Art Bell’s 1996 replay features Ray Crowe of the Western Bigfoot Society, who debunks sensational claims like the Roger Patterson film (1967) and Cliff Crook’s photo while defending non-lethal research like Peter Byrne’s motion-detector project. Crowe estimates thousands of Bigfoots nationwide, criticizing media hype and legal debates over their humanity, like a hung-jury mock trial in Carson, Washington. Bell pivots to politics, praising Alan Keyes’ debate performance but clashing with callers over Pat Buchanan’s ties to Larry Pratt amid white supremacist allegations, dismissing it as political expediency. The episode also touches on domestic terrorism—FBI-confirmed tampering in a Minnesota train wreck—and warns against systemic violence, while Bell rejects slippery-slope arguments like legalizing bigamy or questioning China’s threat to Taiwan. Ultimately, the discussion blends cryptozoology skepticism with far-reaching conspiracy theories and conservative critiques of government and media integrity. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening this morning across all these many time zones, stretching from the Tahitian Islands, brings a certain vision, Hawaii, all the way across this great flyover land through the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands South, well into South America North to Santa Country and the Pole.
This is Live Overnight Talk Radio.
I'm Mark Bell.
The program is named Coast to Coast A.M. Ever the Same.
Always something a little different for you.
Tonight shall be no exception.
I want to tell you I've got a big announcement coming up at midnight tonight.
I have a time in about 55 minutes, something like that.
Big announcement, and so I will just clench my teeth and not say a whole lot more about it.
I've now got two other announcements that I'm going to make.
One is a tomorrow night's program.
I had occasion to, for about 30 minutes today, talk with the program manager, the director, the guy who is running Project HARP in Alaska, John Hecher.
And I talked to him for about 30 minutes, and I had a whale of a conversation with him, which I did not regard as a satisfactory conversation for a number of reasons, and they will become apparent tomorrow night when I have Dr. Nick Begich back on the program from Alaska.
Dr. Nick Begich's subject HARP is a result of a conversation I had earlier today.
So we're going to look once again into this incredible project up in Alaska with what's called an ionospheric heater and the implications of it and my conversations with the director.
And we're going to talk a little bit once again with Dr. Begich about that for reasons, as I said, that are going to become very apparent to you.
Now, tonight, I'm going to do something here in the first hour in a moment that I've been very much wanting to do and I've been pursuing, as a lot of you know, and that is the story of Bigfoot.
So I've been looking for somebody who knows something about Bigfoot, and Ray was going to be with us tomorrow evening, but I've moved him up to this evening for the latter reasons regarding what's going to occur tomorrow night.
And Ray was kind enough to jump up to the position, and so in a moment we're going to a man who heads the Western Bigfoot Association in Oregon.
His name is Ray Crow and he'll be with us in just a moment.
unidentified
*Skiss*
Coast of Coast AM is happy to announce that our website is now optimized for mobile device users, specifically for the iPhone and Android platforms.
Now you'll be able to connect to most of the offerings of the Coast website on your phone in a quick and streamlined fashion.
And if you're a Coast Insider, you'll have our great subscriber features right on your phone, including the ability to listen to live programs and screen previous shows.
No special app is necessary to enjoy our new mobile site.
Simply visit Coast2CoastAM.com on your iPhone or Android browser.
Streamlink, the audio subscription service of Coast2Coast AM has a new name, Coast Insider.
You'll still get all the same great features for the same low price, just 15 cents a day when you sign up for one year.
The package includes podcasting, which offers the convenience of having shows downloaded automatically to your computer or MP3Player, and the iPhone app with live and on-demand programs.
You'll also get our amazing download library of three full years of shows.
Just think, as a new subscriber, over 1,000 shows will be available for you to collect, enjoy, and listen to at your leisure.
Plus, you'll get streamed and on-demand broadcasts of Art Bell, Summer Inside Shows, and two weekly classics.
And as a member, you'll have access to our monthly live chat sessions with George Norrie and special guests.
If you're a fan of Coast, you won't want to be without Coast Insider.
Visit CoastToCoastAM.com to sign up today.
Looking for the truth?
You'll find it on Coast2Coast AM with George Norrie.
I think now, as we look back, we can probably say with pretty good certainty that some people in government might have been aware of what was going on and they turned their cheek the other way just to let it happen.
I also believe that some bigger groups got involved with al-Qaeda to do what they did on that horrible day.
This wasn't just a small group of people who came in and did their thing.
There was a much bigger picture there.
And if you see the events that have unfolded since this tragedy occurred, how we've lost rights, how we used it to go in Afghanistan and Iraq, and how it has really not stopped, because it's going to continue.
We're going to have more and more episodes and more and more involvement in other countries.
And just mark my word, this planet is going through an incredible change.
And thank God we've got you here to talk with us about it.
Now we take you back to the night of February 15, 1996 on Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
You mean you thought they were like the old gold prospectors that would scatter nuggets out in the fields?
unidentified
Yes, exactly, yeah.
But the group that took me out was the kind that, oh, they like to ride back and forth in their cars with their guns and things like that, and dressed in camo gear.
And I'd been a naturalist most of my life, and I liked to just get out and snoop around on foot.
And so I had them deliberately leave me behind, which is something if they were setting me up, they wouldn't have known about.
But they weren't gone 15 minutes before I found a set of Bigfoot tracks going down the side of the road.
Well, as a matter of fact, there's some scientist, it's a wire story, that is now, they are testing some Bigfoot fur or hair, whatever you want to call it.
unidentified
Well, yes and no.
The problem with this is the fellow that selected the hair was on Good Morning America once and said that he faked tracks.
And so that, you know, we immediately wonder, well, I wonder where the hair came from.
He submitted some hair once before that turned out to be synthetic fibers.
Right.
And so, you know, we're just holding our breath.
You know, we'll wait and see.
You know, even the worst drunk coaxer, drug addict, whatever, could see a Bigfoot and could find Bigfoot evidence.
So, you know, we're not writing him off completely, but we're keeping a pretty jaundiced eye on him.
I take it you are sort of a even though you speak on the subject, you're a little bit skeptical, or skeptical at least of the claims made by many people in the field about things.
unidentified
Yes, I am.
As a matter of fact, I'm very skeptical.
But I listen to everything, and I don't let my skeptism overrun when I'm talking to somebody.
No, I think I just let them know like they're telling me the truth.
I do have a newsletter, and then I write all these things up in my newsletter, and I let my readers decide, well, hey, is this a good report or not?
If something hokey shows up, I'll try to include that, too.
Okay, he's very well funded from the Boston Academy of Science, has a lot of really high-tech equipment.
And his idea is using motion detectors and infrared cameras and things that transmit back to the home base to pick up a Bigfoot spur or something moving through the woods that will move his motion detectors.
It's over 300 pounds.
And they'll sight one of these things.
Well, they have a contract with Hillsborough Helicopter here in Oregon.
And what they will do is go up with one of those infrared devices and hunt for the creature.
Well, assuming they do find one, then they use the geosatellite location devices to track its movements with, and then they'll try and on the ground get a choke point.
That is, you know, force it into some place where they can get close to it.
There is a scientist up in Washington State, and I think it was one of the Seattle papers, and then otherwise in other papers, there was a report that suggested he's saying, look, the first Bigfoot any hunter, anybody finds, ought to be shot and killed.
And when the second one is shot and killed, whoever did it ought to be hung.
He's saying for the sake of science that at least one Bigfoot ought to be shot, killed, and I presume dissected and examined at great length.
And that's the reasoning behind what he's saying.
What do you think about that?
unidentified
Well, we're talking to Dr. Krantz, of course, and he's very well known, and his opinions are very well known.
We just think they're rather outdated is all.
You know, back in the 1930s and so forth, if you wanted to find a new panda or a new whatever, he always brought in a corpse and dissected it.
Well, tranquilizers, I think, have to take into account the mass, weight, size of the animal.
unidentified
Exactly.
