Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 24, 1994 - Art Bell

02:50:08

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Kevin Randle - UFO Crash at Roswell

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to Art Bell Somewhere In Time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from June 24th, 1994.
	From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you good evening and good morning under a slight, slightly declining, but still very full moon and a Friday night, Saturday morning kind of situation.
	This is Coast to Coast AM, PM on what's almost the weekend.
	Hi, everybody.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Well, there is a lot of news to talk about, and we're going to get to that this morning.
	We're going to get to open line talk radio.
	The OJ situation continues bombshell after bombshell by the day, and today is no exception.
	They've blown the grand jury right out of the water.
	And we'll talk about that.
	The President taking on conservative talk show hosts, specifically Rush Limbaugh, and I'm sure many others, probably this one included.
	We'll talk about that.
	The economy, the dollars in big trouble, we'll talk about that.
	The U.S.
	Supreme Court rules on private property, we'll definitely talk about that.
	The Clinton week... Oh, it was a bad, bad week for the President.
	And we'll talk about that one, too.
	A lot more.
	I've got a lot of news.
	But I have promised you a guest this evening, this morning, and I am going to carry through with that.
	There is a new book out entitled The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell.
	And this is somebody, surely I would have normally scheduled for Dreamland, but because of the timeline, Kevin Randall, Uh, co-author with, uh, Donald Schmidt.
	Uh, Kevin Randall, um, is going to have, and Donald Schmidt, are going to have, uh, some sort of expo or some sort of, uh, get-together up in the, uh, northwest part of the country.
	I believe up in the Portland area, or perhaps in Washington.
	And, uh, so, because of that time, uh, line, we decided to go ahead and have them on this evening.
	Y'all know about Roswell, don't you?
	On the back of the book it says, this is the extraordinary true story of the crash of an alien spacecraft with a crew of five near Roswell, New Mexico, and the great lengths federal agencies went to to keep the news from becoming public.
	By the way, this is soon to be a movie on Showtime.
	The Chicago Sun-Time said the government covered up the crash for security reasons, and the cover-up continues to prevent panic.
	Panic!
	Chester W. Little, these brilliant science writers have demonstrated the validity of this UFO crash.
	He is the Manhattan Project inventor, the first atomic detonator.
	A Dr. Richard Haynes, NASA research scientist, said, Randall and Schmitt's explosive and important book has set an extraordinary high standard of investigative scholarship.
	So, in other words, here are people who have looked into this closely and find, apparently, there to be a case, a strong case, that yes, it really happened by most UFO scholars.
	This incident is considered to be the most authentic, well-documented case of a visit to Earth by aliens.
	Not so intentional, perhaps.
	So, off we go to, I think, Portland, Oregon.
	Kevin Randall, welcome to the program.
	Well, hold on there.
	Let's put you over here and say, now, Kevin Randall, welcome to the show.
	Thank you.
	I think I'm actually in Vancouver.
	Are you in Vancouver?
	I'm across the river from Portland.
	Okay.
	So I'm close.
	Close enough.
	Right.
	Alright, Kevin, first of all, glad to have you on the program.
	I have long had a great amount of curiosity about Roswell.
	I'm curious about yours.
	How did you come to be interested in Roswell?
	I think I have to blame my partner, Don Schmidt, for that.
	He's the Director of Special Investigations for the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies.
	In the late 80s, the Senate determined there was a lot of work still to be done on Roswell.
	Witnesses that needed to be interviewed, people needed to be found.
	And he wanted to bring someone on board who had a military background.
	I had spent four years in the Army as a helicopter pilot, and then 12 years in the Air Force, both in active duty and the active reserve as an intelligence officer.
	And he thought that the military background would help me understand the mindset of the people we would be interviewing.
	1989, we began our search to find out what happened at Roswell, thinking that we would go into the town, spend three or four days there, find the prosaic answer, and then blow out of town with an answer and everybody would be happy.
	It just didn't work that way.
	I'm sure it didn't.
	So, how did it work?
	I mean, you went to Roswell, and what?
	What did you find?
	What were you expecting to find?
	I thought that we would In a lot of the early UFO cases, if you go back to the primary sources, you can find a pretty interesting answer.
	You can find something that makes sense, that doesn't necessitate a belief in extraterrestrial spacecraft.
	And we thought we would be able to do that, find a secret project, something like that, that would explain the case.
	But it didn't happen that way.
	We began talking to the witnesses, such as Bill Brazel Jr., the son of the man who discovered the debris field.
	We sat with him for an hour and a half and listened to what he had to say and discovered that he was telling the truth as he knew it.
	And there was not a prosaic explanation.
	And we expanded the search out from there, finding more witnesses, additional witnesses, people who clearly were in Roslin in 1947.
	The Provost Marshal, for example, the 509th Bomb Group.
	Provost Marshal being akin to the Chief of Police, telling us that the craft was extraterrestrial.
	I mean, that's what he told me personally.
	It was extraterrestrial.
	And they were giving us first-hand testimony, as opposed to the second and third-hand stories we've had in the past, so it became very, very interesting.
	Well, suppose I play like the government, Kevin, and I say, uh-uh, no, um, you know, these are all very fanciful, very interesting stories, but look, it was a balloon.
	You know, we examined the pieces, and it was a balloon.
	The problem with that story is the Air Force offered that, or the Army, actually, at the time, offered that explanation almost immediately.
	Well, we found the Chief of Staff of the 8th Air Force, General Thomas DuBose.
	He said, no, no, the balloon explanation was designed specifically to get the reporters off General Ramey's back, General Ramey being the commander of the 8th Air Force.
	That the balloon explanation had been handed out to the reporters, but that was not the explanation for when it crashed at Rockwell.
	Who said that, please?
	General Thomas J. DuBose.
	How do we know he said that?
	We have him on videotape.
	Oh.
	And he admits this on videotape?
	Yes, he does.
	That's where this story has diverged from your normal UFO story, is that there are a large number of witnesses, and a lot of them who are in positions of power in 1947.
	We can demonstrate it by the records of who they were, and we have those statements on audio and videotape.
	All right.
	Down in New Mexico, Representative Schiff there, of course, has started the GAO investigation.
	I guess looking at the paper trail and the money trail and trying to figure out what really happened because, of course, if it was transported up to Ohio, to Wright-Patt in Ohio, there would be record of the flight, expenditures, I'm sure, and all kinds of things and ways to track it.
	What's going on with that investigation?
	From what we understand, that's exactly what they're doing.
	They're looking at this event in the context of other similar events.
	For example, an experimental aircraft crashes.
	How did the military respond to that?
	What did they do?
	How much money was spent?
	And putting it in that kind of a context, looking to see if they can trace the paper trail.
	We have records from flight crew members, for example, their personal flight rugs showing some of these flights.
	So we can document some of this ourselves.
	And so, from what we understand, the GAO investigation is going to look for those sorts of things, look to see what kind of records should have been created.
	What about, for example, cargo manifests?
	Well, unfortunately, we're dealing with an event that took place 47 years ago, and the records aren't as complete as we'd like them to be.
	For example, I was able to get the morning reports.
	I asked for the morning reports for the entire 509th Bomb Group.
	What I got was the 509th Headquarters Company, And when I went back with a FOIA request, with a more specific request outlining the specific other units, they said those records don't exist.
	So some of the records exist, some of them don't exist.
	But curiously, in 1947, the 509th kept a very complete unit history from about April of 1947 through October.
	So we have all of those.
	We have a phone book that was published by the the five-oh-nine bomb group for
	all the base telephone okay again let me stop you can the final night
	the five-oh-nine bomb group
	did want were they responsible allegedly for transporting what was left of the
	wreck or did they investigate down there what did they do yeah basically yeah they were responsible for
	the discovery of of of the wreckage they are cordoned off the area they cleaned up the wreckage they
	transported a lot The 509th Bomb Group, interestingly, is the same organization that was created to drop the atomic bombs on Japan.
	So we're dealing with highly trained individuals, hand-picked individuals in 1947.
	This is the only atomic strike force in the world at the time, so they're very specific people.
	Okay, and of people in that group, what sort of eyewitness testimonies come forward?
	We have eyewitnesses who were there, who were on the site, said, I was there, I saw this.
	We have one man, unfortunately, we have to identify him by a pseudonym at his request.
	So his testimony is weakened because of that.
	But we have others, for example, Master Sergeant Lewis Rickett, who is the NCOIC of the Counterintelligence Corps, the sergeant in charge, if you will.
	He'd be good.
	He came forward, corroborated some of that testimony for us.
	We have Major Edwin Easley, the Provost Marshal, who talked about the creatures, who talked about the site north of Roswell, who gave us good ideas of what was going on on the site.
	So we have a wide range of individuals.
	That can provide us with eyewitness testimony that leads us to the conclusion that what was found was extraterrestrial.
	Edwin Easley, as I said, told me specifically that it was extraterrestrial in origin.
	Give me an example in some detail, if you can, of what you would consider to be some of the best first-hand testimony of exactly what they said they saw.
	They saw a craft that was more heel-shaped than saucer-shaped.
	Heel, like the heel of a shoe.
	They saw a craft that was 25 to 30 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide, impacted in a slope about 40 miles northwest of Roswell.
	There was one body, one of the flight crew, laying outside the craft up against the cliff.
	One body that was outside the craft near it, and there were three bodies located inside the craft.
	All aliens?
	All aliens.
	Presumably.
	Described roughly how?
	Four and a half to five and a half feet tall.
	Very slender individuals.
	The head slightly larger than a head would be on a human of a similar size.
	The eyes slightly larger.
	Not the black orbs we talk about from the abduction phenomenon, but eyes that are slightly larger than human eyes.
	Heads that are hairless, but covered with a slight peach fuzz, or a fuzz-like matting.
	The arms are very skinny.
	The bones are thin.
	They're described as bird-like.
	Now, the interesting thing is, some of the skeptical communities said, well, what you've got there are people who saw primates or rhesus monkeys garbed in flying suits in test flights, and the men at Roswell were so caught up in the hysteria of the flying disc phenomenon, they didn't recognize These apes, for what they were.
	And our answer is, if you take a look at the chimpanzee, the head is not larger, it's smaller.
	The eyes are not larger, they're smaller.
	They have big ears.
	They have lots of hair.
	That's not what was seen at Roswell.
	The people were very specific in what they saw.
	All right.
	I want you to hold on for just a moment, Kevin.
	We'll come right back to you.
	OK.
	A little bit of business.
	My guest is Kevin Randall.
	He has co-authored the book The truth about the UFO crash at Roswell.
	and uh... you're going to hear what most consider to be the best evidence this morning
	you're listening to art bell somewhere in time tonight featuring coast to coast a m from june twenty
	fourth nineteen ninety four
	now uh... kevin's listening i know in this just came in on the associated press
	Astronomer Carl Sagan says that people believe in things like alien abductions because they don't know much about science.
	During a conference of people who debunk paranormal claims, Sagan said that scientific illiteracy is widespread.
	In other words, he's saying we're dummies.
	He pointed to studies that show up to one half of U.S.
	adults don't know the Earth revolves around the sun once a year.
	He asked why newspapers have daily astrology columns but no daily science columns.
	Most of the 740 people at the conference in Washington this weekend are psychologists.
	The annual conference held by the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal out of Buffalo, New York.
	So there you go.
	Carl Sagan would be a star indeed to that group.
	And Kevin, are you there?
	Yes.
	What do you think about that?
	I think that Carl Sagan's overstating his case.
	What we're conducting at Roswell, for example, is not a scientific investigation, but is more akin to a criminal investigation.
	We're searching for the evidence for science, so that they can take a look at it.
	But they claim to be looking at skeptics or debunkers at the UFO phenomena or claims of the paranormal, but they're not interested in looking at the evidence.
	They know this can't possibly be, therefore it is not, and it doesn't matter what we present in the way of evidence.
	For example, we can prove What UFOlogists have said for years, the United States government had a secret project to investigate UFOs that was not Project Blue Book.
	You go back and look at the regulations, Air Force Regulation 200-2, dated August of 1954, tells me as a former Air Force intelligence officer, if I get a UFO report from a flight crew, I don't send it to Project Blue Book.
	I sent it to the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, and they determined whether or not it goes on the Blue Book, and a lot of times, for reasons we don't know, they didn't go on to Project Blue Book.
	So we can prove the government had the secret project.
	We have documentation to prove quite a bit of what we say.
	Alright, have they still got that today, Kevin?
	In other words, that...
	That secret parallel investigation, is that still going on today?
	Blue Book was dropped in 1969.
	No, not Blue Book.
	But the other investigation continues on because we've run into people who have submitted UFO reports or have been investigated by government officials after 1969.
	So yes, that secret investigation continues.
	Part of it was disguised as Project Moondust.
	We can prove Project Moondust existed when New Mexico Senator Jeff Bingaman queried the Air Force about Project Moondust, which was designed specifically to recover material of unknown origin returning from space or that of foreign origin.
	And the unknown origin clearly can be UFOs.
	He was told no such project ever existed.
	Moondust never existed.
	When the documents were given to the Air Force, they said, we'd like to amend our last statement.
	We've got the Air Force lying to a United States Senator about a project that clearly existed.
	When we queried them about it, they said that project no longer exists, but we know from other documents the name has been changed because Moondust was compromised.
	What do you think they have concluded after all this time?
	Do you have anybody telling stories about the ongoing investigation?
	We have very little information about that other than the documentation we have from Project Moondust.
	And Moondust clearly is looking for stuff.
	If Roswell took place, they would assume that it could happen again.
	And Moondust, because of its mandate to recover returning space debris of foreign origin or
	unknown origin, clearly could cover another crash of an alien spacecraft if it happened.
	That would be encompassed in part of Moondust's mandate.
	There's no doubt in our mind, and I say our, Don Schmidt's in my mind, that what happened
	in 1947 was a recovery of an alien spacecraft, and it set the tone for UFO research from
	that point onward.
	Alright, is there any evidence that since Roswell, there has been another crash of any substance at all, or is that the one?
	This is the best documented because of the number of witnesses and the documentation available.
	But we have other information.
	For example, there is beginning to build a body of evidence for a crash near Kingman, Arizona in 1953.
	There's another one near Las Vegas.
	In 1962.
	Oh?
	And what's interesting about this one is the Air Force actually broke the sighting into two parts.
	Part of it over Utah, part of it over Nevada.
	So they have two separate sightings, but if you take a look at it, it's one single event.
	And the Air Force card from the Nellis Air Force Base said it was seen on radar, but there was no visual sighting.
	If you go back to the Las Vegas Sun for, I believe it's April 19th, 1962, The banner headline says, brilliant red explosion, flares in Las Vegas sky.
	And there are eyewitnesses who talk about this, including the staff photographer of the newspaper at the time, who saw this thing in the sky as it detonated.
	Well, as it actually exploded in the sky.
	Exploded in the sky, okay.
	Well, meteorites, returning meteorites and so forth, do that sort of thing.
	What makes it a UFO crash?
	Because meteorites are not picked up on radar, and B, if we track this thing based on the eyewitness testimony from Utah to Reno to Las Vegas, Meteors don't make big, looping turns over Nevada.
	Oh, they definitely don't do that, right.
	And see, what's interesting, as I say, the case from Nevada is dated using the Greenwich Mean Time.
	Do we have any craft on the ground?
