Art Bell

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 26, 1996 - Art Bell

02:47:26

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - HAARP - Nick Begich

Participants

Main voices

45:14

nick begich

01:38:50

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Welcome to Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
unidentified		Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		From the high desert in the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening or good morning as the case may be.
		And welcome to another edition of the very best in live overnight talk radio.
		While the others carry regurgitated, recirculated, repeated nonsense, here we are live in the middle of the night.
		From the Hawaiian and Tahitian Island chains in the west, all the way east to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands, south into South America, and as you well know, worldwide on the internet.
		This is Coast to Coast A.M. Good morning, everybody.
		We are going to hold off on predictions for one more day.
		We'll begin them tomorrow night.
unidentified		The yearly traditional prediction show.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And that will be tomorrow night, beginning tomorrow night and through the end of the year.
		Because tonight we are going to revisit something we haven't done in a long time.
		We're going to go all the way to Alaska, and we're going to talk to Dr. Nick Begich, co-author of Angels Don't Play This Harp.
		You wouldn't believe what's going on in Alaska.
unidentified		A lot of you will never have heard of Harp.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's H-A-A-R-P.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But you're about to, and I suggest you stay right where you are, because harp is something to behold.
unidentified		The End.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Incidentally, as an update to a story we have been following very closely, as you know, we've done a couple of large interviews with Joyce Riley with regard to the Gulf War syndrome, whatever it is.
		She has thought for a very long time that it was biological in nature.
		About an hour prior to airtime, I saw a CNN story indicating they finally have decided to investigate the possibility of the exact biological causative agent that Joyce Riley has been telling everybody was used in the war.
		So I'd like to congratulate Joyce Riley, and I guess we better stay pretty close to that story.
		All right, now on to HAARP.
		Dr. Nick Begich, a traditional physician, eldest son of the late United States Congressman from Alaska, Nick Begich Sr. and political activist Peggy Begich, is known in Alaska for his own activities.
		He is the past president of the Alaska Federation of Teachers and the Anchorage Council of Education.
		He's been pursuing independent research in the sciences and politics for most of his adult life.
		He wrote the first major story on the HAARP project.
		Again, that's H-A-A-R-P.
		We'll find out about the acronym.
		Published in October of 94 in Nexus, an international magazine based in Australia.
		His research files on the project and related technologies include more than 400 documents spanning 80 years of technological developments.
		Here from Alaska, where I bet it's getting cold, is Dr. Nick Begich.
		Dr. Begich, welcome.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's good to be back with you, and it is cold.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How cold is it up there, Doctor?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		it's been uh...
unidentified		hovering just above zero today so it's cold uh...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		our own uh...
		upper midwest and northwest is getting This so far, Doctor, is the worst winter in memory.
		It is a horrible winter.
		It began cold and it's getting colder.
		And there's snow where there usually isn't snow and freezing everywhere.
		People say, well, it's wintertime.
		Yeah.
		But boy, it's rough.
		It's really rough.
		What, Doctor, is HAARP?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		HARP actually stands for High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project.
		And it's a jointly operated project here in Alaska by the Air Force and the Navy.
		And the intention is using radio frequency to create a number of upper atmospheric and ionospheric events that then can be utilized for military purposes and other purposes.
		But it's a very, very large project.
		Essentially, you can view it as a large ground-based Star Wars weapons technology project operating here in Alaska.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, what do they say that HARP is?
		Surely they don't say HAARP is SDI-related or a Defense Department operation of any kind.
		What do they say it is?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, initially, their story was it was just strictly an ionospheric research project and that it might have some communications applications in terms of military applications.
		And what we found in terms of their internal documents indicate it's much more than that.
		But basically then what they did is expand the scope of the project sort of in successive press releases that basically start to lay out, as they gain funding each year, the additional attributes of the project.
		And for instance, this current year they've been using it for testing the concept of Earth-penetrating tomography.
		Also some interaction with some satellite technologies as well have been part of the agenda for this current fiscal year.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Kind of general.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where is HAARP located, Doctor?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It's about 250 miles northeast of Anchorage or 250 miles southeast of Fairbanks, but it's a pretty good general location on it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's kind of out in the middle of nowhere.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it is.
		It is.
		In fact, you know, a lot of these projects, people remember in your neck of the woods down there in Nevada, that that used to be where a lot of these programs were tested and run because it was remote and it was out of the way.
		And now, you know, really Alaska fills that bill.
		In addition to some of the this particular project requires a northern location and high energy sources eventually once it gets ramped up to its full size.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why the north?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		The north, primarily, as all of the records show, they need a place where the magnetic lines of force come closest to the earth, ideally situated on the United States territory in Alaska.
		It certainly fits that.
		But it also requires large sources of natural gas, which is sort of where the Project HARP began and really where it eventually will go.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Natural gas for energy?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		What HAARP requires as they continue to build the project, right now it's at what's called the developmental prototype stage, which is the first phase in a multi-phase project as they presented it.
