All Episodes
Previous Next
May 23, 1996 - Art Bell
01:17:33
Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Dr. William Pierce - The Turner Diaries
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
the the
the High Desert and the great American Southwest.
I bid you all good evening, good morning, wherever you may be across all these many time zones from the Hawaiian and Seketian Islands.
We can kind of form a certain mental picture.
Straight over flyover country to the Caribbean and the U.S.
Virgin Islands, South into South America, North to the Pole, and worldwide on the Internet.
This is Coast to Coast AM.
I'm Art Bell.
It will be an interesting morning, I guarantee.
Coming up in a moment, Dr. William Pierce, Ph.D., I guess a retired physicist and author of the Turner Diaries, thought by most to be a sort of a bible for right-wing radicals.
And this is a very interesting man, and we're going to try and find out what we can about him in a moment.
Alright, let us go to rural West Virginia.
This is where Dr. Will Pierce is located.
He's the author of the Turner Diaries, which is just now going back into print.
The opening segment on 16 Minutes Monday was about Dr. Pierce.
It was incredible.
In more ways than one, just an absolutely amazing piece.
It was done by Mike Wallace.
And so I wanted to talk about Pierce.
Good morning!
Indeed, it is morning there after 2 o'clock in the morning, so it was nice of you to check this out.
I'm Dr. uh, I've got more time than uh, uh, 60 minutes to do a piece.
My hope now is solved, even if it's a lot harder to keep from their terror.
I'm going to have to do it again.
I'm going to have to do it again.
to use it uh... and i'm not sure if there's a lot of them
uh...
uh...
but but
alright the enemies allies demonstrating in our streets we should
not prior hands with rules of engagement
that keep us from winning uh... on the battlefront
if on the other hand we are not clearly convinced that they were
is in the interest of the american people we should stay out of it
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
And so, I was torn to try to understand what our position should be in this case.
We were sort of between two stools.
Neither fighting to win all the way, 100%, nor willing to withdraw and say, look, this is none of our business, We're not going to risk the lives of our young people in this conflict.
Well, I agree with that assertion.
I'm not sure it answers the question.
You were trying to figure out how you felt about the Vietnam War.
On the one hand, you were astounded, apparently, by the protests, but on the other, you might have been out there in the street yourself.
Which is it?
Oh, no, I would not have been out in the street demonstrating on behalf of the enemy.
What I could not understand at that time was what the proper position of the government should have been.
Should it have been to try to fight this war to win, in which case this demonstration on behalf of the enemy's partisans in the streets simply would not have been tolerated, or should it have been Simply to say, hey, we made a big mistake.
We're not going to sacrifice our health and our blood.
And on balance, on balance, Doctor, which one do you believe, even with today's perspective, would be true?
That they should be or that we should have gone all the way?
Which which do you think?
You know, if it had been my choice to make, I would have stayed out from the beginning.
But once in, once committed, once having made a major sacrifice, my inclination would have been to go ahead and finish the thing quick.
Atomic weapons?
If necessary.
Actually, I agree with you on all of that.
I really do.
I was involved, thank you, in Vietnam.
Briefly, thankfully.
I, too, was shocked, disgusted at the minutiae planning by President Johnson of a war that he wasn't qualified to be pursuing at that level.
A little bit of background for you, but I still don't understand how you get from observing what happened to Turner Diaries.
Well, let me continue.
Sure, go ahead.
I was also concerned by another movement which was going on simultaneously, and that was the so-called Civil Rights Movement, in which we had all sorts of demonstrations going on, which, again, called into question our values, our standards, our lifestyle, and I really couldn't understand The significance of these things, I had to stop and back off, try to figure out, now what does this mean?
Here we've got people claiming that miscegenation is okay.
We've got people claiming that it's not proper for a group of people to have self-determination and to have a homogeneous society, that we have to mix it all up.
We have to mix these different races, mix these different cultures together.
What's going to be the implication of this?
For the future.
This is really quite a drastic change from the way we have done things in the past.
And one of the consequences of looking at what was going on in this Vietnam War movement and also in the Civil Rights movement was I had to do a lot more reading of history, a lot more thinking about the significance of these things than I had ever had a chance to do before.
As a student or as a professor.
And I began coming to some conclusions.
And I began writing.
My writing was editorials, essays, historical feature articles, analysis of current events.
It was all non-fiction.
It was all pretty serious stuff.
And a friend of mine said to me, This was the late Rebel O. Oliver, who at that time was a professor of classics at the University of Illinois in Urbana.
He said to me, hey, you know, people just don't read this kind of stuff that you're writing these days.
People are interested in serious writing.
If you want people to listen to what you have to say, if you want them to think about the ideas that you believe are important, you've got to put it in the form of recreational reading for them.
You ought to try writing a novel.
He gave me a few examples of novels which had been written in the past, which had ideas embedded in them.
One of them was Jaclyn's, A Tearing Heel.
Another was Harriet Beecher Stowe's, Uncle Tom's Cabin.
Well, I thought about this.
And the more I thought about it, the more it seemed like it might be a good idea.
So eventually I thought I would try it.
And I did.
I made up an adventure story.
Actually, I made it up as I went along because I was publishing a newspaper at the time.
And I put one chapter in each month's issue.
It was a monthly newspaper.
I put one chapter in each issue of the newspaper.
When I started, I didn't know how it was going to finish.
But over a three-year period, I wrote the Turner Diaries.
And I found that my friend, Professor Oliver, had been correct. I got a much larger response from the
public to this fictional series than I had gotten to the serious non-fiction that I had written
previously. Well then you've jumped a question on me because I wanted to understand whether in
fact from you the Turner Diaries really was intended to be a real message carried in a
somewhat entertaining form and you have just confirmed that that is true
So it really is your message in that book.