	Bodies?
	Physical evidence of that?
	Not from that at this point.
	We're going to begin our research.
	There's another case from Ubatuba, Brazil in 1957, where bits of metal were picked up and analyzed
	by the Brazilian government, who said it was magnesium of a purity unobtainable at Earth at the time.
	Those, that metal was analyzed again by Condon, who said, well, the sample we looked at wasn't that pure,
	therefore all the samples were not that pure, which is a conclusion that scientifically
	Alright, so we're at the bottom of the hour, Kevin.
	We've got to pause here.
	So, in conclusion for this half hour, Roswell is definitely the best documented case.
	Yes?
	Absolutely.
	Alright, hold on.
	Kevin, we'll be right back to you.
	This is Coast to Coast AM from the High Desert.
	This is Premier Networks.
	That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM on this Somewhere in Time.
	This is a test.
	This is very informative.
	I'm going to show you how to do it.
	You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from June 24th, 1994.
	From the high desert we come.
	Hi, everybody.
	My guest is Kevin Randall.
	He's co-authored a book called The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell.
	Do you want to know the truth?
	Well, I do.
	I think most of us do, who are involved in this subject.
	Since it is the best documented case of a crash, of recovery of bodies, it makes sense to follow it, doesn't it?
	So, back now to Kevin Randall.
	Kevin, are you there?
	Yes, I am.
	Good.
	So, here it is, the best evidence, I suppose, of actual contact.
	Where do we go from here with it, Kevin?
	What we have to do is convince people like Carl Sagan, convince the journalistic community, that this is a case that deserves investigation.
	We have to convince them the evidence is strong enough to do so.
	I think we've done it.
	We can prove something crashed at Roswell.
	The documentation is there to prove that.
	We can prove the military covered it up.
	General DuBose's statement proves that.
	We believe, based on the eyewitness testimony of the people we've talked to, that it was extraterrestrial.
	But I don't think we have to make that case.
	All we have to do is prove that something happened, and it was covered up by the government.
	I don't see it that way, Kevin.
	I could understand, for example, they would have an experimental craft up, and it would crash.
	Then it would make sense.
	The government certainly would cover it up.
	So, it does seem to me the burden of proof is that it was extraterrestrial in origin, not that there was a crash, because that could easily have occurred.
	I think the point is there was a cover-up that took place, and it persists today.
	We've tried to research as carefully as possible all the alternative explanations.
	We looked into the Northrop flying wing, for example, because one researcher suggested that was what crashed there.
	They found it couldn't possibly have been.
	We looked at the rocket research out of white sand.
	Nothing there to account for it.
	We looked into the balloon launchings of various projects, including Project Mogul, which was this idea that if you could put an instrument package into this acoustical level in the atmosphere, like the acoustical level in the ocean, they could monitor Soviet atomic experiments.
	And they couldn't discover a way of doing that, and they couldn't find the acoustical level, so Project Mogul doesn't exist.
	We looked at the alternative explanations and could find nothing that would account for the crash in the right time frame, the types of debris that was talked about, and the bodies.
	When you get to the bodies, it becomes very important.
	Well, then it becomes a different sort of story.
	I suppose on the part of the government, I simply concede to you, well, yes, there was a crash there.
	But, you know, it was one of ours.
	I mean, so then the burden of proof, really, once you acknowledge there was a crash, and I believe there was, The burden of proof is that it was of extraterrestrial origin.
	I guess what I'm trying to say is we must convince the journalistic community here is an event that deserves research, and that we can prove the crash took place, and we can prove the cover-up.
	Why does the cover-up persist today?
	Why can't we get the proper answers?
	When they present documentation, it does not cover the events at Roswell.
	Yeah, that's a good question.
	It of course is.
	I mean, with all the brouhaha, why let it continue if it was something that was secret then and certainly would not be now?
	Yeah, that's our point.
	What would we have been testing in 1947 that would be persisting as a secret today?
	Even the early crashes of the SR-71 and some of those are still partially classified.
	But we can get documentation and we can write those things off.
	We can realize what's going on.
	With Roswell, it's completely missing.
	For example, the Project Blue Book files.
	Lots of these kinds of stories early on in the UFO phenomenon are part of the Project Blue Book files.
	There's no mention of Roswell.
	There's no file for Roswell in Project Blue Book.
	Why not?
	We can find some documentation that relates to it.
	There's an FBI document where J. Edgar Hoover, in his own handwriting, suggests something about the discs recovered, and the Army wouldn't let the FBI see it.
	Now, there are alternative explanations for that handwritten note, but it opens the door for us.
	Well, let me ask specifically, you say, from J. Edgar Hoover specifically, what did he say?
	How close did he really get to suggesting they were something else?
	What happened was, The Brigadier General Shogan, who was the Assistant Chief of Staff for Air Intelligence in 1947, had asked the FBI to investigate the backgrounds of people who saw flying saucers.
	The FBI thought they should do that.
	In fact, there was a number of endorsements.
	This document is dated 10 July 1947, not long after the events in Roswell.
	Hoover, in his handwritten endorsement, says, I would do this, but before we do it, I want to see I want complete access to discs recovered, for example, and then there's this ambiguous little statement, we don't know whether it's SWLA or what it says, but he says, in the LA case, for example, the Army grabbed it, wouldn't let anybody have it for even a cursory examination.
	So we've got a statement that talks about discs recovered and the fact the Army grabbed it, which fits the Roswell Exactly.
	But it's ambiguous enough that we can't say, well, here's proof positive in J. Edgar Hoover's own handwriting proving that there were crash-flying saucers.
	But it opens the door for that.
	General Twining, in September of 1947, issued a report based on, again, information submitted by Shogun that said that the first paragraph says that the phenomenon being talked about is something real, not illusionary or fictitious, meaning flying this.
	Later on, he says, due consideration must be given to the fact that there is no exhibits in the form of crash-recovered debris.
	But what he's saying is, in that specific sample provided by Shogun, there was nothing that alluded to a crashed flying saucer.
	But that does not mean that Twining wasn't aware of the events in Roswell.
	Curious, Kevin, where might these discs be today?
	Surely we would not have disposed of them.
	We would have them someplace or another.
	Our best evidence is that the material originally went to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Wright Field at the time.
	Yes.
	We have been told now that they've been moved to Nevada.
	Not Area 51, not Dreamland, but a special base in central Nevada.
	We haven't been able to corroborate that.
	That's just what we've been told.
	Hmm.
	Well, as you know, maybe you don't know, I'm literally almost at Dreamland.
	Not quite at Dreamland, it's just over the hill from me here.
	And we see a lot of things flying in the skies, and for a long time there were very persistent reports, even some eyewitness testimony, of there being disks at an area called S4, which is just sort of an adjacent area to Dreamland.
	Could it have been those?
	The one thing we have to keep in mind is that area you're referring to, of course, is also an area where there's a lot of Legitimate experimental aircraft.
	That's right.
	So the sightings might be of nothing more sinister than our own experimentation.
	There might be something else going on there as well.
	That may be, Kevin, but if so, then our own experimentation, as documented with a lot of video cameras and so forth, is of circular craft that are able to do things that you would associate with Flying saucers.
	Oh, absolutely, absolutely.
	I'm just saying, we have to keep in mind, it is possible that it is our own experimentation, but it may not be.
	Our own experimentation with our aircraft?
	With our aircraft, but it may be, as has been alleged, that it's experimentation with something that was captured from the aliens, or experimentation of an alien type craft based on the technology recovered at Roswell, among other places.
	That's right.
	So it's always, there's those distinct possibilities.
	But we have to keep in the back of our minds that the secrecy may just revolve around the fact that it's our own experimentation and we don't want that sort of thing leaking out into the general public at this time.
	Of course not.
	We have to keep that in the back of our minds.
	But there's always this other intriguing possibility.
	And if we can establish that Roswell is extraterrestrial, Then those sorts of speculations take on an added dimension, because we've already leaped the first hurdle, which is to get the craft here from another planet.
	We've proven that.
	Now it's distinctly possible that we do, in fact, have a craft, and we are, in fact, experimenting with it.
	Alright, so how do we blow the lid off it?
	I mean, if you're convinced, you sound like a rational person to me.
	Thank you.
	As a result of all your investigation, are you absolutely convinced, or just about convinced, or what is your confidence level That Roswell was extraterrestrial in origin?
	There is no doubt in my mind that Roswell was extraterrestrial.
	And it's based on talking to the eyewitnesses, it's based on trying to find an alternative explanation that just does not fit all the facts.
	When we bring all the facts into play, there is no other explanation other than extraterrestrial.
	And I think we need to convince the journalistic community and the scientific community that this is an area that deserves further attention.
	It's not the realm of the weirdo or the nutcase, but it's something that clearly happened, and we've got the eyewitness testimony to prove it.
	Now we must move on to finding better documentation for it.
	Alright, fine.
	So we've established all this.
	The government probably knows about it, probably is covering it up.
	And here we sit like a person with a can of some of the fine tuna that I sell, turning it over and over without a can opener, trying to figure out how to get it open.
	So how do we get the can open?
	Well, as I said, one of the ways we get it open is to convince the media to look into it and start pressing it.
	If we cannot convince the media, we'll never be able to create the pressure for Congress to act.
	If we can blow it off by saying, well, you know, it's just a bunch of kooks and we don't have to worry about it, or I'm too sophisticated to believe in this stuff, we're never going to get anywhere.
	But if we can convince people that the level of research is high enough and the documentation is good enough, then we can apply that pressure to the proper individuals in Congress.
	And Congressman Schiff and the GAO investigation is certainly a step in the right direction.
	The work being done by Senator Jeff Bingaman and other senators to find out what's going on with Moondust is a step in the right direction.
	All right, what about Hazel O'Leary, who has released all this information in the administration about past atomic experiments and plutonium injections and all the rest of the horrible stuff?
	They've released that, so then why not this?
	That's a very good question.
	We think that part of the problem may be they're still concerned about a panic, And I say, I don't see how that can be, because if they told us tomorrow that the flying saucers were real, they're extraterrestrial, and one crashed at Roswell, your immediate reaction might be to panic, but then you'll say, you know, this happened 47 years ago, how has it adversely affected my life?
	But if one lands at the Pentagon tomorrow, we're not going to have that nice cushion to fall back on.
	Well, I've done a talk show now, this round of talk shows anyway, for about nine years, Kevin, and I can tell you something.
	If the news got out that, indeed, the ETs are here, that perhaps it leads back toward the possibility that they are, in effect, our creators or manipulators.
	Kevin, I'm telling you, I talked to the religious folks all across this country.
	They'd fill these little aliens, if they still existed, with so much lead that they'd be nothing but a big donut hole.
	I'm not kidding you.
	There would be panic.
	There would be a lot of anger.
	And a lot of times when you talk about these topics, Kevin, there's a lot of anger from these people.
	So I don't discount people saying, oh no, there would be panic and social disruption.
	Oh, I agree.
	I agree.
	But I think that one of the things we have to remember is if they announced that we had aliens from 1947 on, We've got a cushion of some sort.
	It's not affected me adversely since 1947.
	That's true.
	Why does it suddenly affect me now?
	If they landed at the Pentagon tomorrow, we do not have that cushion.
	I think the level of panic would be that much higher, geometrically.
	Right.
	But what about all of the years of reports of abductions?
	You know, if those are true, Kevin, that would seem to suggest that we are aware of what's going on, or maybe we've made a deal with the aliens, or whatever it is, And they'd be very unlikely to reveal something like that.
	Oh, absolutely correct, and that may be part of our problem.
	Or they haven't figured out the codes, if you will, of the spacecraft.
	They don't know how to make it work yet.
	They don't know how to create the metal.
	We have descriptions of metal at the debris field at Roswell that when you picked it up and you folded it up into a ball, it would unfold itself without a sign of a crease.
	What does that do to the body shop?
	The next time you have a fender bender in the car, you back up and the fender repairs itself.
	There are all kinds of questions that need to be addressed about what would be the ramifications after we learn the truth.
	But at some point, we're going to know the truth.
	Something is going to happen and it's going to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
	And yet there are people today who know that we never landed on the moon.
	It was all a Hollywood trick.
	Yeah, Kevin, if you had the proof in your hand, I love asking this question, the irrefutable proof in your hand, would you immediately release it?
	I would, yes.
	You would?
	Absolutely.
	And suppose I came to you just before you were about to have your big news conference, and I said, Kevin, I'm from the government, agency I can't even talk about, we understand what you have, We have concluded over the years that to release such information would be detrimental to the national security and we're asking you not to release what you've got.
	I say prove it.
	Prove it's detrimental to the national security.
	Well, we can sit you down and let you read all the reports we've got from our psychologists showing that there would be social disruption I'm aware that the Brookings Institution, for example, in 1962 did a study.
	They took 15 different disciplines and asked them, theologians, anthropologists, economists, what would happen if there was a confrontation between people of Earth and an alien civilization?
	Not necessarily a face-to-face confrontation, but the fact we learned about it through radio astronomy.
	And of those disciplines, 14 of them said it would be disastrous to our civilization.
	But isn't that also the way our civilization grows and becomes better?
	Grows and becomes better.
	I guess it would be growth of a sort.
	Kevin, hold on just a moment.
	We'll come right back to you.
	uh... my guest is kevin randall and he is called author of the truth about the ufo crash at
	roswell and directly will get back to him
	you're listening to our bills somewhere in time Tonight, featuring Coast to Coast AM, from June 24th, 1994.
	Kevin Randall, author of The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell, back on the air.
	Hi, Kevin.
	Hi, how's it going?
	Before I lose track of things here, what have you got going on this weekend?
	Where is it?
	What is it?
	Well, we're giving a lecture on what we've learned about Roswell, including some of the new testimony that we've developed in the last two or three weeks to corroborate some of the things we've found at the Red Lion Lloyd Center in downtown Roswell.
	Portland, Oregon.
	It starts at 2 o'clock on Sunday afternoon.
	And Mike Lineman is going to be there as well, talking about some of his research.
	And Don Schmidt, my partner from the Center, is going to be there.
	So there's three of us.
	It'll be... Oh, that's wonderful.
	I've interviewed Michael Lineman, and he is a great guy, and he's going to be there too.
	So again... Absolutely, yes.
	All right.
	Again, where is it?
	How do people get in?
	What do they have to cough up?
	Well, it says here they have to cough up $15, and for that you get all three of us talking about our research, and it's at the Red Lion Lloyd Center in downtown Portland, Oregon.
	And for ticket information in this area, they can call 224-8499.
	All right.
	Wanted to get that in for sure.
	Appreciate that.
	Now, I guess what I'd like to do shortly is turn it over to the audience and let them ask you some hard questions.
	You obviously have done a lot of research.
	This is a pretty good-sized book you've got here, Kevin, no question about it, and there's a lot of documentation in here.
	Have you had a colleague, a scientific colleague, sit down, read this book, and give you a good evaluation of it?
	I mean, do they come away saying, oh my God, it really happened at Roswell, or what did people come up with?
	It kind of depends on their persuasion and what they're looking for, but what we've tried to do is put together a case that's not necessarily a scientific case, but more of the kind of case you would present going into a court of law.
	We're in a search for the proper evidence for the scientific community.
	I don't think we've come up with the evidence the scientific community can take into the laboratory and analyze, but we found the kind of evidence that endorses this sort of an investigation.