		Eventually it'll get to the size where they need magneto-hydrodynamic generators and other large generating sources of electrical power.
		And natural gas provides an ideal source.
		And in Alaska, of course, we have trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that's virtually untapped.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We have a photograph somewhere on the webpage.
		Maybe I can get Keith to put a pointer directly to it.
		But we have a photograph of the HARP antenna array there, and it is very impressive.
		It's like a gigantic field of what appear to be dipoles or arrays.
		What is that?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's exactly what it is, but it's a site that was designed to be modular, to be extended on and added onto.
		What you see initially in this field are 48 antenna, of which 18 were activated last year.
		The full array is now activated for this year in terms of being available for use.
		They tested it in November.
		Again, they'll be testing again in January.
		But basically, it's designed to eventually go to 360 antennas in the array from the one facility, the one developmental prototype.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Again, I'm a ham operator, so I understand a little bit about antennas, a little bit anyway, and I know that the higher the gain generally of an antenna, the more directional it is.
		And ham antennas start out transmitting a signal that is relatively narrow, and then it becomes broader and broader and broader.
		The greater the distance, the broader it becomes.
		HARP, I think, is designed in exactly the opposite way.
		It begins as a fairly broad signal and is designed to hit the ionosphere kind of like a laser beam, isn't it?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's exactly it.
		And when you think of an old way of looking at it, just a simple way, actually, is looking at it as a funnel, you know, that standard transmitter.
		The wide end is at the ionospheric levels where the density gets quite thin or the concentration of energy is much, much less.
		In this case, it's focusing the energy or concentrating it into a relatively small area, which is what makes this facility much different than any other.
		And the size of the facility, you know, it's similar on the ground, but it's the amount of energy that can be delivered to the ionosphere, which is an area about 30 to 600 miles above the Earth's surface, but an area that can be triggered by hitting specific frequencies to go in and create a number of different energy effects.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, so it's kind of like when you were a kid and you had a magnifying glass, or maybe even as an adult, and you took a leaf and you focused the little dot of light on the leaf and smoke and then maybe even fire and you burn a hole right through the leaf.
		That is roughly what HAARP does in reverse to the ionosphere.
		In other words, they're calling it an ionospheric heater.
		Why would a person want to heat a little dot or a little area of the ionosphere?
		Why?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, it depends on how they're going to use it.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		In one instance, if you heat an area, a region above the place where your station is, and you can heat it sufficiently, you can actually lift the ionosphere, which then creates a space below in which lower atmosphere rushes in, so that if a satellite, for instance, were crossing that particular area, it would cause it to malfunction because it would hit drag forces that shouldn't be there, right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, that's something I hadn't heard before.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whoa, you said the energy could cause the ionosphere to lift?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes, over a very broad area.
		This actually was raised in discussion on National Canadian television with John Hexer, who's a program manager for the military on this.
		And he acknowledged that the busting of holes or the lifting of ionospheric segments was possible with this technology.
		What happens, though, as a result or a sort of a byproduct of the lifting of the ionosphere and the lower atmosphere moving into that space is it alters normal wind channels or pathways where wind currents would normally traverse the Earth.
		So it could, in fact, and we assert that it does, have the potential of affecting weather patterns over very broad areas as a result of that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let's get a sense of the power levels that HARP will eventually attain.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This project is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger and more powerful, right?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and this is a very important aspect because the effective radiated power of this system at its first phase, which is currently what's funded, is up to 1 billion watts of effective radiated power.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's a huge amount of energy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It really is.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And the eventual power levels that they would like to go, according to a technical document that we uncovered in our research, is up to 100 billion watts, which is an amount of energy that, again, this is interesting because since we were on where we did a long show on this subject back over a year ago, we have had opportunity to get the other side in front of camera, in front of a microphone, where they got to say their side of the story.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And what they acknowledge is at those power levels That many of the effects, particularly the weather modification effects that we've been so concerned about, could very likely occur.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, they admit this now.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, but here's the context in which it occurred: they didn't know that we had this technical memorandum 195, which is sort of the story on where they wanted to go.
		And it was an internal planning memorandum.
		It was 613 pages long, And it wasn't released publicly.
		And he was confronted on Canadian television by a reporter with the document.
		And it's clear where they want it to go in power levels is 100 billion watts.
		And where they are today is, again, we don't disagree at the developmental prototype, but we certainly have a different opinion on where it goes from here than what they're willing to admit.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm curious, what did they say when they were confronted with this document?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, my, where did you get that?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, it was first it was a total denial on the part of John Heckscher knowing anything about it, which is pretty humorous because he is the program manager.
		He was on the distribution list.
		He was at the meeting where the thing was prepared.