Well, yes, I had a very definite message in that book.
The message, however, is not the details of the plot.
That is, I am not trying to predict when I wrote that book in 1975 to 1978.
The specifics of what would happen in the United States, but I was looking ahead in a very general sort of way as to how the trends that I could see at that time might be extrapolated to 20 years later.
And one of the things I saw was the advent of serious terrorism in the United States.
And that is one thing that appears to be beginning to happen.
Well, there's no question about it.
Oklahoma City was proof of that.
Well, not just Oklahoma City.
The World Trade Center bombing, the series of bombings by the Unabomber, all of this, these three episodes have happened almost simultaneously, if you look at it from a long-range point of view, and it's unprecedented in American history.
Was your book prophetic or educational?
Well, it's turning out, I think, to be prophetic.
I think that is what has been responsible to a large extent for the interest shown by the public in it.
A lot of people are very concerned by the breakdown of American society.
And they've heard that, hey, you know, this guy back in the 1970s, he predicted this was going to happen.
So they want to run out and get the book and read it for themselves.
They want to understand, just as I wanted to understand back in the 70s.
What is it that you think you understood, backing up again for a second, about the Civil Rights Movement?
What was it all about?
Well, what I saw was a growing heterogeneity in American society, a breakdown of the homogeneity that we had had up to that time, an increasing cosmopolitanism, and accompanying that uh... a growing alienation a breakdown of the bonds of
community uh... a a lot of the feeling of that that that that that we
have felt as a people
until that time i think that uh... that was on target that's what we're
seeing today cold words if you could words
drawing from the sixty minutes conclusion which you seem to sort of grudgingly
you know of confirm to get america back
or to solve this growing problem as you perceived it the blacks jews
uh... even hispanics basically musco any society
which is to remain healthy
has to maintain a reasonable degree of homogeneity You have to have a consensus among the people.
You have to have a shared sense of history, a sense of family, if the society is to hold together, remain healthy, and continue to move forward in a progressive sort of way.
We've lost that.
One way or another, we have to get it back.
Why is a sense of family, or even a sort of a national sense and identity dependent upon Well, if you don't have homogeneity, that is, if you don't have a shared history, a shared blood, shared values, then you cannot really feel that you have a sense of responsibility to the community around you.
You tend to withdraw into yourself.
The society tends to become atomized.
You tend to have excessive individualism, excessive egoism, And at the same time an alienation so that the society as a whole has nothing to hold it together.
How do you delineate between the values?
In other words, black people mixing with white people, mixing with Hispanics and Asians and so forth and so on.
How are the values so very different because of the skin color?
Well, you know, the values that we have are a product of our history and our genes.
And the people who made up this country, or who made up, let's say, white society in this country, had at least a reasonably common background.
We all came from Europe.
We all went through similar experiences and similar environments over tens of thousands of years before we came Are we by nature a warrior people?
I think it's reasonable to say that we are.
We have always fought for the things that we believe were worth fighting for in the past.
It was seldom that we believed that it was proper just to roll over and play dead when we were attacked by people who wanted to take away from us our land, or make us change our way of life, or deprive us of our freedom.
How do you suppose the American Native perceived our arrival?
Well, I guess that different tribes perceived us in different ways, but the That certainly many of them must have looked upon us as invaders, as a threat to their way of life.
As we were indeed.
As we were indeed.
Do we carry any genetic guilt for that, Doctor?
Oh, I don't believe that we do.
You know, the course of world history has been one of that conflict between people, between races, with the ones who were strong, Probably not one of your favorite people, Rev.
away from the ones who were weak or were not willing to fight and imposing their genes
and their values on the land. Probably not one of your favorite people,
Reverend Louis Farrakhan? Well...
Very interesting, actually, intellectually, interesting individual to me.
I would also like to interview him, but I'm sure you're familiar with the way he feels about the black race in America and the white race in America.
In many ways, you are strange intellectual bedfellows, are you not?
Well, that's true to a certain extent.
You know, it's an interesting thing.
When I had this Mike Wallace interview coming up for 60 Minutes, I've never seen Mike Wallace, uh, interview people before.
I'd heard that he was a tough interviewer.
Doctor, he is a tough interviewer.
We're at the bottom of the hour and this is, uh, we'll pick up at exactly this point when we come back.
Stand by.
My guest is the author of the Turner Diaries, Dr. William Pierce.
This is the American CBC Radio Network.
♪♪ This is the end of side one.
Please leave the cassette exa- 🎵
🎵 🎵
🎵 Art Bell is taking calls on the wild card line.
That's 702-727-1295.
First time callers can reach Art Bell at 702-727-1222.
702-727-1222.
Now, here again, Art Bell.
702-727-1295 First time callers can reach Art Bell at 702-727-1222
Now, here again, Art Bell My guest is Dr. William Pierce, author of the Turner Diaries
and he'll be back in just a moment Fascinating.
All right, back now to Dr. Pierce in West Virginia.
Where are you in West Virginia, anyway?
I'm near Hillsboro.
Actually, I live on the top of a mountain about four miles northwest of Hillsboro.
That's in the east-central part of the state.
An easily defensible location?
Well, depends upon defensible from whom.
It's a nice location.
It's beautiful.
Animals and trees and clear skies.
I like it here.
All right.
I mentioned Louis Strachan.
I've seen him in some good interviews in which he has suggested that in fact, in America, the blacks, the whites, should physically actually go their separate ways.
In his case, he would like, he has suggested, some strip of appropriate land to where America's blacks
might go.
Yes, you know, it's a coincidence that you mention him because in,
prior to the 60 Minutes interview, I asked a friend in New York to send me a
video of any Wallace interview so that I could familiarize myself with his style.
And my friend sent me a video of an interview that Wallace had done a couple of months earlier with Louis Firecat.