And if you're wrong, then the animal could very well die or could get pretty pissed at getting darted and chasing.
I don't know if I can say that on the radio or not.
Too late anyways.
But it could come right after you, too.
So we tell everybody, you know, just when you see something like that, photograph it, look at everything you can.
Try to communicate if you can.
Oddly enough, these things are incredibly curious.
I have many, many reports.
As a matter of fact, my first story, I was told by this old fellow up in Carson, Washington, Davis Perry is his name, that if you take a stick and you wrap it on a stump or a tree and make a knocking noise, and you do it in a pattern like three wraps and pause and two wraps and pause, you'll get an answer.
And so I spent all day wandering around the woods feeling like a fool doing this one day.
But all of a sudden I got an answer.
And it just floored me.
I was just really shocked.
And I've mentioned this to several other people since then, and they've had the same results.
Quite a few people, as a matter of fact.
And I found that there was a society at one time in California, the Bay Area group, where they've done the same thing.
And they'd even written a paper on it.
A fellow had made a big drum-like thing and taken it up in the woods and banged it around and had replies.
Something to do with the curiosity of the things, or maybe it's some communication thing that they recognize themselves and use.
You alluded to the fact that Bigfoot might be human.
What exactly do you think Bigfoot is?
unidentified
Okay, now my personal opinion, and there's lots and lots of people that disagree with this, Dr. Krantz in particular, I think it's an early man, and I'm going for a relic Homo erectus.
There's a lot of other, one of the arguments is, you know, well, if it's an early man, Why is it hairy?
Because early men were great brave hunters and they chased antelope over the plains until they dropped and therefore they lost their hair and became man.
But now science is beginning to look just exactly to the opposite.
He thinks those early people were scavengers and not hunters.
Very well, they might be hairy.
The size, Bigfoots are reported to be pretty good size.
That one there in California was 7'3, I believe.
But then Homo erectus is a pretty good guy.
Leakey has uncovered one in Africa, Naracomi boy, I think they call it.
He was a six-footer, and generally they're six-footers.
And which isn't really when you consider our average human span from some of our basketball players and their feet, you can see, well, there's no big stretch of the imagination to get a Bigfoot out of it at seven foot.
In other words, I almost imagine that a Bigfoot could either be part of society or just be a human being not caring one bit for society and living in the wild as other animals live in the wild.
unidentified
That's a yes and no, but we're talking about two different species.
We're going back to Ray Crowe, who is the director of the Western Bigfoot Society, is in Portland.
We're talking about, Ray, what Bigfoot is.
And I had a guy joking, obviously, I think, last night, send me a message.
And the message was, I'm a Bigfoot, and I shave every day before I go to work.
My whole body.
Well, if a Bigfoot was hairless, could a Bigfoot, in your opinion, walk the streets of our cities and not be known or discerned?
unidentified
Well, I think he can put a suit on him, probably, and he would probably get by as long as nobody spoke to him.
I don't think they have an oral language like we do.
Their throats, I don't think, are built for it.
But yes, I think he can put a hat on and a suit and a tie, and he can walk down the street if he was all shaved, clean-shaved.
But that just gets a wet bit away from the music.
A deer and an elk are in the same family of animals.
But they're completely different.
They have different habits, and they do different things, and they have different languages between them, whatever.
The same is like with early humans and ourselves.
I don't think we could breed.
That's not for sure yet.
But what I'm trying to make you say is there is a big distinction.
And the thing I'd mentioned to you before about what I was talking about was in Scamania County in the state of Washington, it's against the law to kill a Bigfoot.
And the reason they enacted that law was to keep people from running up all around in the woods with guns and so forth.
But it's sort of been picked up as something that should be applied everywhere in the country.
But to put this to a test once, we thought it'd be fun.
We went to Carson, Washington, to the Bigfoot campground, and we had a meeting.
This was last August.
And our meeting was a mock trial.
And the actual brunt of the whole thing was that the law reads that if the thing is an ape, and you convince the coroner that it's an ape, then it's only a gross misdemeanor to kill one.
But if it is indeed proved to be human, then you're going to be bound over for murder.
And so we had one of our members, Mr. Larry Lund, who's probably listening in.
He volunteered to be the killer.
And we got a stuffed gorilla costume and put it in a costume.
And a bagpiper piped it in.
And the police brought him in in handcuffs.
We had a local sheriff was in on it.
And we had, as a matter of fact, we had three judges show up.
And the other one came in and says, well, more or less like with the OJ type thing, that, hey, these tests were all proven to be invalid from that one place.
Consequently, these are all in doubt, too.
Which completely threw our other prosecutor for Lou, speaking of which, she was a very attractive young lady that flew up from Los Angeles to be our prosecuting attorney.
And I'm sure if there ever was brought to trial, it'd end up being a circus at any rate.
But still, the teeth are there, and maybe one of these days somebody, some hunter is going to do that, go up and knock one of them things off and say, hey, here I am.
You know, I've killed one of them things.
And, of course, immediately somebody will confiscate the body, and it'll end up being dissected, and he won't get anything out of it other than that.
Somebody that I respect very, very much, Linda Howe, who appears on my Sunday show Dreamland, got what seems to be a very, very credible tape of an alleged Bigfoot scream or yell actually recorded in the forest.
And it was quite a long story that I'm not going to burden you with right now, Ray, but here is that sound.
All right, toward that end, and I'm probably asking you to speculate or guess now, but what else can you do when you're talking about Bigfoot?
Is there any guess, has anybody made any guess about how many there might be?
What is the population of Bigfoot?
I mean it's silly to ask, I know, because we can barely get our hands on one or can't.
But what do you think it might be?
unidentified
We've made a lot of approaches.
We've done some analysis of population studies of gorillas and tried to compare them and things like that.
And supposedly the best guess right now is Dr. Kranz's, and I'll go along with that, that for every 10 or 100 bears, there's one Bigfoot, which would mean across the nation there's thousands of them.
Because these things occur in every state.
We have reports from Florida and Pennsylvania are a couple of the biggest report areas.
And then out on the west coast, of course, Oregon, Washington, and California.
But there, you know, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, you wouldn't expect them out in these dry areas.
No, you wouldn't.
But there, again, it's because we have this thing in our head that, hey, these are deep forest things.
The only place they live is in Virgin Forest.
And that's not true.
They like the secondary areas best.
They come into the outskirts of communities, raid garbage cans, do all kinds of stuff like that, especially if it's a bad winter and they're hungry.
You can pretty much pattern these things after the bears with the exception that they're a whole different critter.
Right now we have a sort of a stroke of luck going.
There's a town called Malala, Oregon, recently in the news from all the flooding and stuff.
Oh, yeah.
But anyway, on the Malala River south of town, there's one of the residents down there, and I don't know what his reasons are, but he's been putting cabbages and apples out for these things.
Consequently, well, they're not really tame, but we get an awful lot of reports out of that area.
And they seem to be good reports.
We're getting them from responsible people who seem to know what they're doing.
And they're going out there.
At any rate, most recently, just, well, it'll be December now, was the last report.
And the thing, it was pouring rain in the campground.
And the thing was standing behind the tree, just staring at some campers.
Stayed there for quite a while until one of the campers got up and walked towards it, and it faded back into the woods again.
But the point is, if you look at it real close, it almost seems like it's baggy in the legs.
The feet are white.
Our impression is that it's wearing tennis shoes.
We don't think too much of that film.
It might very well be real, but I don't think so.
As a matter of fact, to tell the truth, the news media isn't really very discriminating.
They're pretty sensationalistic, actually.
So if something is reported on the newspaper or the TV or something like that to your listeners, you know, take very seriously the possibility of being hoaxed.
Now, despite the fact that you've looked at some of these things that have really made the headlines, and you come away doubtful about them, you still have a basic belief that the Bigfoot thing is real, don't you?
unidentified
Exactly, right.
The problem is about 90% of the reports that come in are hoaxes, errors, one thing or another, but that still doesn't mean I don't pay any attention to them because I know there are some of those reports that are good, and we do our best to investigate them all.