		It was the lead document that led to the development of the contract that eventually became the HAARP program.
		I mean, it was the technical specification meeting where all of that was put together.
		But the way the memorandum was drafted, the very first sections of it were set up to be what they call a private communication between the parties, which were the private parties.
		So it wasn't, and they also say that it was a non-published document.
		Well, a non-published document, and private communications are exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests.
		And the only way we got it was through a very friendly source that was within one of the libraries where one of the documents was housed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Still, he must have gulped hard.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		He did.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		The picture on screen is really great because you actually, he turns into a pretzel and sort of folds up because he's caught, and it's caught in a very awkward position on this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, as you know, I spoke with John Hetcher and gave him the opportunity to come on the air, which he declined.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He talked to me about the project, and frankly, oh, I think we talked about 30 minutes, and by the time it was done, it sounded like something Boy Scouts were doing.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, we had one legislative hearing here in Alaska.
		We had it in April, and it was telling.
		We each brought our own group of experts to the table to that dialogue.
		And it was telling.
		And what we found is that they're willing only to confront a few issues on the entire project.
		And what they've defaulted to are third-party regulatory bodies that have certain controls over certain aspects.
		But they won't take us on the major issues, which is really unfortunate.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Who is providing the money for this?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		This is U.S. taxpayers.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that's basically the money flow.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Our money.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It's money coming right out of the defense budget.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Our money.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And this year, in particular, you know, they say it's non-classified.
		Two things came out of the hearings.
		One is they deny that any part of it's classified, yet when you speak to the original inventor of the technology, you know, he'll acknowledge that there's major portions of it he still can't discuss because it is classified.
		The military wants to maintain it's strictly a research project, and yet, I mean, it's their own words.
		It's their own paperwork, their own documents that show it clearly as much more than that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, gee, the military is involved then.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There's no question about that.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, they're actually running the program.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Running the program.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It was funded through their budgets.
		Originally, it was sort of put out as a University of Alaska geophysical institute project that they would be heavily involved.
		And they were in some of the beginning stages, but in terms of the operation itself and the budget itself, it's military.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, Doctor, the military doesn't get involved, much less run a project, without at least possible military application.
		Anybody, even the most naive out there, have seen enough movies to know what the military does when it gets involved with science.
		It wants something for the military.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, there's no pure research in this.
		I mean, whatever's developed, whatever grows out of this system is strictly for application in a complex situation, either in defense or offensive conflict.
		And what we've said about the system is, look, Star Wars is a major initiative.
		The whole idea of electromagnetic warfare, which is really what HAARP, the book about HAARP, is all about.
		It's about HAARP as a system, and standing aside from it, a lot of other systems are being developed in the same venue.
		And yet, not any of these issues are getting the kind of public debate that certainly what may turn out to be not just billions of dollars, but trillions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money flowing into a whole new arms initiative that's quite as intense or could be as intense as what we've just come through with atomic and nuclear weapons.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did you know, Doctor, that there is a little-known provision in U.S. code that allows, with 30 days notification, the experimentation on the American civilian population of biological and chemical agents?
		I mean, all they've got to do is notify local authorities, they don't specify which, that this will occur, and in 30 days they can begin experimenting on civilian populations in this country.
		Now, that's a fact.
		I wonder if that would include, or perhaps need not include, with regard to notification or anything else, the experimentation on the U.S. civilian population, in fact, the world's population, of electromagnetic radiation.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, in this case, there are no international treaties that I know of dealing with this particular kind of, if you will, electromagnetic pollution, electromagnetic warfare.
		The whole technology, what people need to realize is, and this is an important aspect of what we're trying to present, is the idea that weapons that utilize electromagnetic principles for affecting human physiology or the environment can be just as destructive, perhaps even more destructive, than weapons that have more overt and apparent effects, such as a bullet passing through tissue.
		But the idea that a weapon can be directed either accidentally or purposefully on a population, affect their physical health, their behavior, all of these things are very possible, and the technology is here, and HARP represents some of the finest.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Great.
		Doctor, hold on.
		We're at the bottom of the hour.
		We'll be right back and talk about what the military might do with something like HAARP.
unidentified		you're listening to art bell somewhere in time tonight featuring a replay of coast to coast a.m.
		from december 26th 1996 love will be strong, they gotta get right back to where we started going do you remember that day, that sunny day, when you first came my way No one would take your place.
		You hurt a little thing like me.
		I can put that smile back on your face.
		When it's all right and it's coming on, we've got to see.
		The End