	So that's kind of where we are.
	We've had colleagues with the Scientific Bend take a look at the information.
	They have suggested ways that we could have improved the work.
	One of the complaints was the footnotes didn't contain enough data about how the interviews were conducted and whether or not they were on audio or videotape.
	And almost all the interviews we conducted were on either or.
	Audio or videotape.
	So it's not just necessarily you have to take our interpretation of what somebody said to us in a private conversation.
	Do you have any plans to include those interviews in an audio tape presentation or in a videotape presentation?
	There are some videotape presentations out that include parts of those interviews.
	The Fund for UFO Research, for example, has one called the Recollections of Roswell Part 2.
	That they sell that has quite a bit of that kind of material in it.
	All right, Kevin, I'm going to break here and turn you over to the audience when we come back, all right?
	Okay, sounds good.
	All right, Kevin Randall, author of, co-author of, The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell, back after the news.
	The trip back in time continues with Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
	more somewhere in time coming up.
	I'm going to be doing a video on the new
	version of the game.
	I'm going to be doing a video on the new version of the game.
	Tonight, featuring Coast to Coast AM, from June 24, 1994.
	Hi, everybody.
	Good morning.
	I'm Art Bell.
	My guest is Kevin Randall.
	Who is he?
	He's co-author of The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell, the best documented case of an alien crash on Earth.
	And I'm going to give you a chance to talk to him here in a moment.
	I just got a fax in, and I guess 2020 did a pretty good piece on the new case of the flesh-eating, ate-my-face-off, Strep A. And you might be interested in this.
	The Center for Disease Control predicts 1,000 new cases of that this year.
	But experts are saying the cases will exceed 7,000 this year.
	Hmm.
	Always been around.
	Nothing to worry about.
	I'm from the government, here to help you.
	For Kevin Randall, in a related, sort of a related question, did any of the personnel who came into contact with any alien crew members, alive or dead, contract any new virus or bacterial infection, and could any new diseases we have appearing today be a result of this contact?
	Kevin, what do you think?
	We have no evidence that any of the people who came in contact with the bodies manifested any type of illness or disease that would be related directly to that contact.
	In fact, one man had sent me a letter and suggested that because there were no outbreaks of a new disease that swept the planet clean of humanity, it proved that the Roswell didn't happen.
	There are many diseases that we have that are species-specific.
	Reptiles can't get certain diseases that affect mammals.
	Mammals can't... That strikes me as an absolutely ridiculous statement on the face of it.
	Which one?
	Well, the one you just gave.
	The fact that no disease spread itself quickly across the planet, wiping out mankind, proves they didn't come here.
	That's... That's... I agree.
	I agree.
	Ridiculous.
	I agree that's a ridiculous statement, but that was his premise.
	And my response was that There are diseases that are very species specific and the fact that we didn't contract some alien bug does not prove that it did or did not happen.
	All it means is that it did not happen.
	We have no evidence that any of the diseases that are affecting The human race today are a result of something that happened at Roswell 47 years ago.
	All right, Kevin, I've got a bank full of people who want to talk to you here.
	Are you ready?
	I'm all set.
	Okay, here we go.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Good evening or morning.
	Where are you calling from, please?
	Hello there.
	Well, that's a strange start.
	On the toll-free line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Good morning.
	Yeah, good morning, Art.
	Hi, where are you, sir?
	Kansas City, Missouri.
	Kansas City, yes sir.
	Yeah, a place where the barbeque's hot, but Art Bale's show is hottest.
	That's kind.
	Oh well, actually I was just curious about something your guest had mentioned earlier, and I don't know if you picked up on this, but he mentioned something to the effect that most people know today that the Moonshot was just a Hollywood production.
	No, I didn't say that.
	What I said was there are people today who believe that the moonshots that are landing on the moon were nothing more than a Hollywood production.
	It's a very small number of people, but there are people who believe that.
	Oh, okay.
	I'm sorry.
	I misunderstood you.
	Well, anyway, I'll get to my question.
	Do we know where these aliens came from at all?
	Or, you know, is it basically where just the ships crashed and the government got the technology, but they don't care where they came from?
	All right, yeah, that's a good question.
	Do we have any idea?
	I don't have any idea.
	I think that if the government could answer that question, they would love to have an answer.
	The only clue that's ever come out of the UFO phenomenon, of course, is the Betty Hill star map, which is a result of her abduction back in 1961, and Marjorie Fish attempting to find what section of the galaxy it came from.
	Suggesting they may have been from Zeta-1, Zeta-2, Reticuli.
	But I don't think that's a very good clue.
	What happened at Roswell, we, meaning we civilians outside the government, have no clues about where they came from.
	Alright, very good.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall, hi.
	Hi Art, Stan here in Cocoa Country.
	Yes, San Diego.
	We had some vibrations today before I asked my question, about between 5 and 10 after 10 in the morning.
	Everything was calm, and all of a sudden, my windows, I have huge windows, four separate huge windows, rattled and vibrated like a hundred bass drums for about three seconds.
	So the Earth moves in California again?
	No, no, there was not an earthquake.
	What was it?
	Don't know.
	Miramar Air Force Base said, we don't know.
	All the news stations said, we don't know, but we know it wasn't an earthquake.
	Unidentified moving vibrations.
	There you go, we've had that before.
	Anyway, my question, um, It's so hard for me to understand why, and the key phrase that you used, you haven't presented them the right evidence.
	You said something like that, right Kevin?
	For the scientific community, the evidence they require is somewhat different than the evidence we've been searching for.
	We need to prove the case so we know where to look for the proper evidence, I guess.
	Okay, so how do they explain I mean, Oswald's been around forever.
	I can't believe there haven't been 10,000 scientists that aren't curious.
	But how do they explain the absolute evidence of the pyramids and that they could not have been built by anybody here?
	All right, thank you.
	The pyramids.
	Have you looked into that at all, Kevin?
	Not really, no.
	My undergraduate degree was in anthropology, but my area of emphasis was Mesoamerican and the Central Andes as opposed to Egyptology.
	But I know that I have seen the theories That have been presented lately about how the pyramids were constructed in Egypt, and the theories that they're being presented seem to make some sense about how they did it.
	And I know that they just uncovered, not too long ago, the remains of the city at the base of one of the major pyramids.
	That's right.
	It was not the slave labor we've been led to believe, but actually a public works project, if you will.
	So there's evidence that needs to be looked at and examined, and I think that we need to take A skeptical eye to all the evidence and look at it rationally and try to determine whether or not the explanations being offered make sense to us rather than reject them out of hand.
	Okay, Kevin, have you looked at all at the work of Richard Hoagland with respect to Mars and the structures on Mars and the mathematical similarities to the pyramids here on Earth and now His latest work with regard to the moon, have you looked at all that?
	I've heard him on the radio, and I've read his book, because I found it fascinating.
	And I think that the face on Mars, for example, I mean, there is an area where it demands that we take another look at it.
	Unfortunately, I like to joke about the reason we don't know more about it is because the aliens blew up the Mars Observer, so we wouldn't have the answers.
	But I think that his work is very interesting.
	Well, it is because it would suggest that either an ancient alien civilization visited here, or in the view of some, Kevin, there was a prior civilization, or even many of them, here on Earth that may have at one time colonized Mars.
	And I think that if we found the artifact on Mars to be in fact a manufactured artifact, That would be pretty much evidence that somebody was traveling through space at some point.
	Yes, but... And it's clearly not us, because we can't do it.
	Well, there are a lot of people who speculate that there have been prior civilizations, that there have been cycles here on Earth when man has come and man has gone, generally because of polar shifts and other great Earth changes that have occurred.
	What do you think of that theory?
	Again, it's an interesting theory, and I know that I used to study what was called oops, out-of-place things, out-of-place artifacts.
	And these were nails found in solid rock, or the spark plug found in the geode, that sort of thing.
	Things that clearly shouldn't be there, but are in fact there.
	And how do you explain a nail being pulled out of a block of granite, for crying out loud?
	If the nail wasn't dropped, if the granite was forming millions of years ago, which would be suggestive of that.
	There's the tracks of the human and the dinosaur that they have in the bed,
	the riverbed in Texas. And I've heard, I've heard theories that seem plausible
	that the the dinosaur walked through the place, that the area solidified,
	later on it softened up and then a human walked through it and left its footprint. So it
	looks like the footprint of a human with the footprint of a dinosaur
	was another type of dinosaur that had a
	human looking footprint.
	You know, they're interesting things that I think we need to look at without an idea to, well, it can't possibly be, therefore it is not.
	All right.
	What about the source of criticism of Carl Sagan in this AP story I read you about abductions?
	Have you looked at the abduction phenomenon?
	And if so, what kind of credibility do you think it has?
	I think that there is some good credibility to the abduction phenomenon.
	I also think there's some very poor research that's been done.
	If you go back and you read some of the earlier works on abductions, you see that the technician or the hypnotherapist has asked very leading questions and has led the witness in a lot of directions.
	We know from our current studies about the false memory syndrome, where you can actually induce memories in people.
	By trying to convince them that events took place.
	So our level of research, as researchers, must increase and must improve so that those kinds of criticisms can't be directed at us.
	But I did it.
	I looked at one of the abduction cases from 1973.
	I looked at it in 1976.
	And the thing that's always bothered me about this is the number of people from the same family abducted.
	And the oldest daughter said that she thought the abduction took place at 1 o'clock in the morning.
	But the mother told me that they'd filed a police report because they thought there was somebody messing with the house, some kind of an intruder.
	Although I hesitate to use that term.
	And I went and found the police report.
	The police report had been filed at 1240 a.m.
	There's no way that the youngest daughter could be abducted at one o'clock in the morning if they were conscious enough to make a police report at 1240.
	But then I discovered the youngest daughter was Nearsighted, and the clock that she saw, the hands were almost the same size.
	So if you didn't get a look at the clock, five minutes after twelve looks an awful lot like one o'clock in the morning.
	And that's the kind of a detail that somebody inventing a story isn't going to make up.
	So something clearly happened to this family, and I don't know what it is, and it seems to fit in the abduction phenomenon.
	So there's some interesting cases.
	I don't think it's nearly as prevalent Well, it winds back into what I was saying earlier, Kevin.
	If the abductions are real, then the implication clearly would be, if you believe in the government cover-up, that they're well aware of the abductions.
	So then, I think, well, if that's true, there's no chance at all that they're ever going to tell us the truth, or that we're going to be able to dig it out, because they've made a deal, and the chances of their revealing that Um, are almost zero.
	Slim and none.
	Given that scenario, I think you're probably right.
	But the decision can be taken out of their hands.
	And of course, if one lands at the United Nations, then the decision is taken out of their hands.
	But if there is no deal between our government and the aliens to allow the abduction to take place, and if the abduction phenomenon isn't as widespread as it seems to be, Then there may be no deal and we may be able to dig something out.
	That's true.
	Uh, Kevin, hold on just a moment.
	You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time tonight, featuring coast to
	coast am from June 24th, 1994.
	all right back now to my guest kevin randall and your questions
	Kevin, are you there?
	Yes, I am.
	All right.
	Let us go to the telephone, Kevin.
	On the first-time caller line, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Yes, sir.
	Am I allowed to be on the air?
	You are on the air.
	I'm on the air right now?
	Yes.
	When I say, you're on the air, that's what it means.
	You there, sir?
	I guess he's not.
	Turn down your radio.
	Yes, that's right.
	And turn on your mind.
	On the Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hello.
	Hello, Art.
	Another good show.
	This is Dan from the University District of Seattle.
	Yes, Dan.
	I have one question I had was, now, did they recover, was one of the aliens alive, and did they have him, kept him alive for a number of years, is that correct?
	We have heard that information.
	We have no first-hand corroboration for it.
	There are a number of second-hand witnesses.
	Frankie Rowe, for example, whose father was a firefighter in Roswell in 1947, said that her father said one was alive and that they put it, that they drove it out of, off the impact site and to the base hospital.
	But I have to stress, we have no first-hand corroboration for that.
	We've also heard that one survived a number of years after this event and died in 52, I think.
	Again, we have no first-hand corroboration for that at this time.
	Yeah, I'd heard that also, and in light of that, it's possibly conceivable that they did find out where they're from, but they're just not, nobody knows for sure, huh?
	There may be, even if the entire crew was killed, there may have been clues in the ship that would have given us a clue about where they came from, some kind of star maps or something like that.
	We don't have access to that information, but the government, the people who are responsible for the retrieval, may have that information.
	We just don't.
	Okay, well, thanks for being on the show.
	Thanks for the call, and have a good morning.
	On the first-time caller line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Yes, sir.
	Hi.
	Where are you, please?
	I'm calling from Montreal, Quebec.
	Montreal, Quebec.
	All right, great.
	In Kennedy, yeah.
	Yes, sir.
	No.
	Many, many years ago, when I was a young lad, there were two publications running simultaneously.
	One was Reader's Digest, which is still running.
	The other one was a small book, the same format, called Coronet.
	All right.
	And somewhere around 1952, 1953, 1954, they ran a small color pictorial in the back of Coronet, which was a common feature with the magazine at that time.
	And did a whole feature on Roswell.
	Now, I don't know whether your guest is aware of that or not, or maybe he could find some archives to go back to that.
	I live in Iowa myself, and the University of Iowa has all those magazines there.
	We'd heard the story that one of the issues had been dealt with, that the crash had disappeared completely.
	So we went back through them in the 40s and looked to see if there was anything missing, and there wasn't.
	I hadn't heard that there was something like that from Coronet in the early 50s, you say?
	Well, I hope so.
	I remember seeing the issue, and it fascinated me.
	The issue was around my family home for many years.
	As a matter of fact, a few years ago when I was back home, I looked for it, but it had gone.
	It had probably been thrown out, but I know when I was a young lad, somewhere between Well, let's say 10, 12 years of age, which would have, I guess, put it at 46, 56, maybe 56, 58.
	Later 50s then.
	Yeah.
	Though that magazine exists, I know they have it at the University of Iowa Libraries, I think one of the first things I'm going to do next week is go down there and take a look at the issues and see if I can find that.
	I haven't heard that, and I would think that if something like that had happened, Prior to this point, somebody would have mentioned it and it would have come forward.
	But it deserves further research.
	Exactly.
	I swear.
	I am telling the truth.
	It exists.
	Caller, I'm sure he will follow up on it.
	Absolutely.
	Could I just find out how I could get a hold of your book?
	Okay, that's a good question.
	Thank you.
	From Montreal.
	How can he get your book?
	I can call M. Evans & Company in New York at area code 212-688-2810, and they can provide him with the information to order it.
	Alright, repeat the number.
	It's area code 212-688-2810, and it should be available in the bookstores, both in the United States and Canada, so he should be able to order it through the bookstore as well.
	Alright, very good.
	On the toll-free line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Good morning.
	From Kennewick, Washington, yes.
	Anyway, like the guy was talking before, he said, where was it coming from?
	I heard several guys talking before, you know, the polar shift, that these guys may be from inside Earth.
	Well, or from Earth at some prior civilization, yes.
	Or they could be from the Earth in the future, coming back through time travel to take a look at it as well.
	Yeah, there's another one.
	And that would seem to go more along with the evolution of humans evolving up into a different looking form.
	Well, I suppose that could be.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	We're very short on time here.
	On the first time caller line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	How's it going?