But you never know.
For instance, the Peter Byrne that I was talking about earlier once told me a story that he'd investigated of a state policeman that had come and told him about a Bigfoot sighting.
Well, he went back with a state policeman, and the policeman was very embarrassed because there was just a big black stump there.
Point being is that had he not gone to investigate that, then it would have gone down as a good sighting just because it was a state policeman.
And so there are good stories, and there are going to be poor stories.
That's why I say even drunk or dope addict or whatever, they could see one just as well as anybody else.
We just have to look at the stories.
We have one that just came in recently, and we'll be going to investigate that very soon as soon as the roads are open again.
They're all landslides, closed roads east of Estaceda.
And this is where a couple had gone into an old mining tunnel, and they were just poking around.
And here was one of these things inside the front entrance of it.
This is just east of the town of Estacada in Oregon.
And that was, let me glance at my note here.
That was January the 2nd.
We want to go up there and check that one out real close.
They reported also that there was a nest or bed inside made of sticks and moss and ferns.
Is it a nesting kind of thing, do you believe, or lives in caves or generally in the open?
Or what's the best guess?
unidentified
Very, very mixed.
We get reports of all these things, and it's hard to nail them down.
That's why I'd like to nail some of these bed reports.
I have a lot of bed reports, for instance, where they've done this, well, on sticks with ferns and moss and things.
So I'm pretty much think that's what they're doing.
There's other reports, though, that tell of the things just in the snowstorms, just buckling up on their knees and hunching their back and waiting out the snowstorm.
So in terms of caves, I don't really get many good cave reports.
This will be, that's one of the reasons we want to check this one out, because it might very well be a good cave report.
But mostly even then, they're not deep caves like they live underground, but they'll be inside the lip or a rock overhang or something to keep out of the weather.
Okay, what advice would you give somebody if you actually in the woods or wherever else, even out in the open, encountered one of these creatures like any other wild animal, especially a bear?
unidentified
But don't run away.
Study it.
Like even if you run from a bear or any wild animal, there's a good chance they'll chase you.
Whereas if you just stand still and ignore them or look the other way, don't stare them in the eyes.
But take in all the detail you can.
It'll be a unique experience if you run across one of these creatures.
I had multiple reports that Dan Rather on his nightly newscast on CBS the other night, twice, once at the beginning of the program, once at the end, made a statement that Bigfoot was being added to the endangered species list.
Had you heard that?
unidentified
I've heard this, and I've heard that Dan Rather said that, and I've talked to several people about it, and so far the best I can get is until they prove it exists, they can't put it on the endangered species list.
But, you know, there might have somebody else might have done it anyways.
Would you say that there is enough proof of the existence of Bigfoot, even just by tales and photos and some moving video, to justify, if you could do it, would you put Bigfoot on endangered species list?
unidentified
That's a tough one to answer.
I just don't really know, Art.
Like we say, there's probably thousands of them.
Once you put something out, you bring it to official notice, then museums are going to want to get out there and naturalists are going to want to get out there and poke around in their private lives, which may or may not be good.
His bosses wouldn't let him go on the program, and I told him he'd get a fair and honest interview.
That I am not somebody who generally pins my guests up to the wall and sweats them.
I don't do that.
But without going into detail, he's not going to come on.
Will come on.
And despite my best urgings, and I mentioned to him, and he's well aware, has heard the show with Dr. Nick Begich in Alaska on HARP.
Despite all that and the bad PR that HARP has had, and I said, look, I'll give you a genuine opportunity to come on here and tell your side of the story.
I did ask him a number of technical questions.
And to sum it up, I was not at all pleased with the answers I got.
And I poured a lot of my blood, sweat, and tears into this book.
First, I thought I would never write a book, but these wonderful people at Paper Chase Press came along.
I had an offer from HarperCollins and blah, blah, blah, big companies, a couple other big companies, and I didn't do it.
As I don't do TV, but Paper Chase came along, and they actually came down here and saw me and met with me.
And they were fans of the show, and I think that's what helped.
They knew the show.
They knew what I wanted to do.
And so we did it.
And we wrote this book, The Art of Talk.
It's a hardback book of the highest quality.
And it's about my life.
And believe me, I've had a weird one.
It's about talk radio, the behind the scenes things over the years that I've wanted to be able to tell people about this program and what I've done.
And I've been doing this program for going on 12 years now.
Even though it may be new to a lot of you.
So, you know, obviously in 12 years, you collect a lot of things that you can't really talk about on the air.
I decided that I was going to write a book that was going to be really bluntly honest.
And believe me, that's what this book is, bluntly honest.
Well, it turned out to be a huge success.
It's actually about to go into the third printing now.
And finally, we have an offer for you tonight that you're going to love.
You know, I'm doing a book signing.
It'll be March 16th at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland.
And I'm looking forward to seeing you there.
There will be a very limited number of books for sale there.
There will be some, but there'll be a limited number, so you'd really be better to order now.
And I'm going to make it very easy for you to do so.
About, how long has it been?
A month, month and a half ago, the Los Angeles Times did a big story on me.
Oh, boy, I'll tell you something.
The L.A. Times reporter came up here, and we spent, I believe, about six hours together.
And he brought with him a photographer who took about six rolls of film.
Well, the shop they chose to run in the L.A. Times was a really good photograph.
And so what happened is Paper Chase negotiated with the L.A. Times people, and they got the rights to that photograph.
And this has been going back and forth and back and forth for a while.
Anyway, the bottom line is, it is a pretty cool photograph, and we've had it blown up into a beautiful 8x10 photograph, glossy 8x10 photograph, you know, that you could put in a frame.
And I think you'll like, and I think it catches me in a very fair way, a decent way.
unidentified
I like the picture.
Streamlink, the audio subscription service of Coast to Coast AM, has a new name, Coast Insider.
You'll still get all the same great features for the same low price.
The package includes podcasting, which automatically downloads shows for you, and the iPhone app.
You'll also get our amazing download library of three full years of shows.
That's over a thousand shows for you to collect and enjoy.
If you're a fan of Coast, you won't want to be without Coast Insider.
Visit Coast2CoastAM.com to sign up.
Looking for the truth?
You'll find it on Coast2Coast AM with George Norrie.
I think now, as we look back, we can probably say with pretty good certainty that some people in government might have been aware of what was going on and they turned their cheek the other way just to let it happen.
I also believe that some bigger groups got involved with al-Qaeda to do what they did on that horrible day.
This wasn't just a small group of people who came in and did their thing.
There was a much bigger picture there.
And if you see the events that have unfolded since this tragedy occurred, how we've lost rights, how we used it to go in Afghanistan and Iraq, and how it has really not stopped.
Because it's going to continue.
We're going to have more and more episodes and more and more involvement in other countries.
And just mark my word, this planet is going through an incredible change.
And thank God we've got you here to talk with us about it.
Now we take you back to the night of February 15, 1996 on Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
I saw them when they began, when they ran live on CNN.
And then I saw a very, very interesting replay of them.
I turned on CNN at 9 o'clock Pacific Time, and they were running the debates again.
But this time, they had a little approval, disapproval meter.
It was really interesting.
They had about 40, 35, 40 people, chosen people, who had a little device in their hand.
And they could, you know, it went between 0 and 10.
And when they liked something, they could turn it up.
And when they didn't like something, they could turn it down.
And they divided this between men and women.
And they had, as the candidates would talk, I dreamed about this for years.
It was like a detectometer.
And these lines would go up and down and up and down, indicating whether the people, individually men and women, were approving or disapproving of what they were hearing.
It's the dandest thing you ever saw.
Not a running lie detector or voice stress test, but the next best thing, 35 or 40 people collectively, and by the way, generally seemingly in agreement, judging what the candidates were saying, and they let this graph go during the debate.
It was amazing.
Now, I think that I generally found myself pretty much in agreement with those people.
And you could watch as various statements were made and lines were followed by the candidates or negative remarks were made or positive things were said.