And so I viewed...
I thought Farrakhan did an admirable job of presenting himself in a way that would strengthen his position with his people.
I've always admired certain things about Farrakhan.
I'm sure that we would disagree on many things, too.
But he is one of the black leaders that I have had the greatest respect for.
Interesting.
No doubt agreement with regard to the Jews?
Well, I cannot say what Mr. Farrakhan's views are in detail.
I know that he resents very much much of the Jewish effort to tell him what is good for his people.
He believes that that is something that should be left up to the black people and that they don't need Jewish guidance in that regard.
Let's jump forward a little bit.
Your book was ostensibly a novel about an imaginary foot soldier caught up in a race war in coincidentally the 1990s.
Is that roughly correct?
Yes.
Do you think that such a race war is likely, unlikely, probable, improbable?
You did say you thought of your book as prophetic.
Are we going to have a race war?
Well, I believe we have a race war going on at a low level right now.
The crime situation in this country has been To a growing extent, a war of the black underclass against the white majority.
And I see this situation as continuing to get worse.
Now, I don't believe that in the 1990s we will see an open, organized shooting war between the blacks and whites.
And I don't know in detail how this conflict will develop in the future.
All I could see back in the 1970s was that this conflict would grow, that it would intensify, and in fact I believe it has.
If you look at the science of genetics, is it or is it not true that racial mixture produces a stronger genetic component?
Now one cannot make a blanket statement like that.
You have to have a certain degree of homogeneity in order to be able to say that this is strain A and this is strain B and compare them at all.
I really wasn't asking that.
You need a certain amount of genetic variability in a population if that population is to be able to respond to changes in the environment.
But we have gone far beyond that with the things that are happening today.
When we were living in Europe, we always had quite a sufficient degree of genetic variability to take advantage of a fairly wide range of circumstances.
There is an optimum degree of genetic variability for a population.
We are going far beyond that optimum value now.
So in going far beyond it, we then, in your opinion, weaken the genetic strain instead of strengthening it?
Yeah, we threaten it with annihilation.
There is currently in the news the story of the Freeman.
In Montana, are you keeping up on that?
Yes, I've been following that with some interest.
So have we.
You've been a hot subject here on the radio lately.
What is your view of their situation?
How do you view the Freeman?
Well, I don't know folks up there in Montana either individually or as a group.
Uh, from what I have seen, they have some, uh, pretty wacky religious ideas and some even wackier economic ideas.
They believe that a certain, uh, amendment, uh, to the Constitution wasn't properly ratified and therefore, the Federal Reserve System is illegal and therefore, they're entitled to prep their own money.
Or something to that effect.
That's about right.
Yes.
Now, I think that is a misreading of history and the law, but at the same time, I sympathize with these folks up there.
I think the government has become far too intrusive into our lives.
I think the government has become far too oppressive.
And these people want to withdraw.
They say, hey, we're not going to put up with this crap anymore.
We're going to do our own thing.
We're going to burn our own money.
We're going to teach our own kids.
We're not going to send them to the public school anymore.
We're not going to have any more interaction with the federal government.
Now, that may not be practical, but I do sympathize with that view.
I think that the government really ought to try harder to stay out of people's lives, to quit insisting that everyone do things their way.
Is there any way that you can see a justification for their, in effect, constructing their own monetary system, issuing liens upon which they wrote checks, which were no good, and blah, blah, blah?
Is there any way you can see that truly justified by their complaint regarding the Fed?
Yeah, you know, as long as they do this among themselves, of course, more power to them.
I think that the unfortunate thing is that they were able to get some other folks involved in this thing by sending their checks out to buy things that they wanted, like new tractors and so on, and they really shouldn't have done that.
They should have thought this thing through a little more carefully because that had brought the federal government into it.
Yes, it did.
But I do sympathize with their basic position.
Of just wanting to be left alone, of feeling that the government was pushing them too hard, even before they did these things which the government decided it had to step in and deal with forcefully.
Well, if we are to maintain any form or level of civilization, then there has to be some rule of law.
I mean, their mortgages could not be paid, so they simply stopped paying them.
Uh, and so forth and so on, and the checks and the death threats issued with regard to local officials.
Now, should the FBI or should a government or law enforcement group be doing essentially what's being done right now, and that is trying to bring them to justice?
and take money away from my neighbor who is not part of my thing, so to speak,
then I expect the government to step in and say, hey, you can't do that, that's stealing, you have to give
it back.
One of the things that I've always been careful to do throughout my adult life
is never borrow money, never be indebted to a bank, never be in the position of having to make payments that I
might not be able to make someday.
These folks got themselves into that position where they began seeing the banks as their enemies, as taking advantage of them, because they were overextended in the loans that they had taken out.
And I understand that the government has to protect the interests of the folks outside the Freeman community, as well as the Well, then, having said that, we are extensively, we cover the whole state of Montana like a blanket.
They've got radios.
You are probably somebody they would listen to.
The FBI has surrounded them.
A hundred FBI out there.
They're getting ready to turn off the power.
This whole thing is headed south.
Beau Brites has been there.
State Senator Duke has been there.
Both of them threw up their hands and said, these people are not the Patriot Movement, these people are not the people you want to be supporting, and we can't do anything with them, they don't keep any agreements, and they walked away!
So, they're listening to you, no doubt, tonight.
What advice would you give them, with the FBI all around them, and no doubt some sort of violent resolution or dynamic entry, possible or probable?
Well, you know, as I said before, I don't know any of these folks up there personally.
I don't know much about their organization except what I've seen on the news, and I hesitate a little bit to give advice because I don't really know what all of their considerations are.
If I were into this thing as deeply as they are with, you know, facing the prospect of many years in prison, I might be inclined just to stick in there and fight it out.
I'd say, what have I got to lose?
