still, Salla shows respect for Greer.

I'm not aware of asserting that Greer was mentally ill. I expressed
the opinion that he had a "cultic mindset". I'm basing that opinion on
his behavior. His reactivity, defensiveness and aggressiveness towards
those with differing opinions and perspectives. To claim that Randle
and other researchers want to keep this matter hidden is laughable,
in light of their hard work to expose what has been hidden.

Of course, Greer is not so over the top as Yahweh, Rael,....or Richard
Boylan (self appointed representative of the planet earth to the
"star nations). But, he's lost the capacity, it seems, to engage in
a cooperative effort, which is why people like Edgar Mitchell dismiss
his efforts.

Edgar Mitchell on Steven Greer:

www.rense.com...

www.virtuallystrange.net...

Interview: Former White House ASA Specialist Under Eisenhower
Stephen Lovekin by Grant Cameron

www.virtuallystrange.net...

I found this there also.

I don't even pay any attention to Greer and his Groupies at this point.

However, I thought I read somewhere that Greer's whole idea was to provide a padded environment for people who wish to come forward.

Yet this must be a stressful situation for Steven Lovekin.

I have to , as a lover of truth , agree with Kevin Randle 100% ! Why not simply clarify SL's rank in the Armed Services and not misrepresent him as a Brigadier General. Which he is not , not in the Armed Services at least and that's what we are talking about here.

The entire subject matter is his testimony from his time as an enlisted man, to call him Brigadier General Lovekin implies that is his rank in the Armed Services. Very misleading IMHO.

I sometimes wonder what would be accomplished, if these circles of researchers could get along and work together.

Exactly...however when public namecalling is engaged in, the one doing so comes out looking not so professional (i.e. Greer).

Look, I support Greer's project, but on this point, he apparently really lost his cool here...and Randle's (and Greer's own) evidence, is right on the mark....

I'd agree, that to call Randle a "hobbyist", is a deliberate insult.

It would be better to see a more united front in UFOlogy, but many serious researchers differ on what they consider valid cases. In addition, some can't admit when they were simply wrong, even when presented with the evidence to show it... It's a difficult wish, to be sure.

However, eventually the secret will be out, one way or another, and then these guys' efforts will truly be seen for what they are, a service to mankind, to get to the truth of this issue.

I'd agree, that to call Randle a "hobbyist", is a deliberate insult.

Absolutely Gazrok. One of my favorite books is Randles 'Conspiracy of Silence'. I'd like to see Greer write something like that.
Hobbyist. phutey.


[edit on 3/1/06 by longhaircowboy]

www.virtuallystrange.net...

And, Salla offers his own apology. Also, Randle's post above (which
includes Salla quotes) delves further into whistleblower or leaker
testimony.

Originally posted by Gazrok

I sometimes wonder what would be accomplished, if these circles of researchers could get along and work together.

Exactly...however when public namecalling is engaged in, the one doing so comes out looking not so professional (i.e. Greer).

I agree, and it also makes it look like SG is being very defensive for some reason. There may be more to this than we know. But after seeing some other recent arguments between other camps, this doesn't even compare.

I think Randle is just saying that the DP should be specific which branch the man served in having the rank of brigadier general. Without specifying, this leads the reader to assume it was a rank held within a branch of the military that might be involved with the government cover-up, and not the “North Carolina State Guard Association” or what ever. To not be upfront about this deflates the credibility of the witness IMO.

Originally posted by MikeJamieson
www.virtuallystrange.net...

And, Salla offers his own apology. Also, Randle's post above (which
includes Salla quotes) delves further into whistleblower or leaker
testimony.

That is an interesting e-mail, and Randle does have a point about misrepresenting the ranks of the military witnesses. I did not know that Phil Corso was a Lt. Colonel and not a full Colonel as described by several people besides Greer. These are the kinds of details that raise questions about a witness, and need to be vetted.

I had to go back and read exactly what Lovekin was claiming in the DP book. He said he joined the military in 1958, and was transferred to the Pentagon after receiving advanced infantry training. He worked for the Radio Frequency Engineering Agency as a code breaker, and then later he worked in the White House Army Signaling Agency. Then he says “I served under Eisenhower from May of 1959 until he got out of office and then I served under Kennedy until I left the service in August of 1961”. As an enlisted man, during his training, he and his fellow classmates were shown debris that came from the crash of an ET craft in Roswell. This was shown to the class to make them believe what they were being trained for.

So he joins the military and in less than two or three years is working directly with two Presidents and has received a Top Secret clearance and is shown Roswell debris? I find this hard to believe, but the point that Randle is making is this guy was still an enlisted man and not a general when he served, which is true.

[edit on 3/4/2006 by Hal9000]