	I'm calling from Albuquerque, New Mexico.
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah, and I just had a few questions for your guests.
	Okay.
	Well, I was kind of wondering, you know, I've seen a lot of weird things around here, too.
	You know, in New Mexico and stuff like that, but I mean, and they're talking about all this stuff and where they're coming from.
	You never know.
	They could be, like, from galaxies far away.
	You know what I mean?
	What did you think on that?
	That, I suppose, is what he thinks.
	Well, yeah, clearly, I believe they're extraterrestrial.
	They come from not from inside our solar system, because there doesn't seem a planet that would be capable of supporting life.
	So they come from another solar system inside our galaxy, I would assume.
	All right.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall and not a lot of time.
	Hi, where are you calling from?
	Phoenix, Arizona.
	Phoenix, okay.
	Turn your radio off.
	That's good.
	All right.
	You're on the air with Kevin.
	What is... Do you have a question?
	All right.
	Are you going to turn the radio off?
	It's off.
	Thank you.
	Do you have a... Okay.
	Well, I think this is marvelous, and I started calling so I could get information on how to get his book.
	I do have a story about a flying saucer, which you probably... Millions of them.
	But my folks and I were in 1952 going to, from Kingman, Arizona to Las Vegas, and... Alright, listen, we're not going to have time for that.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	I'll give you an option.
	Do you want to hold on?
	Oh no, that's okay.
	I know, well... I was just...
	I'm glad that this is all coming out.
	Alright, well keep listening and we'll tell you how to get a hold of the book.
	Kevin, we'll be right back with you.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	This is Premier Networks.
	That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM on this Somewhere in Time.
	This is a test.
	Now, we take you back to the past on Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
	Kevin Randall is my guest.
	He is co-author, along with Donald Schmidt, of The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell, New Mexico.
	I added the state there.
	I assume you know it's Roswell.
	And that's what we're talking about.
	The possibility that a UFO crash, alien beings, and ships were recovered.
	And what that means for us, and of course, the moment this is actually proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt, it will be the biggest story of all of human history.
	Kevin, are you there?
	Yes, I am.
	All right, good.
	A lot of calls, so why don't we go back to the phones.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	This is Adino in SeaTac.
	SeaTac, Washington, yes.
	That's right.
	Kevin, I wanted to ask you, Do you have any idea where the remains of the crash would be kept now at this present time?
	And also I would assume that if the government had recovered bodies that they would also have them still.
	Do you have any idea where that would be?
	The best information we have is part of the debris went to the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
	The craft itself and the majority of the debris and the bodies eventually made it to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Wright Field at the time.
	One of the bodies supposedly went to Lowry Army Airfield in 1947, because that's where the Army had its mortuary service.
	The information we have now is the craft, the bodies, are located in a special facility in the middle of Nevada, which is not part of the Groom Lake-Dreamland Area 51 complex.
	But that information about it being in Nevada is pretty speculative.
	We can trace the stuff in 47 to the bases in Ohio, and we've got evidence it was there for a period after that.
	Then we have other things that tell us where it may have gone or where it may be still, but of course you don't dispose of unique samples, so they're somewhere.
	So the best guess is it's here in Nevada.
	Nearly anything anybody can explain seems to end up in Nevada.
	All right, caller, thank you very much.
	We are the repository, in some cases the sub-pository, for a great deal of the nation's ills.
	On the toll-free line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hello.
	Hi, good morning.
	Glad to talk to you.
	Calling from Portland, Oregon.
	Portland, yes, sir.
	I have a comment for a great show.
	I listen to you every evening.
	Thank you.
	On this whole thing about abduction, what I don't understand, and I've kind of failed to believe, Is that if the government had a deal made with these aliens to kind of look the other way for an abduction, why would they go through abducting and keeping it as a hot topic when wouldn't they be able to find volunteers to have them study or learn?
	Well, would you volunteer?
	Oh, in a second.
	Would you really?
	Oh, yes I would.
	After what I've heard about abductions, I certainly wouldn't.
	I mean, we're talking tables here, medical procedures, long needles, and you'd volunteer?
	Oh, sure.
	It wouldn't be any different from some of the physicals that we go through here today.
	And I think that the exchange of knowledge, it would seem that if they had volunteered, there would be less reports of abductions, and then you've got the movies, you've got the reports.
	It would keep the whole issue of aliens in the news.
	It wouldn't be a secret, I would think.
	What do you think, Kevin?
	The problem is we were forced to speculate what an alien mind would be thinking, and we just don't have a basis for that kind of a speculation.
	And I'm not sure that there is any kind of agreement between our government and the aliens to allow the abductions to go on.
	It may be something they've just decided to do, but I don't think it's nearly as widespread as we're being led to believe.
	I think it's a much more limited phenomenon than is being reported.
	All right.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Okay, this is Roy.
	I'm in Vancouver.
	Yes.
	Yeah, first time caller, but I haven't been able to get through.
	I just wanted to let Kevin know that I was about four years old when it happened down there in Roswell.
	And I remember seeing the flash, which scared me to dickens.
	You mean you were in Roswell and actually saw it?
	No, I was actually in Phoenix.
	You were in Phoenix?
	You see that flash from Phoenix?
	Oh, yes sir.
	Oh, no kidding.
	No kidding.
	And like I say, it scared me to death.
	And later in life when I figured out what it was, you know, and then I've become a believer, but I'm not kidding you one bit.
	All right.
	Well, I thank you.
	You know, that worries me a little bit, Kevin.
	Why would anybody become a believer based on the fact that they saw a flash in the sky and it coincides with the arrest at Roswell, without seeing what happened at Roswell, to become a believer on the basis of a flash?
	Well, my question would be, how is he related to the crash at Roswell?
	If he was four or five years old, how did he know it was related to that?
	The best evidence we had is that there was no flash, there was a streak of light that was seen, but the people who saw it were all in the Roswell area, and it wasn't very high in the atmosphere when it happened.
	Otherwise, we would have had reports like that from all over the Southwest.
	And we could write that off as some kind of a meteoric phenomenon, or an astronomical phenomenon.
	So the fact that he's in Phoenix, I just don't see how that would relate to Roswell at all.
	Well, I'm worried that he would make that leap of faith, I guess you could say.
	Yeah, I agree, I agree.
	Alright, on the wildcard line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	Yes, I'm calling you from Iowa City, Iowa.
	Iowa City, Iowa, okay.
	And it's a dumb question, but how come we can get pictures of aliens with Clinton and Limbaugh on supermarket tabloids, but I can never find one with my camera?
	Alright, thank you.
	I don't know what to do with that.
	Well, it's because they're making up the pictures of the aliens with Clinton.
	There is, however, a good question buried in that humor, and it is, Kevin, with all of the video recorders, and all of the cameras, and all of the UFOs, it seems like we ought to have better photographic evidence than we do, or do we have good evidence?
	We have some very good photographic evidence.
	There was a picture taken in McMainville, Oregon, for example, in 1950 that's very good, or the Rex Heflin pictures.
	From California in 1966.
	There was some good video footage just taken coincidentally in Roswell in, I think it was late March of this year, that they've shown on television a number of times that is very provocative.
	But I think the difference is, when we're talking about a UFO, it's very close to the ground.
	It's not seen over a wide, wide area.
	So that the opportunities to to film it or photograph it are somewhat limited.
	And I know of cases where people are just in awe of what they're seeing with a camera hanging around their neck and they never think to use them.
	I'm afraid of all of that.
	Yeah, that really is true.
	People have I've had one UFO sighting, Kevin.
	I had no camera.
	People called me up later and said, well, how come you didn't have a camera?
	Well, because I don't carry a camera around as a normal part of my life.
	And even if I'd had one, the chances of getting it out in the dark situation I was in, getting it focused and getting anything at all usable would be slim and none.
	Yeah, I think people also overlook that if you're trying to photograph an object that is fairly small in the sky that you can make out with your eye, but when you try to photograph it, you lose an awful lot of detail.
	There's a lot of variables involved.
	There have been some very good photographic evidence, but even if we had outstanding photographs taken tomorrow, That's not going to prove it, because with the technology available today, you can fake things so many different ways, it's impossible to detect.
	It's absolutely true, and so photographic evidence, or the value of it, is diminishing as we begin to deal with each pixel.
	Is there anything, Kevin, do you think that is going to come along, either your book, or follow-up to your book, or more evidence that at any point is going to blow this thing wide open?
	There are hints of documentation that we might be able to get our hands on.
	When I say we, I mean we as a community as opposed to Don and me specifically that may provide us with a way of breaking the thing wide open.
	There may be some eyewitness testimony that if the specific people will come forward and there is the talk of one or two major generals who ...are involved in it.
	I think if you get someone of that stature to come forward and say, yes, I was directly involved and this is what I saw, that will go a long way to adding to our credibility.
	The smoking saucer, so to speak.
	Absolutely.
	All right, Kevin, hold on just a moment.
	We'll be right back.
	Now we take you back to the past on Arkbell Somewhere in Time.
	Now we take you back to the past on Arkbell Somewhere in Time.
	Back now to Kevin Randall and your calls.
	Kevin, are you there?
	I certainly am.
	Alright, good.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hello.
	Good morning, Art.
	Good morning, Kevin.
	Good morning.
	Kevin, I have a question about the movie that I saw quite a few years ago called, it was either Hangar 18 or Hangar 19?
	Hangar 18.
	Hangar 18.
	That was a fascinating movie and wasn't that supposed to involve Roswell?
	It was.
	My understanding is when they started to do the movie, they originally had an idea to do a documentary in the same vein as the Search for Noah's Ark.
	But they couldn't find the people who would go on the record for them, so they decided to write a movie and made it up from that point.
	So I guess you could say it's very, very loosely based on the Roswell crash, but it's basically a work of fiction.
	Okay, because they actually showed it going down somewhere in Arizona.
	And I think it was the result of a crash with, it collided with a space shuttle or a rocket.
	Space shuttle, yes.
	And the astronauts were involved trying to track it down when they landed.
	Yeah, but it's all fiction.
	Okay.
	Yeah, it's a very interesting program you're on and I hope we can blow the lid off it.
	They did have an Encounters program on and also X-Files followed up and mentioned that at Roswell tonight.
	Oh, no kidding.
	It was very interesting.
	I recorded both of them.
	There's so much going on now, and I've missed that one, doggone it.
	All right, thank you very much, caller.
	Kevin, you're doing a thing up in Portland this weekend.
	And again, before I lose track of time, please tell them where it is, how they can come see you in Portland.
	Well, it's being held at the Red Lion Lloyd Center in Portland, Oregon on Sunday at 2 p.m.
	They can just show up there with their, I guess, their cash in hand.
	Get in, but for ticket information, they can also call 224-8499, and that involves me, Don Schmidt, and Michael Lineman.
	Michael Lineman.
	Michael is really something.
	He's a wonderful speaker, and you are too, so I guess this is going to be a pretty good affair.
	Well, thank you, and by the way, I think Michael was on the Encounters program tonight as well.
	Oh, and I'm...
	There's just too much out there.
	All right, on the toll-free line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Art.
	Good morning.
	This is Dennis calling from Portland.
	Yes, Dennis.
	Fantastic show.
	Thank you.
	Credible people with credible information in this field are few and far between, and this is the one I've been waiting for because Kevin Randall is one of the top people in that category.
	Thank you.
	Your $5 is in the mail, by the way.
	I was wondering if you could maybe comment a little bit for me on the government line that this is a popped weather balloon, and if so, why did they threaten people with death over keeping this quiet?
	Oh, yes.
	Purportedly or allegedly, Kevin, there were threats made.
	Can you document that?
	We've talked to a number of people.
	One of them is Frankie Rowe, who is a 12-year-old girl who was visited by four military people And she was told that if she talked about this, the family would end up at Orchard Park, which was a prisoner of war camp, and she'd be taken out in the desert, and she wouldn't come back.
	Oh, my.
	Now, you could assume that maybe the 12-year-old misunderstood what she was being told by the military.
	She overreacted to it.
	We've had it corroborated by other family members, but there are other civilians.
	Glenn Dennis, the Roswell Mortician, was told he'd be picking his bones out of the sand.
	Sheriff Wilcox's family, Sheriff Wilcox was told that if he talked about it, his family would be killed.
	uh... one of the deputies that we found uh... still alive that he wouldn't talk
	to a particular get shot so we can talk to them through the testimony of the people
	involved that they've they clearly were threatened
	and and and and and and it's absolutely correct why
	if it's just a weather boat or even if it's a secret project why are they
	threatening people with those kinds of dire consequences
	when other secretive not been guarded with that kind of savagery Well, if all of that is true, and they were threatening to shoot people for looking into it, what makes you think you're not going to attract some lead?
	I think that at this point, their best move is to leave us alone.
	Because if they start trying to stop our talking about this, or suppress the information, their Giving us a tacit admission that we're right, but by leaving us alone, it's such an incredible secret, people have a tendency not to believe it.
	It's true.
	On the toll-free line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	Yes, sir.
	You're on the air.
	Turn your radio off and tell us where you're calling from.
	Portland, Oregon.
	Turn your radio off.
	Okay.
	That's good.
	Go ahead now.
	Hey, I read a story when I was a young man that it said that at the end of the World War II, that the OSA or the secret service, they went into Germany
	and the Russians and the Americans and everything, they split the scientists and everything
	and they had an identical plane prior to 1947 that was identified and they said they had
	several prototypes, Nazi Germany.
	You're talking about the Horton Brothers designs?
	I'm not sure about that.
	They had a number of flying wings designed.
	They also had what was called the Comet, which is sort of a tail of aircraft as they called
	it.
	A lot of the German scientists ended up at White Sands or Alamogordo through Operation
	Paperclip.
	up.
	At the end of World War II.
	Operation Paperclip.
	All right, Wild Card Line 2, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Art.
	This is Rick, a rebellious cab driver out of Portland.
	I wanted to ask your guest if he had a take on the incident that Richard Hoagland brought up, referring to a firefight in the sky up against something over the skies of Los Angeles in 1942.
	The only thing I know is what the conventional wisdom is, that it was Supposedly written off as war nerves and hysteria, and there was nothing really being shot at by the people.
	They thought there was something there.
	That's the only thing I know about it.
	I haven't heard that Richard Hoagland has any evidence or any theories that go beyond that.
	You know, but when you have mass sightings and you write it off as war jitters, that's like talking about swamp gas.
	Oh, absolutely correct.
	And I haven't really looked into that.
	I'm saying that's all I know about it is what I've been told.
	All right.
	On the toll-free line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	Hi, I'm calling from San Diego.
	Yes, ma'am.
	And I had occasion about a week ago to see some incredible videos.
	Uh, I guess they're kind of being circulated underground.
	Um, they had to do with the sightings that were massive sightings in Mexico at the time of the solar eclipse in the early nineties.
	And of course people have their video cameras and they had their 35 millimeters because they were taking pictures of the eclipse.
	And there are tremendous numbers of videos from Mexico City, Puebla... Yes.
	...that went across the whole part of the continent that followed the solar eclipse.
	As a matter of fact, I've heard the same rumors.
	Thank you, ma'am, that there are a lot of pictures that have come from Mexico.
	Do you know anything about that, Ken?
	I've heard the same thing, and that's about... I heard that there were some massive sightings in the Mexico City area, and there was some good videotape taken, and that's really about all I know about it.