You could watch a little graph go up and down below the center line, either in approval or sharp disapproval.
Now, to me, in both cases, the clear winner of the debates was Alan Keyes.
Dr. Keyes, and I've interviewed him here.
Articulate, convincing, academically sound, very much the biggest social conservative there, in my opinion.
Alan Keyes was spectacular.
Absolutely spectacular.
The audience seemed to like Steve Forbes, said things designed to please New Hampshire residents that are not wild about tax.
Steve Forbes came off, frankly, pretty well.
Lamar Alexander.
How many of you noticed that as Lamar talked, he was obviously very nervous.
He was kind of bobbing up and down a lot.
Had a case of the nerves.
Pat Buchanan was hoarse.
I may be there myself.
I'm getting a cold.
It's been years since I've had a cold, and I'm coming down with a cold.
And Pat, of course, has been speaking incessantly.
And he was hoarse.
Tired, but hit his populist themes on trade.
And he hit Bob Dole.
Bob Dole, kind of, as Bob Dole always is, a bit dour, did not seem to score very well.
In some areas he did what would be called okay.
But he was kind of dour Dole.
You know, Bob Dole.
Bob Dole is a good guy.
But at times his presentation seems negative.
He hit back a couple of times, as Bob Dole does, at Buchanan.
And there was a bit of a fight that ensued.
Maury Taylor was received well.
Simple, he too was nervous.
He's not an effective speaker, I thought.
Bob Dornan, the fire-in-the-belly guy, was the one who went after Clinton and not so much the others.
And in that way, Bob Dornan was certainly a standout.
But again, I'm going to say it.
If you were to score this debate on substance and articulate presentation, I'd give it clearly to Alan Keyes.
And I wonder how many of you would agree with that.
Now, the roof has caved in on Pat Buchanan, the political roof.
One of Pat Buchanan's national co-chairmen is down, gone, out.
He's none other than Larry Pratt, who is the executive chairman of the Gun Owners of America.
I've had Larry Pratt on the show in the past.
Today, Buchanan was put in a totally defensive position as the news broke that Larry Pratt apparently in 1992 attended a Colorado meeting with white supremacist leaders or white supremacist leaders,
Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, those kind of people, were said to be present at the meeting.
Now, Larry Pratt, hitting back, has said, I had no idea that they were there.
You know, I go to these kinds of meetings.
And, of course, you can imagine that Larry Pratt is very much a pro-gun activist, and these kind of people would show up, and they did at the meeting.
He said he didn't know they were there.
Nevertheless, Bob Dole hit Pratt, said Pratt is a right-wing extremist.
Pratt is out.
And I'm going to tell you right now, and this is what I have been telling you, whether you think what occurred today is fair or unfair, it is only the beginning.
And the media is going to come after Pat Buchanan and anybody connected with him like a rabid dog.
They really are.
Here, to give you some idea, is a fact I got from Peggy down in San Antonio.
Regarding the Pat and Larry show today, Pat Buchanan should count as lucky stars that no members of the Dole Entourage listens to as much anarchist radio as I do, Peggy, specializes in listening to anarchist radio.
She monitors them.
Or else Pat would be trying to explain why he, according to Supreme Commander of the Christian militia Dean Compton, gave his blessings to the 250,000-man armed march to the southern border of the U.S. to, quote, discourage, end quote, aliens from coming across.
Building a cousin to the hated Berlin Wall, as Buchanan promises, is bad enough.
Firing on our southern neighbors is nuts.
Compton went on umpteen talk shows swearing that he had to go ahead and Godspeed from the Feisteep Pat.
Pat has said on a C-SPAN panel of pundits.longo when asked what he thought about JFK promising a Protestant audience in Houston that he'd be president first before following the Pope.
He kind of didn't miss a beat, said JFK was wrong and that he, Pat, would never put his church second, even to America.
Said that what was good for Rome was good for the USA.
So I have no way of knowing Ms. Pratt's background and whether it's any deeper than was suggested by the NBC report that I saw yesterday, which talked only of people being in the audience when he was at the podium.
That's all.
That's all they talked about, people being in the audience.
All right, maybe it goes deeper than that, and I don't know about it.
But I'm adding it up from a different perspective.
Maybe Mr. Pratt is utterly innocent of any involvement that goes beyond being at a certain podium.
Maybe there is a deeper involvement.
I frankly have no way of knowing.
I'm only looking at the way this got handled by the Buchanan campaign, and I think it's wrong.
Either Pratt, there was something wrong with Pratt, in which case Buchanan should have said, he's out.
He's out, he's gone.
But Buchanan said it's lies, lies, lies.
And I'm looking at this now from Pat's perspective.
Whether Pratt wanted to go or not, it's always a, well, I'll tender my resignation or a temporary leave of absence while I get this straightened out or whatever.
Fact is, he's gone.
And Pat accepted that.
Now, if Pat really believes that there is no such thing as the press has either cooked up or found out, whichever the case is, I tell you, I don't know.
Pat should have been the man of his word, not let Pratt go, said, no, it's going to look as though if I let you go on this leave of absence or whatever it is, it's going to look to all the world like there is something wrong, and there's nothing wrong, and you're saying right here, that's what I would have expected out of the Pat Buchanan, I know.
That's the point I'm trying to make with you.
Pat's always been a straight arrow, straight-ahead guy.
Look at his defense of Dim Yanyuk.
In the face of charges of anti-Semitic behavior and statements and all the rest of it, he defended Dim Yanyuk come hell in high water during very rough times.
Remember that?
And he was accused of being anti-Semitic, and he stood his ground, and I frequently said, look, Dim Yanyuk was not convicted in a trial in Israel, a place where you would absolutely expect a conviction.
He was not.
And so on that issue, Pat was vindicated, and that's one where he hung tough.
And the people who respect and stand by Buchanan for whatever else he is, being a man of his word and a man of conviction, I think can't help but view this a little bit the way I do.
And the way I view this is he shouldn't have let him go.
Whether Pratt wanted to go, whether Pat let him go, whatever the real, you know, you never really know because it's always a tendered resignation whether it was actually resignation or not.
You never really know unless you were there privy to the private conversation.
But the fact of the matter is Pratt's gone.
Boom, like that.
And that really smacks of expediency to me.
And it doesn't smack of the Pat Buchanan that I thought I knew.
So Pat Buchanan had better get ready because the weight of the oppressive American press is obviously, I'm not going to say is going to descend on him, has already descended on him.
It was expected.
And the only question is whether or not it is going to stunt in its very early growth any possibility of a Buchanan presidency.
And I'm sorry to say that I believe it probably will.
This has been my view all along.
And Mr. Buchanan, according to the little moving lines, when he got off on the populist themes of the border and so forth, the numbers seemed to go way up.
Otherwise, I don't think Pat did as well last night as he might have.
He was tired, He was hoarse, and he had just had a pretty rough day with the Pratt business.
So it's swirling out there, folks.
It's a hornet's nest of allegations, and it's only just begun.
unidentified
You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from February 15, 1996.
Coast to Coast AM from February
15, 1996.
Coast to Coast AM from February
15, 1996.
Coast to Coast AM from February 15, 1996.
You must be one vessel somewhere in time.
Tonight featuring a replay of coast to coast again from February 15th, 1996.
One thing I've forgotten to tell you, with the audiobook on sale now, you will also get an 8x10 frame signed beautiful photograph.
In fact, I'm going to be signing all those tomorrow.
That's going to take up a lot of my time tomorrow, so I'll be signing those like crazy.
Really is a neat picture.
I'm happy with it myself, and I'm not that happy with pictures taken of me, but I like this one.
It's me.
So you'll get that with the audiobook as well.
The U.S. military took a laser beam for the first time in history, a laser beam and shot down a short-range missile.
NBC exclusively had the footage as damned as thing you ever saw.
There's a missile down in New Mexico flying through the air.
The laser apparatus moved, tracked it, and fired and shot that thing out of the sky.