If I could go back, however, and start over again, I'd say, hey, I did this the wrong way.
I think that it's possible to withdraw, to get the government out of my hair to a certain extent, to keep my kids out of the public schools without getting entangled with the FBI the way these freemen have.
And if the government could offer them some sort of a deal where they could make restitution For some of the economic irregularities that they are alleged to have been engaged in.
But didn't have to go to jail.
I think maybe I would look at a deal like that long and hard.
Say, hey, I didn't really start this off the way I should have.
If I can get out of this without having to spend the rest of my life in jail, maybe I'll try to do that and then go my own way a little bit more prudently.
In the future.
But short of a deal of that magnitude, you'd probably, in their position, fight it out?
If I were faced with spending the rest of my life in jail, I think I'd shoot it out.
Why is your book, in its present reincarnation, being published by a Jewish man?
Well, I can't speak for Mr. Stewart, I can only assume No, but you have spoken with him.
Yes, I have spoken with him.
Mr. Stewart has always been a bit of a renegade in the publishing industry in New York.
His public subjects would touch.
He's a ballsy sort of a guy.
When I first made contact with him, he had phoned one of my people, who is in charge of book promotion, and said he was interested in publishing the Turner Diaries, and so I called Stewart.
And he was in a meeting at the time, but when I gave my name, his secretary put me through, and he said, you know, we're talking about your book right now.
And he told the other folks in the room to say hello, and I heard this chorus of hi in the background.
And he said, you know, you give me a call back at my home tomorrow morning, and we can talk about it.
But right now I've got to, you know, decide this matter with my own people.
So I called him back the next morning, And he said, you know, every one of my people yesterday was dead set against our publishing your book.
And that convinced me that we just had to do it.
You know, he's that sort of a guy.
He believes in going his own way and he thrives on controversy.
And he saw The Turn of Diaries as a very controversial book, and I guess he thought that that would go a long way I guess he also thought that any book that is as
controversial as the Turner Diaries must have something interesting to say, otherwise it would
never have all the controversy around it that it does.
Do you want the future in the Turner Diaries to come true?
Well, you know, I hope that we don't have to go through all of the bloodshed and the
unpleasantness that I imagined back in the 1970s when I was writing the book.
I would hope that we can wake up and try to choose a more prudent course before we get involved in this all-out warfare that I imagined.
But, if I look at history, I don't see a lot of grounds for hope.
It seems like we have very seldom woke, waken up to the, to the, the, you know, and chosen a
more prudent course.
It looks like we've, we've generally done things the hard way.
We've generally done things the bloody way.
And I, I don't have a lot of hope that, that we won't end up going through a great deal
of unpleasantness in the future.
Would you consider more likely a race war or a civil war, that is a war against, waged
against the government, or would they be concurrent?
Well, I think probably a concurrent situation.
I think probably it will be more of a civil war, but I think there will be a large racial
aspect to that civil war.
Component, yes.
Yes.
Now, again, I'm asking you, would you, in other words, would you consider a civil war?
Your personal preference, would you see this as inevitable or even something that you would want to happen?
Well, I've always been a peaceful man.
I've been sort of a scholar, a tinkerer, a nature lover.
I've never really been a warrior, except I went to military school when I was a teenager.
I've not been a warlike person.
I've never been a violent person.
I would like to see a peaceful resolution to our problems.
I just don't happen to believe that we will have a peaceful resolution.
You're saying you will not practice what you in essence preach, that we must become participants in change.
The Turner Diaries is not a book of advocacy.
It's not a book which says this is the way the future should be.
It's a book which says this is the way the future will be.
OK, but you seem to embrace the concepts and ideas personally that would drive this scenario in your book to be reality.
No, I don't.
I mean, the specific plot in the book, which involved nuclear weapons and a lot of other flaccid and violent things, that's not something that I look forward to with eagerness.
That's not the sort of thing that I relish.
Those are not the ideas in the book.
That is simply the plot of the book.
And I tried to make the plot interesting.
I tried to make a gripping adventure story so that people wouldn't put the book down after the first few pages and say, oh, I've got better things to do.
I wanted them to read the whole thing through.
So I tried to make a believable adventure scenario.
I tried to put myself in the skin of the protagonist, Earl Turner, as I was writing.
And to make it exciting, you know, this was one chapter a month and so something exciting had to happen in every chapter to keep up the interest.
Alright, are you pleased by or not pleased by the fact that apparently Timothy McVeigh, the man accused of blowing up the Murr Building in Oklahoma City, You apparently embraced your book and your story almost as specific instructions.
No, no, you're sort of implying that my book was the inspiration for the bombing in Oklahoma City, and I don't believe that's true at all.
I think the inspiration for the bombing in Oklahoma City was the massacre in Waco, Texas that took place two years earlier.
And you might ask Bill Clinton and Janet Reno whether they're pleased That what they did in Waco and killing all those women and children has inspired Timothy McVeigh and others to blow up the federal building in Oklahoma City.
That may have certainly been the cause within Mr. McVeigh's mind, but the methodology is just about exactly that described in your book.
Well, you know, as I said, I tried to be realistic.
Doctor, we'll pick up on this note.
We're at the top of the hour here, so just relax and we'll be back.
My guest is Dr. William Pierce.
his book reincarnating on the bookshelves, The Turner Diaries.
The Turner Diaries is a book about the life of a man named John Turner. It's a book about
his life as a man named John Turner.
The Turner Diaries is a book about the life of a man named John Turner. It's a book about
his life as a man named John Turner.
The Turner Diaries is a book about the life of a man named John Turner. It's a book about
his life as a man named John Turner.
The Turner Diaries is a book about the life of a man named John Turner. It's a book about
his life as a man named John Turner. It's a book about his life as a man named John Turner.
Five, zero, three, three.