	All right.
	It seems to me we need one central clearinghouse for all this stuff.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air with Kevin Randall.
	Hi.
	How you doing, Mr. Bell?
	This is Woodinville, Washington.
	Yes, hi.
	How you doing?
	I got a little story to relate, if I may.
	It's going to have to be a little one.
	OK.
	Four boys.
	They were 10 years old, 1962.
	We were camping out.
	We were all watching the stars, counting, shooting stars.
	A ball of fire shot across, right over the top of us, going horizontal.
	We thought it was really crazy, but over the years I've decided that it wasn't a flying saucer, but it was something that was statically controlled.
	It made a noise like a razor or something.
	It made noise and it left a little trail.
	And over the years, I've read things about in Southern California, all sorts of those things were spotted.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Would anything go horizontal?
	Kevin, anything that's reentering, particularly at what appears to be a low altitude?
	I think even meteors can appear to travel almost horizontally.
	But not at a low altitude, though.
	No, that would be at a much higher altitude.
	I believe the dynamics of the re-entry is such that at a low altitude you wouldn't have anything appear to go horizontally unless it's controlled in some fashion.
	Alright, well listen, we are running now very short on time and I want to wish you luck this weekend.
	We'll do it one more time.
	You are going to be where and when?
	Okay, it's the Red Lion.
	Lloyd Center in Portland, Oregon.
	It's, for ticket information, call 224-8499.
	It's Don Schmidt, it's Michael Lindemann, and it's me talking about various aspects of the UFO phenomena.
	It begins at 2 o'clock.
	Excellent.
	And your book, your book that is, and Donald Schmidt's book, how do they get hold of this book?
	The bookstore should have it.
	If they don't have it in the bookstore, they can order it from M. Evans Publishers.
	Okay, Kevin, you have been a grand guest.
	Thank you.
	And what I would like to do is get hold of you, or have you get hold of me, and book you in on Dreamland, our other program.
	Oh, delighted to do so.
	Once I get back home, I'll give you a call next week.
	I'll look forward to it, Kevin.
	Thank you.
	Okay, thank you very much.
	Alright, that's Kevin Randall, co-author of The Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell.
	What we're going to do now is pause at the top of the hour, do a little bit of news, come back.
	And open the... well, we'll do a normal open, and there's an awful lot of news to talk about.
	Things are popping all over the place, so we're about to get into it.
	Brace yourself.
	A Friday night, Saturday morning.
	From the high desert to the nation, this is Coast to Coast AM.
	The trip back in time continues, with Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
	More, somewhere in time, coming up.
	I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
	to be doing a lot of research.
	I'm going to be doing a lot of research on this.
	you I'm going to be doing a lot of research on this. I'm going
	Music Music
	Music You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
	Tonight, featuring Coast to Coast AM, from June 24th, 1994.
	Get ready, here comes Open Line Talk Radio.
	We do not screen calls.
	We, uh, we don't even know what's coming next.
	I'm gonna give you a couple of things to think about here, because there is a lot of news going on for a Saturday morning.
	Hey, it's the weekend, everybody!
	But, wow, the news!
	Um, no doubt about it, a legal bombshell.
	The defense of O.J.
	Simpson received what is certainly a remarkable boost yesterday, when a judge did something that I have never seen a judge do before, and indeed it is confirmed as being very unusual.
	He went along with a request by Simpson's attorney.
	He asked members, or queried members, of a grand jury Considering an indictment against Simpson for murder, if they had been affected by the massive publicity surrounding this case, the answer was yes, and the grand jury was ordered immediately dissolved.
	Incredibly.
	So, while the case against Simpson goes on, the job of prosecuting just got a lot, lot harder.
	Attorney Shapiro The judge bought it.
	The order is done.
	The grand jury action is ended.
	The files are sealed permanently.
	of personal opinions and uncorrected false and misleading descriptions of
	evidence uncovered in the investigation of this case and quote
	the judge bought it
	the order is done the grand jury action is ended the files are sealed
	permanently what brought this on
	well a whole raft of things brought it on The 9-1-1 tapes were said to be exactly what I told you they were.
	Very prejudicial.
	And the fact is, some members of that grand jury apparently heard them.
	But that's not all.
	That's not all.
	Marsha Clark, the prosecutor in the case, I can only imagine This must have been a mistake, a slip of the lip, but what a slip of the lip.
	She said, and I quote, quote, Mr. Simpson is charged alone because he is the sole murderer.
	End quote.
	Um, well, that's got to be a mistake.
	A slip of the lip, eh, Marsha?
	Because you never say he is the sole murderer.
	You say he is the sole murder suspect, or something like that.
	You don't say the sole murder.
	That would have to be considered somewhat prejudgmental and certainly very prejudicial, and so it's another one of the mistakes made.
	Now the evidence.
	Are you ready for even more changes?
	Remember the bloody ski mask?
	Doesn't exist.
	They've got a blue ski cap.
	They might have found there, but not a ski mask.
	No blood on it.
	Remember the bloody clothing yesterday?
	Yesterday's story was supposed to be in the washing machine in his house?
	Well, the LAPD has thus far had no comment on that evidence at all.
	Remember the supposed army entrenching tool that was found as the murder weapon, LA Times?
	Daily News, rather, reported that.
	LAPD denies it.
	No entrenching tool.
	No murder weapon.
	Remember the report of blood in the golf bag?
	LAPD now denies it.
	Not true.
	Remember the report of scratches on Simpson's hand?
	Incredibly, Shapiro denies it.
	Not even a scratch.
	Maybe just one little mark where he had a broken glass.
	Nothing more, they say, than paper.
	Cuts.
	Paper cuts.
	Incredible.
	Remember the concealed hand?
	The hand under the bag all the way to Chicago?
	The flight attendant now denies she ever said anything like that.
	And, in fact, the passenger who sat all that time with O.J.
	also didn't see it.
	Then, of course, there's Garcetti, one of the prosecutors who said Well, he wouldn't be surprised.
	Last Sunday on Brinkley, he wouldn't be surprised to see a confession forthcoming from O.J.
	The pre-trial hearing, in other words, the prosecution of O.J.
	is now going to go forward, but I don't know where it's going to go.
	Where's the meat?
	Where's the evidence?
	There'll be a pre-trial hearing on Thursday.
	Can he possibly get a fair trial?
	I'm beginning to wonder if, in fact, he can.
	You know, in a lot of cases, they say, well, it's going to be hard, but oh, we'll get a jury.
	And they got one for Rodney King.
	Maybe they're going to get one for O.J., but I just don't see how this man can get a fair trial anywhere in the Western Hemisphere.
	And I'm not even so sure we could change the venue to Europe and get a fair trial.
	Do you think he actually might beat the charge?
	Might beat it?
	On Thursday, in this pre-trial hearing, they will decide whether or not there is enough evidence to even bring him to trial.
	And I guess I've got to ask, where indeed is the evidence?
	Remember the groundskeeper?
	There's another one.
	Kalen, I think his name is.
	Kato Kalen.
	He's going to testify for OJ, not against OJ.
	So what's going to happen on Thursday?
	Well, I'll tell you, the prosecution had better have its evidence together or that judge could set O.J.
	free.
	Might have to set him free.
	Without a DNA test against Simpson, do they have any case at all?
	I'm beginning to wonder.
	And so what began at the beginning of the week As what seemed like overwhelming evidence against O.J., we end the week with anything but overwhelming evidence.
	In fact, a question in my mind about whether they even have enough evidence to bound him over, hold him over for trial.
	And have you heard the latest?
	Now O.J.' 's very capable attorney,
	Um, is aided by none other than Alan Dershowitz and Melvin Belli.
	That's right, Melvin Belli, actively involved.
	Boy, what a character he is.
	Melvin's something else.
	Very effective.
	So's Dershowitz.
	It's, uh, it's almost the equivalent of a, um, of the hand of the Creator coming down on OJ's legal defense team side or something.
	It's unbelievable.
	The power of the attorneys on his side, and I'm frankly beginning to wonder where they are with this case.
	So that's where the O.J.
	Simpson story sits this morning, and it is nothing other than incredible.
	So if you have comments, they're welcome, of course.
	Then the economy.
	Brace yourself.
	There is more severe trouble For the dollar on the world currency markets, big trouble yesterday, folks.
	It's beginning to cause a domino effect that is knocking down dominoes on Wall Street.
	It may require yet another interest rate hike.
	Wall Street doesn't like that idea one bit.
	And the Dow fell 62 points yesterday, 140 points since Monday, not good.
	The dollar is falling against other currencies despite the best efforts of the central banks of the world.
	They've been intervening, buying dollars.
	It has not helped.
	The dollar has continued to plunge near the 100 yen mark, for example, right now.
	Not good.
	So, my question, despite Greenspan's statement the other day about the relative health of the U.S.
	economy, I know there are a lot of you out there that watch all of this very carefully, and I would ask you this morning, where are we going?
	What have we got here?
	How serious is this?
	When you have a currency fall unchecked by even a central bank intervention, you've got something fairly serious going on.
	So where do you all think this is going?
	Another interest rate hike?
	Wall Street crash?
	Currency devaluation?
	What's going on here?
	Yesterday, a Supreme Court ruling that affects just about every land owner in America.
	Do you own land?
	The question is, how much power should the federal government have to regulate landowners?
	In other words, the federal government coming to you and telling you what you must do with your land, your land, In a certain way, to preserve the environment.
	The case stems from the Portland area.
	A lot of news up there lately.
	Tigert, Oregon, specifically.
	And the question was, if the owner of a plumbing supply business up there wanted to have a bigger store, she, in this case, a she, must give the local government one-tenth of her land.
	Just give it to the government!
	So that the government, in this case, the municipality, could build a bike path and provide for flood control.
	Well, I understand the flood control, but since when, when you want to increase a business on your own damn land, do you have to give some to the city within which you reside so they can have a bike path?
	Well, the Supreme Court said no, barely.
	In a 5-4 vote, they said there was, listen to this, not enough of a connection between the city's demands and the effects of expanding the business.
	But it was close.
	Very close.
	A 5-4 vote.
	And that should scare the whiskers right off you.
	Political news, there's a lot of that.
	Mr. Clinton has had a terrible week.
	Now, I don't know if he's still in St.
	Louis, where he was earlier in the day.
	But he may be.
	And I guess he was doing a talk show on KMOX, our affiliate's competitor there in St.
	Louis.
	And the President took off.
	Really began to complain bitterly about the religious right in America.
	Falwell, who as you know is distributing a tape with a number of people who don't have much good to say about the President, in some cases very serious allegations, which I too agree are kind of too far out for me, thank you.
	But he complained bitterly about Falwell and his tape.
	The President took off on Rush Limbaugh, As a matter of fact, he said on that show, after I get off the air today, Rush Limbaugh will have three hours to say anything he wants, and I won't have the opportunity to respond, and there's no truth detector."
	Well, since when does the President of the United States feel it necessary to take off at a talk show host?
	I'll tell you what it sounds like.
	If you listen to the President's words, and you read not very far between the lines, it would be pretty simple to translate this complaint to legislation in the form of regurgitating the Fairness Doctrine.
	Now I can just feel it in my bones.
	Rush Limbaugh, in his typical way, responded by saying, well, does this mean the President's going to start agreeing with me?
	With regard to the comment about the truth detector.
	So, what do you think about what the President said?
	What do you think this means?
	What does it mean?
	Does it mean the President is getting ready to come after the talk show host?
	Uh-oh.
	Uh-oh.
	Mr. President, If you're still in St.
	Louis at this hour, you're welcome to call this program, and I'll certainly put you on the air, Mr. President.
	You're welcome to respond to Rush, anything he's said or anything I've said, and I've said a lot.
	So has Rush.
	So have a lot of others.
	Is the day of the talk show about to end, ladies and gentlemen?
	Is that what our president was suggesting?
	Well this one ought to put a little crick in your neck Thanks.
	This comes from Reuters News Service, and I picked it off Internet.
	A British scientific research body said Friday, it's found evidence of a rapid rise in temperature in Antarctica that could cause a global disaster.
	The British Antarctic Survey's Faraday Research Base on the Antarctic Peninsula has recorded the fastest sustained warming since worldwide temperature records began 130 years ago.
	The rise is the fastest we've got on record.
	People should be looking to the future or the consequences could be quite dire, according to Dr. John King, head of the survey's meteorological group.
	Temperatures at Faraday have been recorded since 1947.
	Interesting year.
	Show a rise of about a half a degree centigrade a decade.
	Scientists fear the sensitive Antarctic region is acting as a warning beacon that the global climate is rising.
	It could be a sentinel region, according to King.
	The global warming theory Predicts man-made pollutants in the atmosphere will trap the sun's heat, warming the globe, melting the polarized sheets.
	Not good.
	The subsequent rise in world water levels would submerge vast tracts of inhabited land.
	Are you listening, Seattle?
	Are you listening, San Francisco and Los Angeles and San Diego?
	Hmm?
	Gurgle, gurgle.
	So, there it is.
	That's Reuters News from London.
	It sounds to me as though they're saying, look out, it's gonna melt!
	It's gonna melt!
	It's getting hot!
	You think that's true?
	Or do you think that's a bunch of baloney?
	Alright, we'll get to two-way talk here in a moment.
	You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from June 24th, 1994.
	An awful lot to talk about this morning.
	Before the bottom of the hour, just let's try one call.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air, good morning.
	Yeah, this is Charlie Libro in California.
	Hallelujah.
	First of all, let me just say that I want to thank Bill Clinton for finally coming out and giving these religious Bible-thumpers who are trying to take over a political party what for.
	Yeah, really let him have it, didn't he?
	Well, I think they're finally starting to realize that normal people out there are not going to stand for this.
	And I think it was the thing It was a thing with, uh... You know what he did, Charles?
	He actually called Falwell, um, well, uh, he said it was not a very Christian thing of him to do, and, uh, sort of saying... Oh, Falwell, let's face it, Falwell the Reverend, and I use the term loosely, the Reverend Falwell, I mean, the guys, the guys, the scuzz, the guys, the scuzzbucket, those guys get on TV, they collect all this money, it's just like that fool who got on TV, A couple years ago and said God was going to kill him if people didn't send in money to him.
	I mean, that's the level that these guys are at.
	Well, if I were you, I wouldn't call him a scuzzbucket.
	I think that, you know, don't you worry about being eternally damned, Charles?
	No, when that guy did that, I was going to call into his show and say, I'm going to send the money to God so he can hurry up and kill the guy.
	I mean, I could care less whether God killed him or not, but the guy...
	What Bill Clinton's basically saying is that these people have no right to involve themselves in politics to the level that they've done.
	And how about that Rush Limbaugh?
	Well, the man is politically extreme and he's got an open air three hours a day.
	He can basically attack and lie about Bill Clinton's record.
	And when you've got somebody lying about your record three hours a day, that's bound to distort every single thing that you're doing.
	And by God, it's got to be stopped.
	We need a little regulation.
	The man is making a living... Hey, Joe, look, I'm at the bottom of the hour.
	Do you want to hold on?
	Yes, thank you.
	Yes, all right.
	The man has got to go, doesn't he?
	He's got to go.
	Pretty lippy.
	Three hours a day.
	He's gotta go, along with the First Amendment.
	The trip back in time continues, with Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
	more somewhere in time coming up.