Cost $3,000.
Patriot missiles, which were shown after the Gulf War not to have been nearly as effective as advertised, cost $650,000 each.
Again, the cost of the laser shootdown, $3,000.
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
Again, don't miss Tomorrow Night's Show on HAARP.
Because if they're doing that with lasers now, just try to imagine what they can do when they concentrate energy, focus energy on a specific portion of the ionosphere.
If I keep going on with this, I'm going to get angry because I had a conversation yesterday.
There is a new report, two new reports actually on AIDS.
One from the government.
AIDS in America is now up 9%.
60,000 people in America died last year from AIDS.
For the second year in a row, it is the leading cause of death for all Americans between 25 and 44.
It is interesting.
I see one story that says if you're a heterosexual male or female, the danger of AIDS in America is very slight.
And then you get this stat, that for the second year in a row, it's a leading cause of death for all Americans between 25 and 44.
Well, that's not a trivial matter, is it?
Then I got this from Billy in San Antonio.
Dear Art, the CBS Evening News reported today there is a new strain of AIDS, the E strain.
It was first seen in Thailand, and according to Dr. Bob Arnott, it has arrived in the U.S. Oh, happy day.
It is primarily a heterosexually transmitted strain from men to women and women to men and is more infectious than the B virus common to the U.S. Some cases are based on a single sexual contact.
Oh my.
The first few cases have been confirmed in this country and Toronto prostitutes, Toronto, Canada, have been confirmed with it now.
Meanwhile, Thailand is going through one of the most rapidly progressing epidemics from this strain.
AIDS is one of the leading causes of death for men between, as I told you, 25, 44.
Actually, NBC said for Americans.
Let's hear it, he says, for marriage or abstinence, pray for those infected.
Billy in El Paso, Texas.
and that also is my attitude about aids these people are dying and uh...
any And I guess my emotion with regard to those who are infected is one of compassion.
They're dying.
And I don't care what you have to say about your attitude about people's lifestyles or some of the rest of it.
There are people who have AIDS because of blood transfusions, too many of them.
There are people who have AIDS because of heterosexual contact as well.
And even those who have it as a result of IV drug use and homosexual activity, they're still dying.
And I guess I choose certainly not to use the opportunity to go after the gay community or any other community because somebody's dying of this disease.
They're dying.
And I'll tell you something, bad as IV drug use may be, or bad as homosexual activity I may personally view it, these people are dying and we need to find a cure for this before it gets us one way or the other.
A nonchalant attitude about, oh, well, it won't happen to me, I think is not justified.
And this news of the new strain is not unexpected.
There was a lot of other news of the day, and I'll try to get to it as I can.
Right now, let's go to the phones.
Here are the numbers.
First time callers.
I know a lot of people are going to be commenting on this swirl of controversy around Buchanan.
It was expected.
Area code 702-727-1222.
The wildcard lines.
Area code 702-727-1295.
Toll-free west of the Rockies.
It's 1-800-618-8255.
East of the Rockies, it's 1-800-825-5033.
This is open line talk radio.
Anything you guys want to talk about is fair game.
We don't pre-screen calls here, and that at times will be in a comedic way obvious that we don't.
And at other times, it will bring on topics that you will not hear on other talk shows, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Hello.
No, you're not.
We just missed you.
West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Hello.
unidentified
Hi, I call from L.A. Yes, sir.
I talked to you on a fast blast some time ago to ask if you ever had a station running in Florida, like Tampa or somewhere.
My own personal view is that there are a number of things, as you know, that I disagree with Pat Buchanan on.
The one particular area that I agree with him is on immigration.
Whether it takes a wall, electronics, human beings, border guards like the one who was just on the air, Charlie, you've got to recall, works for the Border Patrol.
You've got to wonder when Charlie's out on patrol and sees the running hordes that are coming into this country by the millions, how his attitude transfers into the enforcement of his sworn duty.
And you've got to wonder whether it does.
Just a little side note there for you to think about.
Yeah, the thing you were saying earlier about AIDS, I think as far as your compassionate heart to people that are sick, I think you're really on the right track.
But I wonder if you're aware that in the scientific community, there's really no consensus about even what causes AIDS.
This whole thing about the HIV virus being the cause of AIDS.
And so therefore we're worried about every little variation of the data.
I've had guests on the air here who say HIV could no more cause AIDS than man and moon.
There's not enough of it and all the rest of it.
Dr. Duesberg, I had on.
But the fact of the matter is that when all is said and done, the people who die and contract the opportunistic diseases that finally do them in have the HIV virus present.
There are some people that have died of AIDS-like things, but the massive numbers of people dying, 60,000 last year, the great high majority of them had the HIV virus present.
unidentified
But many people that have the virus never get sick.
My attitude is that drugs, as Duisberg has suggested, other lifestyle things, if you have this virus, probably come and get you much easier.
In other words, if your immune system is already depressed and you do things that depress your immune system even further, then you're probably going to die a lot faster.
Whereas if you suddenly resurrect everything and stop the drugs and begin a good lifestyle and eat properly and get nutrition and exercise, blah, blah, blah, blah, then you can forestall the slow slide, inevitable, of the immune system.
Make sense?
unidentified
I think it very well could be a variety of factors, but I want to keep people from being too fearful about having normal relationships and a normal sex block.
Because at least so far, I don't know about this type E, but when you look at the statistical evidence, people don't get AIDS from casual sex.
And I think you do a lot better by being, as you said, not doing drugs, staying away from mainstream medicine.
I think a lot of times people are getting sick not from AIDS, but from the AIDS drugs, like AZT and so on.
All right, well, that's also, thank you, Dr. Duisberg's argument.
And I buy into that one, too.
I'm not a big fan of AZT.
AZT, according to Dr. Duisberg, is as much a killer as AIDS.
And he feels that AZT, when taken by somebody with a weakened immune system, shows a quick spike in T cell count and then a very, very quick downturn, and that AZT itself murders the immune system.
Very controversial position, but it may well be the case.
The immune system is something that tries to muster its defenses against whatever assault is underway.
And so AZD itself, according to the doctor, assaults the immune system, producing a temporary spike or fight, which is then quickly overcome by both AZT and whatever effect there may be of AIDS.
Dr. Duisberg probably wouldn't even include that.
And the patient is killed.
Now, I have no way of knowing if that is true.
It's a great debate in the scientific community.
However, I think you're well to make note of this apparent new strain of AIDS that is predominantly heterosexual.
AIDS continues to change constantly.
And we better keep after it, or one of these changes is going to be a change we're not going to like one bit.
unidentified
that's my attitude about it Looking for the truth?
You'll find it on Coast to Coast AM with George Norrie.
Let me ask you this.
What is going on to necessitate this so quickly?
There seems to be a deadline in their brains, and they need to get this done.
They know their whole New World Order is inches from going up in flames.
So they're afraid of the awakening, and they know that their collapse is about to take place because we've been asleep at the switch, and we've let incredibly corrupt interests take control of our society.
Now we take you back to the night of February 15, 1996, on Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
I just wanted to, I know that our weather out here in the Northwest has been in the news lately, but I know lately this year we've had extremely rare weather i know it's been that way all across the country not only around the world but what uh what i've just seen lately is we had a pretty mild winter up until we had a a snowstorm which dropped down into you know about 15 degrees then after that it went up uh almost like a week
Later, we got all the rain and the floods and stuff, and now we're into like 60-degree weather.
And last night, I tried to get in to talk to you last night, but we had reports on the radio saying that we have a burn ban in effect now.
and I know where you're obviously going you're you're playing the harp on this one yeah you got that right I was gonna say hey talk to your guest tomorrow night and say hey you know what's going on well I you even depend on it and I as I said I spent 30 minutes imagine 30 minutes with the program manager of harp on on the phone and I hit him with that and a lot more and I was not pleased with the responses I got and that's why Nick Begich Dr. Begich is going to be here tomorrow night so
it's coming so you're going to be uh uh talking to uh him about your conversation and uh the things that he said yes great and what and uh and then I'll let of course Dr. Begich go ahead and expand for those who haven't heard it a lot of people out there on what HARP is great Ward I sure enjoy your show and thanks for taking my call thanks for making it sir we will do that tomorrow night I I'm compelled to do that after my conversation and inevitably it's trying to lead
into, and I don't want to do that tonight.