This is the CBC Radio Network.
He was the subject of a story on 60s, the 60s, the 70s, and the 80s, and he was bound to die in a chaotic way in this
man's death.
Indeed, his motivation for doing what he did may have been revenge for Waco. I think that's clearly probable.
Again, his method was nearly identical to that method described in your book, where I believe a militia member,
a white militia member, drove a truck full of fertilizer bombs, or big bomb, under an FBI building in Washington, D.C.
and blew it to smithereens, even according to Mike Wallace, down to the mix of the fertilizer, that close.
I mean, that's pretty close.
Um, uh, the...
The truck bomb is the weapon of choice for the terrorist who wants to blow up a building.
It was a truck bomb that was used to blow up the Marine barracks in Lebanon.
When was that? 1984?
It was a truck bomb which was used to blow up the World Trade Center.
And Timothy McVeigh, who I understand was a student of military science, must have been aware of this.
that it's the weapon which has been used traditionally and it's the weapon which makes sense
if you want to do large-scale damage to a strong structure like a concrete building.
No question about it.
But he is also known to have been, in effect, a student of yours.
So combined with the chapter in your book and the fact that he regarded it almost as a Bible,
you find that it makes the connection almost impossible to deny.
Well, deny, I don't know what you think.
Thanks John.
A criminal goes out and hangs someone and you say, well look we found a copy of this western novel with him and in this book there's a hanging and they used a rope.
They used a rope in this hanging.
And this criminal also used a rope.
He must have gotten the idea from reading this western.
I mean that's stretching it.
The fact is that if you want to hang somebody you use a rope.
If you want to blow up a building, you use a truck bomb with fertilizer.
I recall doing an interview on the radio.
Another radio station was interviewing me and I began to see the pictures of Oklahoma City.
And that moment is sort of ingrained in my memory the way so many others are throughout our history,
the Kennedy assassinations and so forth.
And that moment when you began to see what was going on in Oklahoma, didn't it flash through your mind?
What flashed through my mind?
Your book, that explosion, I mean, didn't... At that moment, when you began seeing the news coverage, what were your thoughts?
Well, you know, it took a while for me to understand what had happened there, as I think was the case with most other people.
You know, I watched a lot of that early newsreel coverage of the bombing, and one of the things that struck me Uh, was that, uh, this was within, say, the first hour after the bombing.
Mm-hmm.
Uh, they, they were reporting that other unexploded bombs had been found in the building.
I recall that, yes.
And, um, so, uh, that was, that was very interesting to me.
I was trying to figure out, well, just what has gone on here?
Um, what, what caused this, uh, explosion?
Other unexploded bombs in the building?
That must have meant it was an inside job.
And then, later on, there was never an explanation of this.
They just stopped talking about these other bombs that they had found.
And this, of course, has fueled all sorts of wild speculation.
There are a lot of people that are speculating that the government blew up the building themselves to serve as a pretext for cracking down on the militias and for outlawing fire.
I don't believe that.
I don't believe the government blew up the building themselves, but I always wondered What happened to these unexploded bombs that they were talking about early in the newsreel coverage of this thing?
Oh, I don't know.
Any large event like that gets conspiracy theories wound into conspiracy theories.
Right, I'm not talking about the theories, I'm talking about the news reports.
Yes, I recall the news reports, and I think there was an explanation that they were there for training, or they were there... I can't exactly recall, but it did sort of drop off.
Then there were people who said that, well, there were two explosions, not one, and they attempted to produce seismic records that indicated that was so, and, you know, and on and on.
And then, of course, John Doe No.
2, we could go on and on about the sort of urban myths, maybe some of them not myths, that have grown out of this.
Right, well as I said I was following all this and it was a while before the conclusion was reached by the authorities based on their investigation that in fact this had been a truck bomb using ammonium nitrate fertilizer.
So it took me a while.
No, not really.
It was quite a while later before there were reports that McVeigh had read the Turner Diaries.
it came slowly but at some point you must have begun to see the fact that there was
a connection or that people would perceive there was a connection, one of the two.
No, not really. You know, it was quite a while later before there were reports that, what's
his name, MacVeigh had read the Turner Diaries that he had talked about in some of his army
stories. You know, I watched the news reports of the World Trade Center bombing too, and
And it came out, I think, a little bit more clearly and a little earlier in that bombing that it was a truck bomb that was used in the World Trade Center bombing.
Now, people don't ask me, say, well, don't you feel responsible for the World Trade Center bombing?
I mean, after all, it was a bomb similar to the one you described in the Turner Diaries.
And I say, nonsense.
It's clear again that the motivation for that bombing was not something that these folks who blew up the World Trade Center had read in a book.
It was what our government has actually been doing over in the Middle East.
And these folks wanted to send a message to the government, say, hey, we don't appreciate the fact that you're supporting Israel and Israel is killing our people.
And I think, again, in the case of the Oklahoma City bombing, it was somebody who wanted to send a message to the government about something that the government had actually done, namely the massacre in Waco.
an inspiration that came from reading a book, my book or anybody else's book.
Alright, anti-government sentiment is building along with other hatreds very rapidly in America right now.
Is it your prophetic sense that we're going to see a lot more Oklahomas?
Well, I don't know how things will go in detail, but in general, yes,
Yes, I do believe that we will see more terrorism.
I believe that the scale will increase.
I believe that the number of incidents will increase.
I believe, in other words, that these incidents that we have seen happening almost simultaneously on a historical scale, the World Trade Center bombing, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Unabomber and his mail bombs, I think that this is just the beginning.
I would imagine that you have read in total the Unabomber's manifesto?
Yes, I did read that when it was published in the Washington Post and the New York Times.
The method of getting it published aside for a moment, even his deeds for a moment, what are your impressions of the manifesto?