	I'm going to be talking about the process of how to make a video. I'm going to be talking
	about the process of how to make a video.
	I'm going to be talking about the process of how to make a video.
	Premier Networks presents Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from June 24th, 1994.
	Absolutely on a Saturday morning and unlike newspapers that bury it on the last page, if I made a mistake I'll put it right here on the front page.
	I think I said that the attorneys are now working on the side of O.J.
	were Alan Dershowitz and Melvin Belli.
	I probably meant to say Alan Dershowitz and F. Lee Bailey.
	And it is a pretty close association, because I heard, so it was F. Lee Bailey, I guess, not Melvin Bella.
	It seems like Melvin ought to be involved, though.
	F. Lee Bailey, I think, consults now, they said, on a daily basis.
	Isn't that what they said?
	So, that's being very closely involved, indeed, with the case.
	Here is from St.
	Louis, Dateline St.
	Louis, a prodigy internet story.
	President Clinton, in an airborne live radio interview Friday, heatedly lashed out at Rush Limbaugh and other conservative radio talk show hosts, accusing them of, quote, a constant, unremitting drumbeat of cynicism, end quote.
	In a phone call to a St.
	Louis talk radio station, MOX it is, from Air Force One, Clinton also took on evangelical Christian broadcasters, mentioning Jerry Falwell by name!
	said quote remember jesus through the money changes out of the temple
	didn't try to take over the job of the money changers clinton said who
	who who who who who who who who that's pretty severe stuff
	on now back to uh... one in sympathy with that kind of rhetoric
	charles you're back on the air again well you're damn right bill clinton to be upset
	i could be on the it would be on the same level i got a radio talk show and i constantly three hours a day
	bombarding Art Bell was late paying his taxes.
	Art Bell is always late showing up for work.
	Charlie, don't you really want to retain the right to do that, though?
	I mean, one day you might want to go on the radio.
	Come on, Charlie, answer that.
	Well, I'm not saying that... Well, what are you saying?
	What are you saying then?
	Let me give you a rare compliment.
	You know, it's sure you distort Bill Clinton's record, and sure you're an extremist.
	And sure, sometimes you don't know what you're talking about.
	Get to the damn compliment, come on.
	At least, at least, you don't spend 90% of your show Bombarding Bill Clinton.
	You spend like 40% of your show bombarding Bill Clinton and 60% of your show talking about Martians building towers on the moon.
	But at least that's 50-50.
	This guy basically should change his show from the Rush Limbaugh Show to the Attack Bill Clinton Show.
	Because that's all he does.
	Fine.
	Bitch, bitch, bitch.
	All right.
	But listen, Charlie, if he can have... In other words, I guess we're saying he has a right to have the Attack Bill Clinton Show if that's what he wants it to be.
	And you have a right to have an Attack Art Bell Show if you want it to be that way.
	Now, Charlie, you don't want to lose that right, do you?
	No, but what Bill Clinton is saying is that it's a right, but it's irresponsible, and there's a difference between giving people rights and just letting people do what the heck they want to do.
	I think he's crossed over that line, and I think What Bill Clinton is saying is we need to push Rush Limbaugh back a little, and we absolutely must stop the religious right.
	And I think that people like yourself, well, you're an extremist, but I mean normal people, even in the Republican Party, should fear the religious Bible-thumpers from getting into the political ring.
	Alright, thank you.
	Well, that's a point of view, I'll accept that.
	It's a point of view I don't want to share, but it's a point of view.
	The question is how you, quote, knock Or push people like Rush Limbaugh back?
	See, what you're ignoring is that he's now on, what, 600 and some odd radio stations?
	So how do you push him back, Charles?
	You might wish him back, but I don't know about pushing him back.
	Unless you want to regulate, unless you want to tamper around under the hood with the First Amendment a little bit.
	Uh, maybe, uh, re-gap the blugs in the First Amendment engine.
	Is that what you want to do, Charles?
	Uh, we're on almost a hundred, or just about a hundred.
	Matter of fact, we're going to be celebrating, I think, a hundred, uh, radio stations next week, or at the latest, the week after.
	I don't know.
	We'll have to see how it, uh... We just got another affiliate in, uh, Michigan, I think, yesterday, up near the Canadian border.
	So, I guess what I'm saying is my show, Russia's show, A lot of other shows out there are immensely popular, and they are where they are not because of anybody's particular political view, but because of popularity.
	Because of popularity.
	Because it gets ratings, because people listen, because sponsors sponsor, because they're going viable entities.
	So unless you're willing to regulate or legislate Against shows like this one, or rushes, you might be a-wishin' and a-hopin', but you better not be pushin' and a-shovin'.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	This is James.
	Spokane, 1230 KSPN.
	Good.
	Welcome to the program.
	I should say a sad Spokane, in light of the... Yes, of course.
	...just the last week.
	It's a bizarre twilight zone.
	In regards to this ubiquitous 9-1-1 phone call, I've been listening to it just out of the fact that it's on every channel.
	You couldn't miss it, that's right.
	And it strikes me as being very strange.
	It almost sounds like it could be a staged phone call.
	And I say that in just the fact that in the length of time she's on the phone talking to the dispatcher, she doesn't seem really Um, too upset and he's in the back.
	Oh, I don't know where you get that.
	I mean, she was saying, look, he's about to come beat the S out of me, you know?
	Well, no, it's the other call when he was supposedly talking out the back door to the person that lived in the back.
	Yes.
	And then she just, uh, and then all of a sudden, um, he never comes through the whole time.
	And like, if he was wanting to gain access, he would have came and confronted her.
	Well, I will say this.
	And after, who are you talking to?
	I will say this.
	On the basis of the telephone calls, there's a lot of screaming and yelling, but there's no a-thumpin' and a-hittin'.
	Not any that I was able to hear.
	And then you hear, like, this knock, where he sounds like he's closed, or he's supposed to be checking a bedroom door to see who's behind it or something.
	Yeah.
	And I just think that the whole thing, you're going to find out it's some kind of a setup.
	The phone calls prove they had a bad marriage.
	It proves that they fought like cats and dogs, and that there may have been a lot going on.
	What it does not prove is that O.J.
	Simpson killed Nicole Simpson and Mr. Goldman.
	I'll bet you he didn't, Art.
	You know, another thing that disturbed me was they showed video of Nicole's sister removing articles.
	They showed her with a box and put them in her trunk, out of this Nicole's house, and that seems highly irregular.
	This whole case, this whole case, sir, is highly irregular.
	She could have been removed and all kinds of things that would have been, you know.
	Count this as one of the biggest stories of the year.
	Maybe the biggest.
	Thank you very much for the call.
	A really big story.
	And whether, I'll tell you, there is the possibility that the prosecution will not be able to muster enough Yes, my name is Otis from St.
	to even ensure that he's bound over for trial.
	Do you realize that? In the prelim hearing which begins next week?
	Should that occur, he'd be cut loose.
	He'd be back on the street.
	No telling where that one would go. Wildcard Line, you're on the air. Hello.
	Uh, yes, my name is Otis from St. Louis KSD.
	Good, uh, good morning Otis. Uh, is...
	Is the President still there?
	No, I think he left after a private $1,000-a-pop dinner tonight.
	I see.
	Attended well, I suppose?
	Well, I didn't get a chance to make it down.
	Being a 24-year-old, I don't really have $1,000 to blow.
	But one of the things that bothered me I've been keeping track of the news.
	Me and a buddy of mine were listening to the comments that came across on Camel X. Yes.
	And what I have found, which really scares me about my generation, which is pretty screwed up at the time, is the general attitude is that they believe with basically what Clinton says are pretty much anti-religious, very socialist.
	I kind of felt sorry for the talk host on KMOX, I don't know who it was, but the president jumped all over his stuff.
	I mean, the poor guy simply asked Clinton about the thievery, or maybe it shouldn't be called thievery, souvenir hunting of the White House staff while they were on board this aircraft carrier, right?
	And the president came unglued at the guy, and you know, as a talk show host, I mean, after all, having the President of the United States on, that must have been a rough one.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, the host tried to ask him a few questions, and it sounded like to me that President Clinton just basically was livid and basically lost his cool.
	Yeah, he lost it.
	I agree with you.
	You know what the White House said later?
	The White House said, oh no, and they had this thing where he was shouting.
	They said he wasn't angry, he was just having to shout over the aircraft noise going on or something, another baloney.
	This guy was crawling out of his skin.
	Right.
	Well, I saw video footage on that just probably about an hour ago, and the host Of the show, we're looking at each other in amazement, like, I can't believe this is happening.
	Yeah.
	And, uh, you know, being a young man here in St.
	Louis and interacting with a lot of people of my generation, you know, I've been called a racist, an extremist, I've been put down.
	Oh, me too.
	I ask people to come up to me and argue with me all the time.
	Haven't they called you a Nazi yet?
	Yes, I've been called that.
	In fact, a friend of mine two days ago basically called me, uh, A neo-Nazi told me that I should be put in a concentration camp.
	Uh-huh.
	And that's a switch on terms.
	Probably bunk right next to Falwell.
	Well, it's interesting.
	It's kind of scary.
	There are a number of people that... Well, I was in Chicago about three weeks ago with a bunch of people, mid-twenties.
	Most of them are going to law school.
	And what really surprised me, we got into a lot of political discussions while we were out on the town.
	And of the 25 people I happened to be out with at the time, 22 of them basically said that they were socialist, and that they thought that it would be okay to give up their rights.
	And that scares me, because that's a predominant attitude amongst the 20-something generation.
	Well, I thought a lot of what the President had to say yesterday was very chilling indeed, because it feels like a precursor to either regulation or legislation that would Attempt to silence such critics.
	Uh-huh.
	Well, you know what is amazing to me?
	Him being the President of the United States, if anybody has the ability to get his word and his message out, it's this man.
	And, you know, I mean, who is he to start going off and putting down talk show hosts?
	This is a free country where he used to be.
	I'm not so sure if my generation is going to have much of a free country in the next 10 to 20 years, or even in the next couple.
	But who is he?
	I kind of wonder about the same thing, my friend.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I wonder about the same thing.
	And I asked almost that very question in a different form yesterday morning.
	In another 30 or 50 years, as we all look back at America's history, on roughly what Do you think we will conclude that American individualism, American basic freedoms, as described in the Bill of Rights, basically began to disappear?
	What sort of historical judgment would you make about that?
	A lot of people said in the 70s, Art.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Dr. Democrat.
	Oh, Dr. Democrat.
	Good morning, Art.
	Uh, Charlie was absolutely right about the religious right and Rush Limbaugh.
	Was he?
	Absolutely right, and I got a lot more to add.
	Well, let's talk about where it goes.
	You know, you complain and you bitch and you moan about Rush and about Jerry Falwell and the religious right and all the rest of it.
	Let's get to the bottom line, Doc.
	What do you want done?
	I think, uh, most Americans believe in the separation of church and state.
	And I don't think they want people, fanatics, like Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, Getting into the White House or getting into Congress and
	telling the American people that if you don't believe the way we believe
	You're not an American We're going to have religious wars and all kinds of things
	that the Republicans said in the 1992 Republican Convention I don't think America wants that and I think I have a lot
	of Republican friends that are pretty worried and pretty upset about this
	In fact a couple of them are thinking about leaving the Republican Party
	Oh, no, and when you get a guy like Falwell who's selling a videotape for 1995 that accuses the president of the United
	States of murder He's a radical
	And what has happened here, is that Falwell and Robinson have taken over the Republican Party, and the Republican Party got shaky knees!
	Alright Doc, alright Doc, we're in the same old rut here, we're doing what the President did, bitch and moan, question is, what do you want to do about it?
	Well, I don't want to do anything about it because I'm not worried about it because it's going to hurt the Republicans in the elections.
	So I hope they keep it up and escalate it myself.
	But I'm just bringing out the facts of life.
	And as far as Limbaugh goes, he'll throw out anything across the radio.
	He won't exactly say, you know, I got evidence.
	I think it's 100% true.
	But what he'll say, he'll just throw out anything that some hobo in Arkansas will bring up.
	Any allegation that has no evidence, that's unfounded, he'll throw it out there to try to make people think it's true because so many people think Limbaugh is God.
	You know, all the ditto heads out there.
	They think that they're brainwashed is what they are.
	And believe me, I don't want to do anything about it.
	You don't want to do anything about it?
	Nothing at all, because Clinton is absolutely right.
	Now, Clinton hasn't said a word about this for 18 months.
	He's let those people run their mouths and run their mouths, and now he's getting fed up with it because they're throwing such dirty charges at him.
	It's the most dirty pool I've ever seen.
	It's okay to bash.
	It's okay to criticize his policies and dissect them and analyze them.
	Well, okay then.
	I'll deal with it at this level.
	What do you think the President's criticism of Limbaugh will do?
	Will it bring Limbaugh to his knees?
	Oh, no.
	Not at all.
	He'll have fun with it.
	But the thing of it is, I'll tell you what's going to happen, it's setting up a foundation for a backlash against Limbaugh and the Republicans.
	Yes, a legislative or regulatory backlash, Doc.
	No, once Whitewater, once Clinton is not guilty of murder, once they can't prove Paula Jones, when all these charges that you guys have been bringing up are proven to be not true, the Republican Party is going to take a big hit.
	And because people are going to see right through it.
	People aren't stupid.
	They know it's partisan.
	They know what the Republican strategy is.
	Just throw everything in the kitchen sink at them and something might stick.
	Because they can't beat him on his policies.
	The deficit's coming down.
	Jobs are going up.
	We're on our way to peace in North Korea.
	He's fighting for universal health care.
	He's tough on crime.
	He's tough on welfare reform.
	He stole those issues from the Republicans and they're mad!
	Well, no wonder he's upset with Falwell, because the way you just described him, he sounds like our creator.
	this uh, illegal, unfounded, untruth, uh, charges at him.
	Well, no wonder he's upset with Falwell, because the way you just described him, he sounds like our creator will be
	back.
	You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from June 24th, 1994.
	Wild card line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Good morning, Art.
	Good morning, sir.
	This is Sean calling from Big Sky Country.
	Okay, Sean.
	Or last best place, whatever you want to say.
	ANC's reporting right now about Branch Davidians up in Denison.
	Yes.
	Colorado's saying that they might be armed with weapons.
	Yes, and they've got darkened windows, and you know, I don't quite understand why they're doing what they're doing.
	It's almost as if they are saying to the federal government, here we are, come and try to get us.
	We're ready for a standoff.
	You know, isn't that the way it sounds to you?
	Well, I haven't heard about the darkened windows or anything.
	Basically, what I've heard being reported is Branch Davidians are looking for a new home.
	Yeah, but don't you get the same sense?
	I mean, why would they be so public about this, as if to say, here's where we're going to be.
	You want us?
	Come get us.
	You know, another standoff.
	We're ready.
	Right.
	Yeah, I kind of get that same aspect there, but just I don't know.
	It seems like a big media hype to me.
	Okay, well, we got these branch Davidians in Denison.
	Well, we gotta go in and take care of them there, you know.
	They're bad news, having Davidians, you know, in America.
	Yeah, I heard the sheriff of the town said why they had better not break the law, and he sounded like he was ready to go charging in himself, and I don't know.
	Why do we have to have more of this?
	I don't know.
	I'm just tired of it.
	I'm tired of the O.J.
	thing.