It'll make it the center of conversation for tonight, so we'll just hold that one for tomorrow, and I will relate to you then the details of the conversation I had with the program manager of Harp.
That was a very, from my point of view, a very disturbing conversation.
unidentified
You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time, tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from February 15, 1996.
Music by Ben Thede
Radio Networks presents Art Bell somewhere in Time.
Tonight's program originally aired February 15th, 1996.
I spent 30 minutes on the telephone with the program manager for HARP, the guy who's running HARP in Boston yesterday.
It was not, in my opinion, a satisfactory conversation.
I gave him the opportunity to come on this program.
It was declined because his superiors, he said, wouldn't allow him to.
With that much known, I put in a call to Dr. Nick Vegas.
He will be on the program tomorrow night at the beginning, first hour.
You don't want to miss him.
I'll just leave that one right there.
Second item is, and I'll do this very quickly, my book, The Art of Talk, is now on audio tape.
And we've got a big, big bargain going on for you right now.
The L.A. Times came up here and took a whole bunch of photographs, and they ran one on the front page of the calendar section of the L.A. Times.
And we liked it so much that Paper Chase Press acquired it and had copies made, not newspaper-type copies, but full, glossy 8x10s of the same image that was on the front page of the calendar section of the L.A. Times.
And if you order a copy of my book, The Art of Talk, as of tonight, or the audio copy of my book, which as of tonight is out, you get an autographed version, an autographed version of that photograph, which can be framed.
I think you're going to enjoy it.
I hope you will.
I'm going to be signing my little life away beginning in the morning for you.
So that's the deal.
Any copy of my book ordered during this special edition offer, whether it's the audiobook or the book book, gets a personally autographed 8x10.
The exact same one that was in the LA Times.
I am taking a break.
If you're trying to dial in on Vidian, I have the system off tonight.
We're awaiting some new software.
And when I hear about that, you'll hear more about it.
I thought clearly Alan Keyes, Dr. Keyes, was the winner.
And I thought many other things of many of the other candidates which I had articulated last hour, and if you want to comment on the debates, you're absolutely welcome to.
Pat Buchanan, in a world of hurt over allegations made about Larry Pratt, who runs Gun Owners of America, as executive director of Gun Owners of America, somebody got hold of some information that Larry Pratt was at a meeting in Colorado in 92 with people in the audience who were Aryan types and Ku Klux Klanners and that sort of thing.
And Larry Pratt had been on Pat Buchanan's, it was very high in Pat Buchanan's campaign.
He is not now.
He's gone.
As of tonight, he's history.
Actually, yesterday now.
And so Pat was on the defensive all day long.
CNN ran a special edition.
I saw both.
I saw the live debate, then the one where they had this little line that would go across with people reacting to what the candidates were saying.
I wonder what you thought of that.
And I wonder if you agree with me that the walkaway winner of that debate was Pease.
Absolutely articulate, straight down the line, a social conservative, straight down the line talking about the present state of our society, and a lot of very, very, very, very interesting, proper explanations of what's going on and what's wrong.
I just thought Keyes was brilliant.
I've interviewed him on this program, but he was brilliant.
He was relaxed.
He, by the way, Alexander certainly wasn't.
Lamar Alexander, who I thought was a pretty cool potato, wasn't cool last night.
He was nervous.
He was bobbing up and down.
Pat Buchanan was hoarse.
Bob Dole was dour.
Steve Forbes was interesting and was received fairly well.
I thought Forbes did himself some good.
Buchanan probably drew a straight line or lost a little bit as a result of the debate, I thought.
Bob Dole probably lost as a result of the debate, I thought.
It's going to mix things up in a very interesting way in New Hampshire.
So what was your take on it?
Did you see it?
Do you feel in some way different than my take on it?
I would like to talk about the whole number system, how it somehow or another ties into this whole world that we're in.
It's a coincidence that our whole number and the way that we work has some way or another, it's like a bunch of circles, and they're all tied in to everything around us.
Well, look, I appreciate your call, but I'm going to say this to everybody.
If there's any place where I think there's reason to be suspicious of information obtained through a process they're calling channeling, i it is channeling.
It's these people who will tell you, uh, go into a trance and tell you that in a past life you were related to some great Roman warrior or something or another, and here's information for the world from that great Roman warrior who now speaks through me, Suwami Bell.
No, I don't, I'm extremely suspicious of that.
It doesn't mean that there might not be something too channeling, but I think that for me it means there's so much phony baloney going on in the area that nobody could properly discern if there was something real because there's too much baloney in the middle of it all.
So I kind of tend to dismiss that pending further and better evidence.
Well, look, by a lot of measurements, Rittmeister, Pat Buchanan is a somewhat socialist, in his view, and not typical of mainline conservatives at all, particularly with his ideas on trade.
And Pat Buchanan is a self-styled, he calls it America firster.
It would translate to something that I wouldn't agree with, and that is putting up barriers to trade without regard, without having, as the center of the reason for these, fair trade, but just to build the fortress America.
In other words, to force jobs back into America, to force these lower-paying jobs.
It's like fighting Mother Nature.
Things are going to be built cheaply in Mexico and China and Central and South America as they develop.
The little gidgets and gadgets that are made are going to be made with that cheap manual labor, whether we take part in it or not.
That's my argument against what he wants to do.
This is going to happen whether we like it or not.
First thing I want to say is that, boy, you can really tell that Pat has him scared.
He's got all the liberals scared.
And I was actually informed probably about a week ago that this news was going to come out this week on a local talk show by one of our representatives down there in Washington.
Pat has a long paper or more likely audio clip trail behind him, and they're going to dredge it all up and beat him to death.
unidentified
The thing to remember, though, is that Pat also knew it was going to come.
And I think that this is what I have to say about it.
I think it's great that it's coming out now.
And I only pray and hope that Pat can still win the nomination with all this out, because if he does, well, that's only going to hurt the White House because the Liberal Trump card has already been laid.
And they destroyed Goldwater with a lot less ammunition in the belt than they have to use on Pat Buchanan.
unidentified
is just something you ought to keep in mind Looking for the truth?
You'll find it on Coast2Coast AM with George Norrie.
I think now, as we look back, we can probably say with pretty good certainty that some people in government might have been aware of what was going on and they turned their cheek the other way just to let it happen.
I also believe that some bigger groups got involved with al-Qaeda to do what they did on that horrible day.
This wasn't just a small group of people who came in and did their thing.
There was a much bigger picture there.
And if you see the events that have unfolded since this tragedy occurred, how we've lost rights, how we used it to go in Afghanistan and Iraq, and how it has really not stopped.
Because it's going to continue.
We're going to have more and more episodes and more and more involvements in other countries.
And just mark my word, this planet is going through an incredible change.
And thank God we've got you here to talk with us about it.
Now we take you back to the night of February 15, 1996 on Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Art Bell East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Good morning.
Hi, Art.
I've got a couple things.
First of all, there's a good New American special immigration issue February 19th about the immigration of the Mexicans and the Chinese, and many of them are communists.
That's interesting.
It's a good issue.
Second, did you hear that the train wreck in Minnesota is now suspected of being sabotaged in the U.S.?
If anybody else out there has input on that, I'd appreciate it.
Have we really entered a day and age where Americans on a regular basis are going to be killing, blowing up, and maiming other Americans?
Is that what it's come to in America?
Just like the bombing in Oklahoma City, I'll tell you something.
If it really does come to that, this nation doesn't have long to go.
It's a mark of the near end.
You can put your money down on that one.
If we've decided in America, whether it's the militias or any of these other nutball groups that are out there, if we have collectively decided the only way to change things is with force and bullets and bombs, then the end, folks, is near.