I don't agree with a lot of the ideas that Mr. Kaczynski expressed in his manifesto.
He came from a left-wing background.
I don't share a lot of those sentiments that are common in the left wing, but I do sympathize with some of the things that apparently were bugging him.
He has complained about what this over-industrialized lifestyle has done to us as a people, what
it has done to the world.
When I was studying history, I was struck by the changes that the Industrial Revolution
made in the life and in the thinking of people.
It took people off the farms, out of the countryside, away from the villages, and urbanized them.
It packed them together into factory towns, into mill towns.
And I think that, by and large, this was an unhealthy change.
Now, I'm not a Luddite like Mr.
I'm a bit of a technology freak myself.
I've always been interested in computers and other devices, but I do think that the way in which technology has been applied to our lives has not been well thought out, that it has had some very unfortunate consequences and I could see Mr. Kaczynski agonizing over these things in his manifesto and I sympathize with a lot of what he said.
What about his message?
You mean of sending out mail bombs to various people?
I really don't agree with that at all.
Often I wondered Why he chose some particular guy as a target when I couldn't really see that this guy was responsible for the things that Mr. Kaczynski was complaining about.
And I got the impression that maybe Mr. Kaczynski was acting more out of frustration, out of the feeling that he just had to do something.
And hadn't really worked out an effective plan of action to change the things that he found disagreeable.
Mr. Kaczynski said that the reason I killed was because, had I not, would you have published me?
Would you have listened to me?
The answer is no.
So he claims he did what he did so that what he had to say would be heard.
Well, maybe so, or maybe this was just a rationalization after the fact.
I don't know.
That is, nevertheless, what he claimed.
And is that not, in a lot of ways, very similar to what your character did to the FBI building in Washington for very much the same reason?
No, not so.
The bombing of the FBI building was for a very specific purpose.
It wasn't to send a message to the government.
It was to destroy a computerized identity card system that the government was developing so it could keep track of all of its citizens.
Well, that's a message.
Excuse me?
That's a message.
Well, the folks who were fighting against the government in the Turner Diaries were concerned about a specific threat.
And that was this computerized identity card system that the government was developing, and the computers were in the basement of the FBI headquarters, and so that's why they put the bomb there.
Actually, almost a Unabomber kind of message, really.
Well, I guess it depends upon how you look at it.
I think that the Unabomber was not trying to stop any particular program or something.
I think maybe he was just trying to say, hey, I'm here, I've got some real concerns, listen to me.
But I don't think that he hoped to stop some of these industrial programs he saw as Life-threatening by killing some forestry official or some professor at a university or what have you.
Timothy McVeigh for a second aside, how do you feel about the fact that your book has been embraced as sort of a bible of the extreme right?
Is that upsetting to you?
Pleasing to you?
How do you feel about that?
Well, I don't know that I'm upset by this claim, or that I'm pleased by this claim.
I'm not sure that the claim is true.
You know, what you call the extreme right is a pretty heterogeneous bunch of people.
There are a lot of different types of folks.
There are these identity Christians, I understand that.
uh... that's what these people are up in montana are the montana freemen
uh... there are people with other ideas uh... and uh... i doubt that uh...
the all of the people who are opposed to the government for one reason or another
could agree that uh... the turner diaries uh... is is a viable for them
I think maybe a lot of people who are opposed to the government find certain ideas of interest in the Turner Diaries, but I don't think that as a whole they would accept it as a Bible.
Are you a religious man?
I am a religious person.
I'm what you would call a nature worshiper.
Do you believe in a creator?
Yes I do, but I see the creator not as some big daddy up in the sky sitting on the clouds and keeping his finger on everything going on below.
I see God as eminent in nature, an indwelling God.
Do you believe man has a soul?
It depends upon how you define soul.
If I really want to... Something... I'll do it for you.
Something that would live beyond the physical or exist beyond the physical.
No, no.
I don't believe in ghosts.
I don't believe that I or anybody else continues to be conscious and to be able to think about things and observe what's going on after his body has been destroyed.
So no heaven, no hell?
No heaven, no hell.
Okay, do you think that that which you describe, you said you believe in God, then you said well God is kind of nature, or maybe nature, do you think that nature or God looks upon white people in a more kindly way than it does those of other skin colors?
You're making God anthropomorphic.
I am, yes.
I don't look at it that way at all.
I am a person of European ancestry.
I value more the things that my people have done.
I value things like western civilization and the values that are at the root of western
civilization.
I value the history of my own people.
I value the great men of my own people more than I do the values and the people and the
history associated with other racial groups.
I can't speak for God.
Wouldn't it be these very men that you describe, that you admire, values you admire, who would bring about a system of identification that you would see blown up?
I guess I didn't follow your question.
Yes, okay.
In your book you said the FBI building was blown up because of this new system of identification.
If there were to be such a thing, and many believe that we are headed in that direction, would it not be instituted by the very people you suggest you admire?
No, I don't think so.
I think that we're headed toward a national identity card system because the government is worried about losing its grip on things.
A series of actions and reactions.
The government becomes a bit more intrusive, a bit more oppressive, and people react to that becoming hostile to the government.
And the government says, uh-oh, the natives are getting restless.
We've got to do something about this.
Let's have an identity card system so we'll know where people are all the time.
And then people learn about this and that makes them even more alienated from the government, more likely to commit terrorist acts.
And then the government, in turn, reacts to this.
So you have an escalating series of things which I think will lead to more violence and more hostility.
And you think it's not going to be very long, correct?
I don't want to try to predict with any degree of precision how long, but I would say within a decade we will see a significant escalation.
Alright, we'll pause at that note.
We'll be right back to you, Doctor.
This is CBC.
This is the end of side one.
Please.
🎵Hardbound by John Williams🎵 Hardbound is taking calls on the wild card line.