	I'm more concerned about the way this country's going and the socialistic aspects of what's happening.
	And what's going to be left for the next generation?
	Well, that's a good question, Sean.
	Thank you.
	We've got to go to the news.
	Top of the hour.
	We'll be right back.
	You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from June 24th, 1994.
	This is a test.
	This is a test.
	the somewhere in time with our film continues courtesy of
	premier networks welcome back to the best part of the night time
	May we always be around.
	Dear Art, here's a fax from Ken.
	Staying up late tonight to join the show, Rush Limbaugh's great.
	Think he has Clinton on the run.
	Let's hope he can run him out.
	As for Charlie, I think he's a worthless piece of human debris.
	One can only hope that someday people with his lousy attitude realize they were misguided.
	They are the ones that are brainwashed.
	First time caller line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Eric.
	Hi.
	This is Jim from Kenosha, Wisconsin.
	Hi, Jim.
	A couple days ago, I was listening to Rush's show, and he was saying how it was pretty much driven by his opinion.
	Yeah, that's correct.
	His agenda.
	Today, I'm listening to him, and he's talking about how it's a bastion of the seeking of truth.
	And I would suggest that as a commentator, which he has every right to be on the air, Commentary and truth and fact aren't necessarily the same thing.
	They intersect every once in a while.
	And so I think that's what Bill Clinton was getting at, and I think what he did today was a mistake on his part, because it did empower Rush.
	Yeah, it was absolutely a mistake, unless it is a prelude to something dark and really sinister.
	Well, which I sincerely doubt.
	I think it was more a fit of temper than anything else.
	Can't you almost see him sitting at his Oval Office desk, having one of his well-renowned private fits of temper, and grabbing the old executive order for him, and assigning it, and who knows what would happen then?
	Not at all, because I think the fit of temper becomes... It passes, and it's also tempered by cooler heads.
	The point is that I think he's correct.
	And that Rush presenting his show as this beacon of truth, when in fact it's nothing more than his opinion most of the time.
	Well, so it's a beacon of opinion.
	I mean, it really does not matter.
	Rush, as long as he stays within legal limits, is free to say what he wants to say.
	If he wants to claim some sort of absolute written-on-tablet truth, it's his right to do so.
	Well, absolutely.
	But there's people who take it as truth, and that's the danger.
	The danger that I've seen is that, and he flies in the face of his own words in almost the next sentence, is the divisiveness that's caused.
	The point is that, and even you said it earlier tonight, you used the word, you said that the liberals are closer to fascism than any right-wing group ever has been.
	That's right.
	Why paint any group with this broad brush that only causes divide us further?
	I mean, we're all supposed to be working together here.
	No, we're not.
	No, absolutely not.
	That's an absolute myth.
	Look, sir.
	America is based on two or more competing systems of ideals and ideology.
	We're based on that consistent friction.
	That difference.
	That's what makes America strong.
	Not that we all pull behind one wagon no matter what.
	President Clinton, right or wrong, by God, he's our president.
	No.
	That's not what we're all about.
	No, it's not a right or wrong, but you do work with your neighbor, do you, not to try and make your town, you know, on a micro basis.
	Yes!
	Okay, and your neighbor just might happen to be one of those groups that is bashed on Russia's show.
	Maybe so, but what if, sir, what if your neighbor wants to take part of your property for a bike path?
	Oh, are you listening to Milwaukee Radio today?
	No, I just, you know, the Supreme Court had a ruling yesterday with regard to this, and I'm trying to describe to you the difference, the real difference, and the important difference in our points of view about things.
	So I'm not going to pull with my neighbor if he wants to take my land.
	But we have to find the middle ground, otherwise what we end up with is civil war.
	And that doesn't do anybody any good on either side of the fence, does it?
	No, sir, but we have a system that's designed to have this adversarial relationship, for example, between the press and government, various forms of government or branches of government.
	And without that, we've got much more danger to our future than if we were all somehow talked into pulling on the same train.
	I absolutely agree with you.
	I mean, the press as watchdog, which they're roundly criticized for whenever as being negative reporting and so on and so forth.
	Rush has his right, but he should not present as fact and truth that which isn't.
	And that's where we get down to.
	There's a big difference between a commentator and a journalist.
	You like to take on journalists all the time.
	If I was a journalist, I would... Well, the point is, Russ, you're not a journalist, and you don't govern your show by what is supposed to be the standards of journalism.
	Well, but you are the one... But, sir, you are the one required to recognize that difference.
	Well, you're right about that.
	As a listener.
	Pardon me?
	As a listener.
	Yes, and he claims that his listeners do, but when you get the caller called in and says, Mega dittos, Rush!
	In other words, I agree with everything you say.
	I don't think there's much, uh, you know, there isn't discerning listening going on.
	All right, sir.
	Thank you.
	Look, the only rap that I would have against Rush, and he has every right to do it, uh, there's all kinds of different, uh, talk radio.
	And I feel that the best argument against imposition of the Fairness Doctrine, or whatever it is that our Prez has in mind, Is the open line aspect of talk radio.
	And I think that any commentator, talk show host, worth his salt, should not be afraid to face the calls as they come in.
	And by that I mean not screening them out for content, or general interest level, or ratio of agreement with the talk show host before the call is put through.
	On the little computer screen.
	You can always recognize shows that have that, because they will say, John from Milwaukee!
	Hi, welcome to the show!
	Well, the only way John from Milwaukee could be known before the fact was that somebody picked up the call and screened it, and then there are various levels of screening, for agreement, for interest, blah blah blah blah.
	You can scream for all kinds of things, and as I've said, the best argument against a prepared point of view, or a managed point of view, is not managing.
	That's the best argument against it.
	It's what we do here.
	It's a braver form of talk radio, and I'm not saying that I'm that much braver than anybody else.
	I'm just saying that it's a good way to do it, and it's a good argument against regulation.
	That's all.
	And it's my way.
	On the toll-free line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Uh, yes.
	Oh, yes.
	My name is Christine.
	All right, Christine, where are you?
	I'm in Sacramento, California.
	Sacramento.
	KST, yes.
	This is the first time I ever listened to your show, your program.
	Well... I watch the program on TV tonight about the alien thing.
	I wanted to say, That I had an uncle who worked for the Project Blue Book.
	Oh?
	And... The... There was so much secrecy in that, that the people themselves had... They had things done to them that they weren't allowed to talk.
	And danger came to their families also.
	You mean like your family?
	Yeah.
	It became... What kind of danger?
	What happened to your family?
	Well...
	Anyone who worked in high security things, they're not allowed to say anything.
	So you can't tell us what happened?
	Pardon?
	So you can't tell us what happened?
	Well, I know his wife.
	They said his wife committed suicide, but she didn't.
	You know, things like that.
	Well, what do you mean?
	Are you saying his wife was murdered?
	I believe so.
	Why?
	A lot of us do.
	Why?
	Because he worked on the Project Blue Book.
	Well, why would that...
	Well, he knew too much or his wife knew too much?
	He knew too much.
	And so then they killed his wife as a warning?
	I believe so.
	And, you know, a lot of people don't realize that.
	That's why a lot of people don't talk up and they don't say anything.
	Well, if that was the case, my wife would have been dead long ago.
	For as much talking as I do about this sort of thing.
	Or I'd have been dead.
	But here I am.
	Still.
	After all these years.
	On the wild card line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Radio Free America.
	Yes.
	Say, isn't this Fairness Doctrine the censorship art?
	It would depend how it's applied.
	It could turn out to be that.
	Yes.
	You know, aren't these the same folks on the left that decry since, you know, You know, at the mention of censorship, you know, they're appalled at the thought.
	Well, by God, they want their right to burn an American flag.
	You know, that's your right.
	We're not going to take our flag and burn that sucker.
	That's a freedom of expression of speech.
	That's more bombastic babble.
	Anyway, the jury forewoman said the government in the trial tampered with evidence and withheld evidence.
	And there's a rumor, and I'm praying to God it's true, That Jerry Spence is going to be involved in an appeal in the Waco case.
	That would make sense.
	Yeah.
	There's a new video out, I have not seen it, called the Clinton Chronicles.
	Yeah, I've got it.
	I've seen it.
	Is it good?
	On a couple of levels, it is.
	You know, it's the latest Nichols & Company offering.
	And I feel that that video documents cronyism.
	In the Clinton administration, beyond any shadow of a doubt, it documents a lot of cronyism in Arkansas, but a lot of the charges it makes, unfortunately, I think don't stand.
	It's got the executive producer of 60 Minutes on it.
	Yeah, I know.
	He edited the Clinton piece the way he wanted to.
	Yes, he admits it.
	Clinton would never have made it past New Hampshire.
	That is correct.
	He saved Clinton's butt in New Hampshire, and he's been kind of kicked in the butt for it.
	Also, I will fully support what Bill Sapphire is decrying.
	Full disclosure on Whitewater.
	And was Lloyd Cutler the guy that was putting pressure on that guy for 60 minutes?
	Yeah.
	That's amazing.
	It really is.
	All right, sir.
	Thank you.
	What I don't think was made in that film There were allegations of drug dealing.
	I think they were not connected to Clinton.
	Let me repeat that.
	They were not connected to Clinton.
	Then it got down to the body count and the people that have been dying and all the rest of it, and tried to make that case and did not make it.
	So, you know, it did a couple of things very well.
	It certainly documented the lies that have been told, and it documented the cronyism.
	But it didn't make any of the charges that you would need if you were to take any legal action.
	I'm sorry, but that's the way I read it.
	I watched the film very carefully.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Mr. Bell, this is Nathan in Santa Cruz.
	Hello.
	First of all, I'd like to say it's very bad, too bad about that airplane that crashed.
	I didn't catch whether the people were all right or not.
	No, the crew is dead.
	Nobody on the ground was killed, though.
	Then I hope their families are all right, and everything of that nature.
	And generally, if a B-52 comes down in any sort of populated area, anybody generally on the ground does not live through the experience.
	Oh, well, it's good that they lived then, that the people on the ground did.
	Well, anyway, once again, that's very, very too bad.
	And the people there have my Condolences on that.
	Anyways, let me move on.
	I, of course, consider myself a liberal, or at least have in the past, and I'm upset about this idea that I'm somehow out to take away people's guns or to take you off the air.
	I'm a fascist.
	This, to me, is not fair discourse.
	You know, there was a fax that was on earlier Where a fellow said that how often conservatism is equated with fascism.
	Well, I'd like to... I actually agree with him, and I'd like to say that how often even my views are equated as being communism.
	As a matter of fact, just yesterday on local radio, some woman thought I was a communist, and she called in, oh, I'm a communist, and that somehow discredited everything I'm saying.
	When I'm actually... Actually, I'm not.
	I believe in liberty and republic.
	So I think that this kind of discourse can go both ways.
	And you're absolutely right.
	And I think that that I'm sorry, I'm losing my track here.
	But I think that I'm upset by this notion that I'm somehow a fascist or something.
	I don't support the fairness doctrine for television or talk radio.
	Alright, how did you read the President's comments yesterday?
	I have to admit, I didn't exactly follow them.
	I saw the headline that says, Clinton lashes out at Falwell and Limbaugh.
	If Clinton's right to say what he wants to say, as much as it is... Yeah, but I know, but he kind of lost it.
	And Presidents, as a general rule, are best advised to stay above this sort of thing, criticism of this sort, in the media.
	And to lash out that way, particularly in a sort of lost temper situation, is pretty chilling when you're the president.
	Well, I have had many difficulties with various things in the Clinton administration.
	I will say, though, that in my viewpoint, even Reagan, with the criticism he got, didn't seem to be as horrible.
	I mean, to me, the never-minding policy things and things you disagree with, The way that Clinton was handled by the Republicans from the very beginning was absolutely... I mean, if anything, could drive someone over the edge.
	To me, and this is all how it seems to me, of course, it was how Clinton... Not that everything was unfair, but how Clinton was handled from the very beginning, that whole Republican National Convention, to me, was a very, very big I don't know how to describe it.
	All right, well, that's good enough.
	Thank you.
	Well, with regard to Mr. Clinton and being driven over the edge, I think that it's not
	a long journey.
	Somewhere in time with Art Bell continues, courtesy of Premier Networks.
	Hi.
	Hello, Mr. Bell.
	Hello.
	This is Bog Radio Off in Tacoma, Washington.
	Yes.
	Luckily, I just moved.
	I called to talk about the, uh, aliens you were speaking of earlier.
	Yes.
	I found out that, uh, you know, you get a lot of information and little pieces of a puzzle, and it starts forming a picture.
	On abductions, there are certain people who are abducted throughout their entire life
	and this is used for experimentation and or as one woman on a show was saying, she was
	implanted and then abducted again and they were taken out and rovers were taken out and
	they were grown in test tubes so to speak and this is to get people or aliens who look
	like us who could pass for us down here.
	Well, that's really gonna be a problem, because if they look like us, how is one to know?
	Uh, we really aren't, to tell you the truth.
	Well, that's it.
	And, see, every time I open my alien line, what do I get?
	Aliens.
	Lots of them.
	People claiming to be aliens, walking among us, but saying they are aliens.
	All right, well, thank you very much for the call.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	It's Virginia in Tucson.
	Hi, Virginia.
	How are you?
	Just fine.
	That Doc Democrat really got my goat.
	I had to call.
	I just feel like they're always bashing people that have any kind of faith at all.
	Well, to me, as I listened to Doc this morning, I could almost see Bill Clinton slowly descending to earth on gossamer wings, you know, an angelic figure come to set all right with us.
	Well, I'm going to tell you that not all people that have faith are ignorant.
	I am very interested in history.
	I've read a lot about the Civil War, about Abraham Lincoln, the Black Movement.
	I've served in the Air Force.
	I worked on the Minuteman Missile Project.
	I've studied on In Search of Noah's Ark, which was James Irwin, who was an astronaut, was very interested in.
	I love politics.
	I have a rounded view.
	But when it comes to my faith, I'm very centered on it because I know exactly what I believe.
	But I don't believe in pushing it off on anybody else either.
	And I just don't understand the mentality of somebody that will say, Bible thumper.
	What do they mean by that?
	Jerry Falwell, Leonard, people who are vocal about their faith and They are as extreme on one side as some of the faith are on the other.
	That's the way I view it.
	Look, this is America, dammit.
	People have a right to say what they want.
	I'm not a Bible thumper, but I would sure get out and fight to protect the Bible thumpers, you know, if somebody tried to shut them down.
	Well, you have to look at it this way.
	One minute it's guns, one minute it's cigarettes, one minute it's Bible thumpers.
	What's next?
	Talk show host.
	It better not be.
	We're out of luck right now.
	Well, that's right, but I mean, how else do you read not very far between the lines in the President's remarks yesterday?
	Well, I'll tell you what it made me think of was when he made that remark about the Waco Wackos.
	Yeah.
	He said they were religious nuts, and I'll tell you what, that's really something to be concerned about.
	I feel like tapping my pen like Rush Limbaugh.
	I mean, it just makes you angry.
	We're supposed to have tolerance for everything they want to do, but oh boy, I don't have any tolerance for me if I want to even mention what I believe in.
	Dear lady, there is no less tolerant group than the liberals.
	None.
	They are the closest to fascism.
	They're closer to fascism on the left than the right ever was.
	Thanks for the call.
	Goodbye.