Not for mankind, not the world, but this nation.
So I hope that one's not true.
unidentified
You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from February 15, 1996.
Coast to Coast AM from February
Coast to Coast AM from February 15, 1996.
15, 1996.
Coast to Coast AM from February 15, 1996.
You're listening to Arc Bell somewhere in time.
Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from February 15th, 1996.
I thought maybe what do you think about this for a future debate if they expounded on it just a bit to where when, you know, the center line that they showed, they had the male and female in the center line.
Kind of in the middle, and it would stay above a lot of times, and sometimes it would dip below.
Yeah.
Maybe if it dipped below, it kind of, if they wired up the debaters, so it kind of delivered a little shock just enough to where it got to a point where they let out a yelp.
Well, look, first of all, it is not surprising that Larry Pratt, who heads up an organization that concentrates on nothing but Second Amendment protections, who's probably, you know, he's been on this show speaking, he's been on a million other radio shows, he goes to all kinds of conventions and gun shows and things like that and speaks to people about the Second Amendment.
To be able to tie him into Aryan Nations, tie him into the Ku Klux Klan, by saying they were in the audience, that's a little much for me.
I mean, who the hell?
There's Aryan Nation people listening to me right now.
But the real point, thank you, is whether or not the fact that people with these persuasions...
are connected to him, simply because they were in the audience when he spoke somewhere, is absolutely ludicrous.
Now, if they had more than that, if they had Mr. Pratt in cahoots with these people, if they had Mr. Pratt specifically addressing the Aryan Nations, or going out of his way to court the Aryan Nations, or accepting courtship by the Aryan Nations or the Ku Klux Klan, then you've got something else.
I even wonder, frankly, whether Pratt did the right thing by cutting Pratt loose like that.
I mean, to me, Buchanan was always a man of rock-solid principle.
Well, if you're a man of rock-solid principle and you come out and say it's a bunch of lies, and then you cut the guy loose, swinging in the breeze, without so much as a how do you do, then you're not the principled person I thought you were.
unidentified
No, but still, he sees it's like within his sights now.
He's got the momentum going, and he doesn't want to lose it by then.
Look, I'm not mean to be rapping on Pat, but if he'll do that for this, then what will he do when he gets there at the real center of power to keep it?
unidentified
Well, that's true, but you've got to play the game to some degree or you're not going to win.
Or at least to the degree, even near the degree Keyes did.
I thought it was a runaway myself.
Keyes was good.
Really good.
And he's not a player in this election.
At least I don't think he is.
Unless New Hampshire folks reacted the way I did.
And there's a miracle in the New Hampshire primary.
I bet he goes up.
I'll bet she goes up.
What I think Keyes is, is a player in the next election.
Maybe not this one.
Maybe Keyes is a vice presidential player.
There are many possibilities, but I'll tell you, his showing last night is not going to go unnoticed and unremembered.
unidentified
most of what a doctor keys does is remembered well and believe me last night is no exception ScreenLink, the audio subscription service of Coast2Coast AM, has a new name, Coast Insider.
You'll still get all the same great features for the same low price, just 15 cents a day when you sign up for one year.
The package includes podcasting, which offers the convenience of having shows downloaded automatically to your computer or MP3 player, and the iPhone app with live and on-demand programs.
You'll also get our amazing download library of three full years of shows.
Just think, as a new subscriber, over 1,000 shows will be available for you to collect, enjoy, and listen to at your leisure.
Plus, you'll get screened and on-demand broadcasts of Art Bell, Summer In Time Shows, and two weekly classics.
And as a member, you'll have access to our monthly live chat sessions with George Norrie and special guests.
If you're a fan of Coast, you won't want to be without Coast Insider.
Visit Coast2CoastAM.com to sign up today.
Now we take you back to the night of February 15, 1996 on Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Art Bell First time caller line, you're on the air.
Yeah, well, however these things happen, sir, the fact is, it's like people are always, when there's a parting of the ways in high business positions or high government positions, arrangements are always made.
But the fact is, Pat's gone.
Pat accepted it.
And I've got a problem with that, frankly, unless there's more to it than I know.
unidentified
Well, some of the stuff that they put on Nightline tonight, and I was very disappointed in Ted Coppel because he seemed to be not so timid when he did programs on Waco and Ruby Ridge, but he really went after Larry Pratt tonight with a vengeance.
Was the substance of the program in the end, did it show that Pratt had interest connections with Aryan Nations or Ku Klux Klan or whoever?
unidentified
Okay, not that he was forwardly openly endorsing their position, but let me tell you something.
They showed this guy at some of these conventions and different things.
And when you go to these, especially when you're in the spike training and some of these things that are going on around here, these seminars, you get to know who's there.
Now, it's not who's in the audience that they were saying.
It's who was sponsoring the event and who else was on the platform in the same evening or afternoon that he was there.
Now, I don't think that that has anything to do with Pat Buchanan.
So we understand and accept that this is something that the press is doing.
However, I also have to say, just because I'm in public life publicly myself, in politics, you pay a consequence when you do decide to share these podiums.
So, you know, I'm sure Larry Pratt, you know, I'm a member of his organization and I think he's a fine guy.
And I don't think, I don't never seen or heard anything racist about him or anything like that coming from him.
Nor have I. But the fact is, you know, he's out there beating his drum and there are some people who resonate with that, whether he agrees with their positions.
They certainly agree with his.
And when you move around and amongst some of these groups and some of these organizations, it is just fodder for the press.
Then I think Pat Buchanan has no chance because they are going to show other associations.
unidentified
All right, but let me put this plug in for Pat, though, on that note.
The fact that Prat came to Buchanan and asked for relief from his position only for a period of time so he could straighten this out and then come back.
See, I heard other people say, hey, Pat should have just fired the guy out of hand right now.
Get rid of him.
It's over with.
Let's move on.
But see, this is one thing about Pat.
I think one of the strongest things he has going for him is that he is an honest guy.
I'm surprised and disappointed at your reaction to the train wreck.
You of all people should know by now that if the facts are not known, the news media will make some up.
As far as I know, there's no evidence that proves the train wreck was sabotage, only speculation.
Well, no, it's not speculation.
Actually, sir, it's my understanding the FBI has the train wreck location sealed off and that the FBI is crawling all over it.
So, you know, that's more than speculation.
You seem to be making a habit of conclusion jumping and flying off the handle.
If that's what you want to do, try this.
Maybe the feds are using what is truly an accident to help justify the passing of another unmeeted terrorist bill that'll further erode our constitutional protections.
Oh, God.
As to the militia, don't paint in such a broad brush or you'll damage your credibility.
Not everyone who joins the militia or sympathizes with their fear of the federal government is a nutball or a right-wing kook.
When you make this mistake, you fall right in with what the left-wing dominant media wants the American public to believe.
Bob in Phoenix.
Bob, I never said the militia did this.
Clean out your ears.
You're selectively hearing, Bob.
I said nutball cases.
And anybody who would wreck a train to try to make a political point, Bob, is a nutball case.
Anybody who would blow up a building full of relatively innocent people to redress a wrong done at Waco is a, I would almost use the word I can't use on the air, is a nutball case.
I didn't use the word militias, Bob.
I didn't say that.
Clean out your ears.
I never said a word about that.
I said nutball cases.
Some of them may be in militias, Bob, since you bring it up, and some maybe not.
People who will assume the moniker of patriot, Bob.
You know, that's the people I'm talking about, Bob.
I have no idea who they are.
Flying off the handle?
You're damn right I'm flying off the handle.
If anything's going to pull this country apart, it's going to be nutball cases like this.
It's not like that they're not I mean a lot of them have conviction keys and you know Buchanan, but that there's no overwhelmingly strong obvious candidate.
You actually said that very well by stumbling around and not being able to find the words.
You really said it very well for many of us.
Keyes is a candidate of the future or he's a vice president for somebody.
Maybe even now.