That's 702-727-1295.
First time callers can reach Art Bell at 702-727-1222.
one two nine five that's seven oh two
702-727-1222.
seven two seven one two nine five
first time callers can reach Art Bell at seven oh two seven two seven
one two two two seven oh two
seven two seven one two two two
now, here again, Art Bell once again, here I am, my guest is Dr. William Pierce,
author of the very good Brazil, Turner Diaries coming back now in print
Once again.
Back now to Dr. William Pierce.
He was a physics professor, very interesting, a physics professor, and then I guess retired and became an author.
And, um, many people say his book, um, forwards the idea of hatred, in fact, culminating in a race war.
It is fictional work about a race war.
Uh, with a message, and we discussed that, and I think it's an important, uh, important aspect, uh, that you really did want the message out, Doctor.
Now, I think, arguably, whether it's racial hatreds or it's hatred of the government, it is certainly these days increasing, and it's headed toward something.
Now, one side preaches, we must End this stupid, wasteful hatred between people because of races and differences that we have.
The other side, and I think it fairly is your side, sees that as increasing or even wants it to increase.
One way or the other, we want to have some resolution, we'll have some final resolution in our society, a race war or some way to cure this hate.
Which way is it going?
Let me interject something here.
You talked about the internet in one of your commercials just a minute ago.
That's right.
I've actually got a lot of different facets of this message, only part of which appeared in the Turner Diaries.
I have a website on the internet where people can look at a lot of the other facets of the
message.
That website address is www.natvan.com.
Now you talked about hatred and it is true.
We are seeing a lot more hatred, a lot more hostility, a lot more tension building up
in this society than anybody is comfortable with.
And people are saying, oh, we've got to stop this hatred.
It's a bad thing.
And I agree, but I think that the only way that we are going to stop it is to look at the causes of it and try to undo those causes.
I think that when we have this conflict developing between the races as a consequence of these We've got programs to force the races together, to force them to mix.
We've got to say, hey, maybe this program, this idea that everybody will be happy if we force them all together, maybe we were wrong on that.
Maybe what we need to do is the sort of thing that Mr. Farrakhan has been advocating.
We need to let people do their own thing.
We need to allow them to separate if they want to.
And then, perhaps, we can decrease some of this hostility.
In your book, there is a very provocative chapter about the Day of the Rope.
The Day of the Rope.
This is when all race traders, mainly white people, would be hung from lampposts and stop signs and such.
Yes?
Yes, you know, there was a civil war going on in the book.
And, uh, the revolutionaries had captured Southern California.
But they had not pacified Southern California.
There was all sorts of turmoil going on.
There was sniping and assassination and sabotage.
Kind of like Southern California today.
Yeah, sort of like Southern California today.
And so there was a pacification program which involved hanging an awful lot of people in order to calm things down.
A very unpleasant Well, there were people who were hung for having betrayed their race.
I remember a specific example of a realtor who was hanged because he had participated
in a program which provided lower cost housing to racially mixed couples, for example.
And the revolutionaries regarded him as an advocate of this program, which they regarded as racially destructive.
And so he was hanged, not only as part of the pacification program, but as an example to the rest of the population.
Doctor, what would you say to a happily married interracial couple?
Well, you know, I don't know that I have anything to say to such a couple myself.
I don't believe that miscegenation is healthy for a society.
I know that it is increasing among us today.
I know that we have people who advocate that as a solution to the racial conflict.
Are you certain that it is not?
Excuse me?
Am I certain that it's not a hallucination?
Yes.
Well, I don't believe it is.
I mean, I've seen miscegenation increasing over the last three decades, and I've also seen racial conflict increasing over the last three decades.
And you attribute it directly to that?
Well, I don't say that the racial conflict Uh, is attributable to the miscegenation, but I think we see these things going together.
We used to have in America separate societies, a white society and a black society.
And we had a lot lower level of racial conflict and a lot less miscegenation.
We also had a lot of difference between the rights of black people and the rights of white people, didn't we?
Well, in terms of voting rights in the South, for example?
One example, sure.
Or where one sat on the bus, or many other things.
Right.
We had a... The white society was clearly dominant in our society, say, prior to the Second World War.
We had separate and unequal societies in this country.
And I don't think that was a healthy situation either.
We got ourselves into a pretty unfortunate mess in this country by starting off with a slave-based economy in the South back in colonial days.
When that slavery came to an end during the Civil War, we dumped 3 million freed slaves into the general population.
and laid the basis for the problem that we have today.
They saw a solution to this problem, thought they could head off a lot of unpleasant consequences by sending the slaves and their descendants back to Africa.
And President Lincoln looked with favor on this program and was helping to formulate a plan for repatriation at the time he was assassinated.
Uh, so then, uh, that day, of course, is gone, and we now have what we have.
So, ideally, then, in this country, would you see it be separate, but equal, with regard to rights, uh, constitutional, uh, Bill of Rights, all the rest of it?
Well, I think we need to have separate societies again.
I doubt that those societies will be equal.
They will be different societies.
They will have different types of people in them.
Again, though, I refer to equality with regard to constitutional rights, civil rights, etc.
I think we're going to have different constitutions.
People need to have governments and laws and societies and institutions that are reflections of their own nature.
and different types of people are going to have different societies, different governments.
Well then, this is asking you to speculate, of course, but just out of curiosity,
how would you see a separate white nation, or how would you see it delineated from a separate black nation?
Well, you know, you're asking me a question which I can't just answer off the top of my head.
If I were in a position to design a new society, I would work on that problem.
But it would be something that I would take a long time to work out.
I would think about it very carefully.
I would seek the advice of a lot of other people.
I can't answer that off the top of my head.