	There's absolutely no question about it.
	On the left, they are coming closer to fascism than the right ever thought of doing.
	This is Premier Networks.
	That was Art Bell hosting Coast to Coast AM.
	On this, Somewhere in Time.
	Strange world design won't make foolish people.
	I've never dreamed that I'd meet somebody like you.
	I never dreamed that I knew somebody like you I never dreamed that I knew somebody like you
	I never dreamed that I knew somebody like you somewhere in time.
	Tonight, featuring Coast to Coast AM, from June 24th, 1994.
	Not enough time left this morning.
	Boy, I tell you, these shows just fly by.
	Good to be with you.
	I'm Art Bell, and if you'd like to join us, pick up a telephone in these declining moments of the live portion of the show.
	On the wild card line, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hello, Art.
	Hi.
	Jose Honolulu again?
	Yes, Jose.
	All right.
	Listen, I think Clinton is just afraid of the religious right, if you will.
	Oh, afraid of?
	Perhaps angry at?
	Angry.
	Frustrated with?
	Kind of losing it with?
	Yes.
	You know, he needs to blame somebody for his health care and whatever else.
	His popularity is just awful.
	Yeah, I think he generally blames talk radio as a general rule and Rush specifically.
	In particular?
	That's right.
	I think Michael Reagan is much worse than Rush is.
	For the decline and death of his health program and now the crime bill.
	There is a provision that he's put in the crime bill, Jose, that would allow prisoners to Uh, file appeals based on the fact that more of one race than another is executed.
	I'm aware of that.
	That's right.
	And, uh, if it goes through, uh, then his crime, his crime bill is not going to go through, Jose.
	I, I hope not.
	And, uh, can you, I just thought of something.
	Can you imagine the, the, the fit he must have with a step on all of us like he normally has?
	Yes.
	Now I imagine he's lashing, uh, Or even caning Stepanopoulos on a regular basis for all of this.
	Oh, gosh.
	That's funny.
	Did you hear what he said, what the big guy said yesterday?
	Yeah.
	Well, have a good one, Harsh.
	Take care, Jose.
	Aloha.
	That's Jose in Honolulu.
	On the wild card line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello, Harsh.
	Hi.
	This is Mike in San Diego.
	Hi, Mike.
	K-O-G-O, San Diego.
	Yeah.
	Good show tonight.
	Glad you've enjoyed it.
	It's too bad he couldn't stay a little longer, but... Yeah, I know.
	I tell you, talk shows are like good books.
	I actually get upset with them when they're ending.
	It's like there's not enough time left.
	It's not fair.
	Yeah, even with five hours it seems short sometimes.
	It really does.
	I hear you didn't get a chance to see Encounters tonight.
	No, I missed it.
	Yeah, I taped half of it, and it was pretty good.
	There, you know, there was so much news going on, so much going on, that I just, I had to pay attention to that.
	The whole OJ thing was going crackers.
	I needed to have a good understanding of what happened with the grand jury, so I spent time with that.
	Yeah, it's really overwhelming with that story.
	Unbelievable.
	I wanted to ask you about your sighting.
	My sighting?
	Yeah.
	Are you familiar with Strange Magazine?
	Strange Magazine?
	No.
	Yeah, it's got topics on everything.
	Right.
	And they describe something seen in England that sounded very similar to your sighting.
	My triangular vehicle of unknown origin?
	Yeah, it's a short paragraph that describes a black triangular aerial object seen over Bakewell in England.
	Right.
	Over 30 witnesses.
	They said it had bright white lights on each of its corners with red lights in between.
	Really?
	And it traveled at approximately 40 miles per hour.
	That sounds just like what I saw.
	What I saw was traveling at about 40 miles an hour, too.
	It was just sort of floating along.
	Yeah, I thought that was very strange when I read it.
	Well, it is.
	And I thank you for the report.
	And it was really strange because when I gave that report, I hadn't even heard about triangular objects.
	I always thought they were saucers, you know, and mine had to be a triangle.
	So I came on and I reported, dooleys, told the audience.
	All of a sudden, everybody starts sending me this stuff about triangular objects.
	It just, it blew me away.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Green River, Wyoming.
	K-U-T-R.
	Green River, Wyoming.
	Yes, sir.
	Yeah, I'd like to say that if the President is unsatisfied with Rush Limbaugh, he can take Of course we have, and sue him for slander.
	I don't think he'd ever do that, because he'd be afraid.
	No, actually he can't.
	The President, like Rush Limbaugh, and like myself, is a public person.
	And the rules of slander, libel, apply very differently toward public people.
	So he can't?
	Right.
	More or less, he can't.
	He's going to have to come at Rush in a different way.
	He's going to Have to regulate Rush Off The Air, bring back the Fairness Doctrine, and I would imagine, if you read between the lines, that's probably going to be next.
	Sounds like it.
	On the Fairness Doctrine, doesn't it work?
	It wouldn't put you off the air, but, like, the little stations?
	I mean, not just the little, but any of the stations, if people that are listening to it don't like it, they can... Well, yeah, it depends, sir, on how it's applied.
	It might put me off the air.
	Um, it might put a lot of people off the air.
	It basically would require, uh, that if one, uh, point of view is consistently or repetitively, uh, uh, aired, um, that an equal, uh, opposing voice would, would have to be provided.
	Now, the end effect of that for the licensees of the radio stations would be that it, they would be, um, In other words, be so much they would have to do that it would be easier for them in the end and cheaper for them to just throw up their arms and say, we give up.
	You know, let's play Elvis Presley oldies.
	Also on the Soundgene, the one you're advertising?
	Soundgene, yes.
	Soundgene.
	Can you hook it up to a computer?
	I read about it where you can get like the weather, satellite reports and stuff that they fax.
	The answer is, of course, yes.
	OK.
	That's all I needed to know.
	OK, thank you.
	Sure.
	WeatherFacts.
	The Sanjean would provide an output that would be compatible with WeatherFacts.
	So sure, you can do that.
	And if you know where to listen and so forth, you can get weather pictures that will show you basically what other forecasters see.
	Maps of the United States with the clouds and weather fronts and all the rest of it if you know what to look for.
	On the A wild card line, you're on the air, hello.
	Hey Art, how are you?
	Just fine.
	I'm really happy to get through to you.
	My name is Kevin and I'm calling from Portland on 1190KEF.
	Oh, the big one in Portland, yes.
	Yes, and I saw Vance Davis up in the Puget Sound area tonight and I listened to you on my way back home.
	And I wanted to tell you a little bit about what he had to say, but first of all I wanted to talk to you about the health care program.
	Sure.
	I really don't think that it's dead, like you do, because just today, moderate, as they're called, moderate Republicans have been trying to work something out with Democrats.
	Right, but what's dead is what the President said he must have, and that is 100% coverage that can never be taken away.
	That, believe me, is dead.
	Now, our President has said, maybe he doesn't mean it, That anything less than that put on his desk will draw his vengeful veto.
	But don't you think they could come up with some agreement that would say within, say, 15 years it's going to be worked in?
	Yeah, I think they could.
	So really it's the same?
	I just don't think he can sign it.
	Oh, I'll bet you he can.
	I'm afraid.
	Well, yeah, you know, he may say in the end, what's better?
	A little bit of socialism or no socialism?
	And really, it's a lot of socialism.
	It's just going to take a little bit longer to be enacted.
	Incremental socialism or no socialism?
	How about that?
	And really, that's how it's been working for the last at least 20 years.
	It's been incremental, step-by-step-by-step-by-step, and it's really... I'm 25 years old, and I heard your caller from St.
	Louis a couple hours ago.
	He's 24, and he was saying the people of his generation Lot of Mara socialist and I see the same darn thing and it's
	it makes me Nervous and a little bit put off because when I was younger
	1415 I thought a lot of people I was around were pretty rational thinking
	Youngsters and it seems like once they've gone through the school system once they've gone through college
	They come out and a lot of them are What I would say confused brainwashed. Well, I don't know
	if it's brainwashing It's just that they keep hearing the same... It is brainwashing.
	...as Rush would say, Barbra Streisand, BS, over and over.
	It is.
	Look, it is brainwashing.
	What do you think brainwashing is?
	Yeah, I guess, I suppose that's it.
	It's a repetitive message until finally you're saying yes and repeating it.
	It's not, not good.
	And, uh, that, you know, talk radio is really the only outlet that a conservative voice has.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	Which is why the president took off on it like a banshee yesterday.
	Sure, because there's nothing left.
	There's not newspapers.
	You can't afford to be on television, I doubt, for four hours a night.
	Well, maybe I could, but I don't want to be.
	Yeah, it's a different thing.
	I hate television.
	Yeah.
	And I hate TV.
	Well, let me tell you, Vance was very interesting.
	Was he?
	And I saw him last night.
	There was a little Discussion with about ten people, and I was able to wrangle my way into that, which was great.
	And then tonight, Andy, you had five new predictions, and I thought I might share them with you.
	Share them with us.
	Okay, I'll start at number five and work my way up to the big one.
	All right.
	But number five, man finds first birthplace of man by 2045.
	All right.
	And four, great upheaval that destroys most of Florida and brings up ancient cities will occur by 2012.
	Number three, government will introduce the first alien to the citizens in 1996.
	Wow.
	And number one and two follows, but an earthquake on the West Coast measuring 14.6 will occur in 1996.
	What?
	Well, that would be the East China Sea meeting the California coast.
	It would be off the Richter scale.
	Yes, that's right.
	He didn't say if it would be Oregon, Washington, Even, uh, B.C.
	or Alaska.
	Oh, listen, Nevada.
	Throw in Nevada.
	Nevada's always destroyed in any prediction these days.
	I'm so sick of it.
	I really am.
	I mean, Nevada's always destroyed.
	Always.
	The first target of a nuclear war?
	Nevada.
	Let's push the button on Nevada.
	I'm tired of it.
	And like you said earlier, where do we send all the waste?
	Get dumped on both ways.
	That's right.
	Anyway, it's great to talk to you, and I'm a first-time caller, but I will be calling you again.
	Please do.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, pal.
	Right.
	Why is that about Nevada anyway?
	Why do we always have to be destroyed?
	Well, Art, because you're the center of sin.
	You're the capitalist, the boil on capitalism.
	That's what you are, and you've got to be destroyed.
	we'll be right back to Art Bell somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM, from June 24th, 1994.
	On the wildcard line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Hi, Bell.
	Yes.
	Uh, let's see.
	I'm listening to your commercial, calling me off guard.
	I'm calling about the crime bill, which is... Not much has happened on it in the last... It's in trouble.
	Hopefully.
	Yeah, hopefully.
	It's in trouble.
	This is a police state empowerment bill, and it will empower...
	A police state quite a bit if it ever gets through.
	And, uh, I hope it won't.
	It looks like, um... Well, if it dies, it's not gonna die because it's a police state, Bill.
	It's gonna die because there are things in it that the Republicans will not swallow and will not allow, and it will be talked to death.
	Well, so far, a couple appointments have been made in the, uh, uh... committee that have uh... uh... they have not been able to uh... uh... do the committee uh... appointments of uh... well they just haven't met and fortunately and it's very good news that uh... uh... it's not out of committee yet
	No, and in the way things are going, it may not get out.
	Thank you.
	The President's crime bill's in trouble.
	The President's health care bill, as he's described it, in absolutely impossible trouble.
	And these things ought to be in trouble.
	We don't want them passed.
	So, this is good news, and what you heard the President do yesterday with regard to the Republicans, the religious right, and Rush Limbaugh, That was sort of a flashpoint expression of frustration at these things not going through.
	He needed somebody to blame.
	Falwell's a good whipping boy.
	Rush Limbaugh's a good whipping boy.
	Conservative talk shows are good whipping boys.
	That's fine.
	It's just that we need to watch carefully that it is not something more ominous than that.
	You heard a severe presidential temper yesterday.
	It could be manifested next in regulatory action or some sort of presidential action with regard to talk shows.
	That would not be good.
	A couple of notes here very quickly.
	Time is rapidly escaping, I'm sorry to say, and this program is nearly over.
	I will be back Sunday, this coming, on many of these same stations, with Dreamland.
	And this Sunday's Dreamland features Dr. Bruce McAbee, who is one of the greats when it comes to scientific investigation of UFO evidence.
	So don't you dare miss that, Dr. Bruce McAbee, coming this Sunday on Dreamland.
	It'll be a hot one, beginning at 7 o'clock Pacific Time.
	If your station does not yet have Dreamland, call and be nice when you do it and ask your station manager or program director if it wouldn't be possible to take Dreamland.
	Now, it does not always have to air at the time that it airs, Sunday 7 to 10.
	A lot of stations have obligations.
	They can record it off the network and replay it.
	And by the way, The network replays Dreamland every Saturday afternoon between 5 and 8 p.m., 5 and 8 o'clock, Pacific Time.
	So there are plenty of opportunities.
	You can tape it.
	You can play it back.
	One way or the other, I would just like to see it get to the audience.
	A lot of people want it.
	When you call your radio station, be nice.
	Be polite.
	I've got some people out there so desperate to get it, they call these radio stations and they say something like this.
	You know, what you've got on the air is really a bunch of crap.
	What a bunch of crappy programming.
	Why don't you get Dreamland?
	Well there's just a great introduction and way to get Dreamland on the air.
	You insult the person that you're talking to.
	Don't do that.
	You know, one person's trash is another person's treasure.
	And it may be that if it's some sports show or something, There's a lot of people out there treasuring it could care less about Dreamland.
	So, be nice and just express your wish and ask nicely and say thank you.
	That's the way to deal with people.
	You get, what is it, more flies with honey than vinegar or something?
	Not to compare radio station ownership as flies, but you want to be nice to them if you can, so please do.
	The other is, as soon as I get off the air here, I will go on short wave, that's right.
	Warm up the big rig over here, and I'll be on the 75 meter band, 38.92, 3.892 lower side band, soon as I get off the air, minutes from right now.
	On the wild card line, you're on the air, top of the morning.
	Yes, KSMA Santa Maria.
	Well, good morning.
	In the beginning you were talking about land.
	Yes.
	And a lot of the hunting.
	Homestead Horse and Camping Magazines are warning about bills floating through Congress, excuse me, about fees and taxes and outlawing general use of these lands for just about any purpose on trails, parks, all of these things.
	And it seems like they're coming after it by gun control.
	And these environmentalists are just, they're really fueling the fire and it's just, Getting out of control, and I just wanted to make that point.
	Well, you made it, sir.
	Thank you, and you're dead right, and that, too, is beginning to get to be very worrisome.
	On the toll-free line with seconds to go, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, this is Dennis in Phoenix, KFYI.
	Hey, Dennis, how you doing?
	Fine, thanks.
	You know, every night I listen, I hear Charlie and Doctor come on in, and it makes everybody want to call in to rebut whatever they have to say.
	I just wanted to say one thing about Clinton and what he did yesterday with the right.
	Very quickly.
	Okay.
	He never misses a photo opportunity to put a cross in the sand over in Europe, or every time he's coming out of church and stuff, yet he still wants to bring down the religious right and everything.
	Oh, you're dead on.
	Thank you, my friend.
	I'm sorry, we've gotta go.
	That's all the time there is.
	I live and die by the clock, and right now it's die time, so... But, generally, never say die.
	See you next week, or see you Sunday on Dreamland.

▲