Maybe the best move Buchanan would make would be to immediately court Keyes if you want to if you want to turn back any allegations of racism or anti-Semitism or that certainly would go a long way toward doing that.
I repeat that I really don't enjoy what has occurred yesterday, not so much the allegations about Pratt, but the way it was handled by the Buchanan campaign.
And I believe Pat Buchanan.
You know, people are sending taxes saying, well, they did it.
I'm not that naive.
The stakes are enormous.
You know, whether there's anything to the allegations or not, the stakes are enormous.
And to imagine the candidate did not have a part in the decision to allow Pratt to leave for whatever stated reason is just way too naive for my taste.
unidentified
Thank you.
Now we take you back to the night of February 15, 1996 on Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say it worries me about Buchanan, but I would say that what we saw yesterday was a concession to the reality of politics as usual.
unidentified
Another thing I wanted to ask you, exactly how long it was that you first interviewed Linda Thompson and the Bigelow Corporation decided to fire you, Raggedy ass?
Well, then, so I mean, I don't understand how he could be outraged when he turns his TV on and sees women and children being murdered in front of his mother.
Yeah, they're calling all over everybody that's anybody that had anything to do with any of the workers or anything.
They've even interviewed me.
So the only thing that they know for a fact is that two of the hydraulic levers on the main switching coming into the train yard had been tampered with.
And that's confirmed.
And they're also relating to the this is the second incident.
Well, second major one that's caught the presses in the last two weeks.
unidentified
Right.
And this has been confirmed that they're just trying to figure out the reasons why now.
They're trying to track it down to maybe someone that worked with railroad or maybe someone that had a vengeance against one of the employees or someone higher up in the management.
That's what they're trying to lean towards right now.
That's what they're trying to ask everybody.
And of course, everybody doesn't have any whole lot to say, but it hit everybody's device as a surprise.
Sure.
And nobody really has a whole lot to offer to it, but they're tearing it apart.
Well, it's people for whatever reason, whether it's some vengeance against merging banks or railroad companies or some sort of political, more likely, motivation behind it all.
If there is an area I can make a difference, this is the area I would like to make a difference.
Americans have got to realize that their heritage, their nation, their roots, their forefathers, that document we live by is more than just a document.
And that change in America can be accomplished in the body and the spirit of that document.
And God help us if we've become so radicalized that the only way we can any longer think we can change things is with booms and bangs and guns and bullets.
In America, it seems like it's become the first thing that people grab for.
As a matter of fact, if you want to know the truth, I consider there to be so little difference at the presidential level between Republicans and Democrats that that's as far as I'm willing to go.
I'm a staunch economic conservative.
I'm a social mixture.
unidentified
Right, okay, I understand.
But you know, the president is ju really just a figurehead.
I mean, he can veto things if the Congress can say overriding by two-thirds margin.
Well, you're turning to something trivial, something that is not trivial.
A veto is a very non-trivial thing.
Only in the rarest of circumstances are vetoes overridden.
So it's not a trivial power.
Okay, but sir, so far, the president's veto, or threats of it, have managed to keep the larger parts of what's called the Republican Revolution by Mr. Gingrich and others stopped.
Well, he's a knuckle dragger, I can see, as far as you're concerned.
But whatever else you say about Pat, and I'm not a full Pat Buchanan fan, except in certain ways, and that's why I'm disappointed this morning, because whatever else he was or wasn't, he was always a man of stone-hard conviction.
And not one to cut and run, given a little controversy.
He jumps right into the middle of that, and so I'm saddened by what's happened today.
unidentified
Okay, but his supporters always saying, oh, he's got the liberals on the run and they're afraid and all that.
Well, I don't see what's so great about making everybody afraid of you.
Personally, I think he's the playground bully that I always hated when I was growing up.
To to seal, to uh that's uh the best I can come up with for the moment.
To seal, to to seal a bargain, to seal a relationship.
unidentified
Cement.
Make solid something like that.
Yeah, okay.
Okay.
I was going to suggest a domestic partnership changed in the law such that responsibility for children, responsibility for other family members would somewhat be separated from two people who just wanted to live together.
And it would solve, I think, a whole lot of controversy over the tax code and over, let's say, special privileges, special classes, special categories of the Well, right now, with our present tax code the way it is, there's actually a penalty to the partnership that we have that we call marriage.
You can heterosexual marriage.
unidentified
Right.
So what I'm proposing is that all domestic partnerships be treated the same way from a legal and economic standpoint, whether it is homosexual or heterosexual, provided there are no children and obviously no third parties involved.
As soon as someone decides to have a child, an entirely different contractual relationship Once we give up on the traditional relationship that we support or penalize, however it may be at the time, with tax manipulation, then why don't we give up on it all?
In other words, why would bigamy, under such a circumstance, remain a taboo?
unidentified
Why would anybody go part of the way?
Well, no.
Well, yeah, maybe.
I'm going most of the way.
But what I'm trying to preserve is, I think, a value that homosexuality as well as heterosexuality espouses, which is a commitment to spend your life with one person.
Yeah, but once you're ready to cast aside the heterosexual relationship or include with it the homosexual relationship, then you might as well include any form of domestic partnership that anybody cares to talk about, whatever it is.
I do, but see, then that makes my point, that the moment we begin moving off the road that we're on now, there is not going to be an end to it, but maybe there will be an end to us.
unidentified
Well, what would be the if I think it would add responsibility to partners who have to decide whether or not to have a child, you would no longer have the same tax penalties and tax benefits that now put incentives in all the wrong places.
and there would be no negative stigma to any two people wanting to live together under a contractual basis and keep the privacy of what goes on in their bedroom to them.
It's an argument worth making, and it's an argument worth having the audience respond to.
To me, it's a road that once you begin going down it and making homosexual relationships inclusive with heterosexual, then you've opened the door to arguments, similar arguments, from literally all kinds of groups.
So it's not an argument easily made from the way I think about it.
One of the things I haven't heard addressed, and it may have been a misprint, but I haven't heard anything about that, and that was that, and it's about Mr. Buchanan.
But like any good soup, if you throw too many wild ingredients in, you run the chance of spoiling it.
Immigration has strengthened us, but immigration at the levels we're suffering it now, underline the word suffering, is harmful.
So I support certainly a big modify.
I want the borders.
The word isn't sealed.
We have a right to know who's coming and going.
And the other Republicans who are making noises now about how wrong it would be to have a wall or to have enforcement by military or whoever it would take to enforce our borders, they're out to lunch.
It's a federal mandate that we enforce our borders, and we've ignored it for too long, and it's economically threatening our future.
Millions of people.
So I agree with Buchanan on that.
unidentified
Another thing, you may recall a lady that called you earlier in the week, and she was sharing with you about a rainbow she saw.
And actually I chased a couple of the ends of it, and it was incredible to look through it and actually see the rocks and the grass and I guess cattle actually in a couple of instances.
And they all had kind of a golden glow.
But it was, I think, because you were looking through the crystals.
But it was quite an experience.
But as you said, you really, it looked like you could get to it, but you sure couldn't get to it.
There are some things, most of which have come by way of your program, that I will just mention.
It doesn't take a lot of discussion, but let me mention a few that I think might, if we keep thinking, give us some thoughts other than our immediate reaction.
In the end, sir, it doesn't matter who the hell it is.
It really doesn't.
Whether it's a nutball, right-wing, left-wing, middle-wing groups, nutball groups doing this, or it's wild-card people in agencies, BATF or whoever, it doesn't matter.
If this is the direction we're headed, the collision is inevitable and the result is inevitable.
I think you've got to remember that Taiwan with a population of 21 million has more than a capacity to defend itself against the Chinese military that really doesn't have that much capability to land troops.
Well, look, if China goes after Taiwan, sir, it's going to be bloody as hell.
I'm not saying Taiwan can't defend itself.
unidentified
Oh, I agree with you, but when you're talking several hundred miles, you have to remember that the Chinese Navy is just not capable of sustaining the kind of operations that we had.