In general, I try to avoid Hypothetical questions in these interviews because I don't like to make snap judgments on anything Well, it's just something that I imagined you would have thought of Since you feel that that is is the only possible direction or ultimate direction whether we have a race war We don't have a race war that will cure this problem.
So then you must have occasionally imagined the differences between these Governments, structures, lands, peoples.
Well, no, I mean, I don't try to design the type of government that some other group of people will have.
I don't believe that we should impose our ideas about government on other people.
I've never agreed with this idea that it was America's mission to make sure that every country in the world had a democratic form of government.
I don't believe that we should have We haven't taken upon ourselves the burden of changing the religion of the people in Africa or India or anywhere else.
I think that we should concern ourselves with our own problems, our own people, our own development, and let other people have the form of government, the religion, the institutions that they find congenial to them.
So then, what might you say to a black man or a Hispanic or any other race who would stand before you and say, look, I don't want to be separated.
I'm an American.
I like where I am now.
I like the country that I live in.
I don't want to go somewhere else.
I don't want to be separated.
What do you say to that person?
Then, we're going to have a conflict.
We'll have to fight each other.
Well, that's too bad, isn't it?
Yes, it is too bad.
It's too bad that we got ourselves in the position where we have to have this conflict.
It's too bad that we did not maintain the degree of separateness that we had at one time in the past.
During the interview with Mike Wallace on Sunday, he asked you about your admiration of Adolf Hitler.
That's correct, he did.
So let me ask you about it as well.
What is it You know, after the First World War, Germany was in pretty bad shape, economically, socially.
They had a government known as the Weimar Republic, which tolerated homosexual behavior, which tolerated all sorts of things that a certain liberal set found very congenial, but
which was very distressing to the more tradition-minded component among the German
people.
And Hitler developed policies and programs which restored Germany to health, not only
to economic health, not only to political strength, but to moral and spiritual health.
He managed to get all of the German people, or virtually all of them, Behind him with this policy, these policies that he formulated, he did a job which was nothing short of miraculous.
And I'm not the only one who has looked upon these policies with a degree of admiration.
Winston Churchill, back prior to the Second World War, expressed his admiration for what Hitler had done in Germany, for Hitler's policies and programs.
When it finally got down to it, though, we all know what the final solution was.
What about that part of it?
Well, you know, one of the things that Hitler and his followers were determined to do in Germany was to free German society from the very disproportionately strong Jewish influence that had built up During the period of the Weimar Republic.
The German newspapers were disproportionately in Jewish hands.
The legal profession was very heavily in Jewish hands.
The Jews had developed a disproportionately strong influence in the universities, in the arts, and Germans... Why, by the way, do you think that occurred?
Well, the Jews have, by working together, by having a strong sense of racial solidarity, by cooperating with each other, had a great advantage toward doing that sort of thing in every country that they have moved into.
The very thing you admire, natural selection.
Right, when it is something that is done by my people to strengthen their own position.
Not when it's done by anybody else.
But not when it's done by somebody else so that it weakens my people and affects my people.
Now, if a group of people in their own part of the world do this, it's not my concern.
I don't worry about it.
I don't resent it.
But the German people did resent the situation that had developed in Germany and they set about to change that situation.
They instituted from 1933, when Hitler became chancellor, they instituted a program to essentially
de-Judaize German society.
They rooted the Jews out of the teaching profession, that is Jews could remain in the teaching
profession but they could only teach Jews in Jewish schools.
They rooted them out of journalism.
Jews could still publish newspapers, but only newspapers for the Jewish community.
They rooted them out of entertainment.
They rooted them out of German economic life.
And the result of this was that the Jews began to see Germany as a place without a future for them, and they began leaving the country.
There were some 600,000 Jews in Germany in 1933, when Hitler became Chancellor.
That number had decreased to approximately 200,000 by 1939, when the Second World War broke out.
Two-thirds of the Jews had physically left Germany.
and their influence over German life had virtually been neutralized.
And Adolf Hitler, of course, went far beyond that when he then, in lands he successively conquered,
collected generally the Jews and made a good shot at genocide and killed millions.
Well, you know, there's been quite a bit of controversy about what actually happened.
There were charges immediately after the Second World War, for example, that millions of Jews were gassed to death in Germany.
And certain prison camps, the camp at Dachau, for example, outside Munich, was held up as an example of an extermination camp, and there was a big plaque At the entrance to the camp that so many tens of thousands of Jews had been gassed to death in the gas chamber there.
Do you suggest that did not occur?
It did not occur at Dachau and that is generally recognized.
Now the plaque has come down and it is admitted that there never was a gas chamber at Dachau in which anyone was gassed.
And other camps?
Well, in other camps I don't really know.
Possibly, as it has developed, Uh, you, in order, if you question it, you've gotta look at the details.
You've gotta look at the facts.
You can't say, well, there was a holocaust or there wasn't a holocaust.
You've gotta say...
What specifically do you allege happened?
What are all the details which together make up the Holocaust?
And if you think that maybe that wasn't entirely true, you've got to look at it detail by detail.
Examine the specific instances that are alleged to have happened and see whether or not in fact they were true.
Do you think it was partially true?
I think it was partially true, yes.
Just as the government in this country rounded up citizens of Japanese descent and put them in internment camps or concentration camps, the same thing happened in Germany and in the German-occupied territories during the Second World War.
Well, certainly what we did with the Japanese constitutionally was not constitutional, I guess I ought to say.
Well, I don't know whether I'll make a constitutional judgment on that or not.
I don't think the Supreme Court raised a big fuss about that back during the war.
Well, they've certainly redressed it.
Doctor, we're at the top of the hour.
You know, I'm going to have to bow out now.
I'm becoming a little hoarse, and probably you'll want to allow some of the callers a chance to call in, and I think I'll let you Talk to those callers.
Alright.
And I appreciated the chance to be on your program.
▲
Export Selection