		The End You'll listen to Art Bell somewhere in time tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		It is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, everybody.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich.
		His book, Angels Don't Play This Harp.
		Military angels, colonels and generals.
		Somehow I don't.
		Anyway, you get the picture.
		we'll talk about what the military might do with heart here in a moment Thank you.
		Back now to the cold country, Alaska, where there's a gigantic antenna array somewhere between Anchorage and Fairbanks getting ready to radiate maybe as much as 100 billion watts at our ionosphere.
		And we're discussing why they might want to do that and why the military is involved.
		And Doctor, what military applications might there be for a HAARP?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, there were several that we found.
		Just kind of tick through them, then we can sort of explore the ones that you want to go to.
		Sure.
		The first thing that we discovered, of course, was the communications aspect.
		And this is using a signal that's sent from the HARP transmitter to the ionosphere, causing the ionosphere to modulate or vibrate, sending a secondary frequency in the ELF or extremely low range, which penetrates the Earth and sea for communication with submarines.
		This is the same application that enabled the use for earth-penetrating tomography, which is funded for this year in the non-proliferation, counter-proliferation of the defense budget.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So in other words, there is so much energy radiated at the Ionosphere that it bounces off or re-radiates.
		I'm not quite clear on that.
		And actually can penetrate the ocean and you could communicate with submarines.
unidentified		Right.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		What they're doing is actually they're pulsing the high frequency into the ionosphere in a way that causes the ionosphere to act like a giant antenna in the sky and radiate back because it causes it to pulse or vibrate a low frequency.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And that low frequency then is used to carry communications for submarines, for instance.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we all know that whales communicate with a very low frequency over incredible amounts of territory underwater.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And there is a large antenna in the upper Midwest somewhere.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Miles and miles and miles of it underground designed to be able to create a frequency that not exactly does the same thing but has the same effect, communicates with submarines.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You can understand there would be a military application here.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would that be worldwide, Doctor?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In other words, if you modulated the ionosphere, you send up a high frequency signal, cause it to begin to radiate this low frequency signal, would that be worldwide?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that gives you the ability to communicate in the low frequency range and affect at least hemispherically initially and then eventually with a worldwide system you could actually create an ELF frequency.
		And the thing about ELF is it also, all the research shows are the frequencies, you mentioned communications between species, but also for the purpose of orienting directionally, there's a lot of indication that migratory species orient along magnetic lines of force, which will be interfered with by the HAARP signals.
		More than that, human beings are, our brainwave frequencies tend to be dominant in the ELF range, and this is where some of the other concerns that we've raised can occur.
		But when you raise the issue of similar to the Midwest, that's quite accurate in terms of what these antenna can do, at least in that limited application.
		But that's also now a question, you know, back when that started, there was a lot of controversy over creating problems for biological life, including creating genetic deformations or problems along that line.
		And it's the same kind of issues that are raised with ELF effects on biological life today, and no difference between that project then and the HARP project now in terms of that potential.
		But going back to military applications, one of the other applications is an over-the-horizon radar capability allowing to detect incoming objects from a great distance around the curvature of the Earth.
		And then there's a couple applications built around that idea that deal with detecting which of those incoming objects might carry nuclear payloads and then also being able to generate enough power to perhaps even knock those objects out of the sky.
		And these are, again, more pure military applications, but ones spoken about within the patent context and within many of the planning documents, right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's clearly SDI type stuff.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		In fact, there was an article that came out after the book was published that was actually written in a Moscow newspaper proposing a phased array antenna system as a ground-based SDI weapons technology.
		And that article, which was translated into English in a magazine called 21st Century, actually discussed, in the same terms as HAARP documents discussed the use of phased array.
		But in the Russian case or the former Soviet Union's case, they were at least honest about saying it is SDI, and our government is saying it's just an experiment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Just an experiment.
		What about this topography business?
		You mean it could actually look underground?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		That's what's funded this year.
		It's the idea that it's under non-proliferation and counterproliferation of the defense budget.
		And what they've specifically called out is to be able to look for underground tunnels, nuclear facilities, and shelters.
		And what can happen with ELF penetrating the ground with detection equipment either traversing the ground at low altitude or on the ground, you can then detect differences in ground strata, including voids or areas where such shelters or facilities could exist.
		The thing is, is this is operating again in the ELF range, which correlates to predominant brain waves in human beings, which then can trigger a number of chemical effects, which in fact many government documents that we can talk about as we go on this evening point to having a tremendous effect on the behavior within human beings and primates.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's not hard to imagine that anything that would be strong enough to penetrate the ground.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do they know, by the way, to what level at the higher power levels they could penetrate the ground and look for underground stuff?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, they're speaking in terms of several kilometers or even several miles.
		We're talking some pretty great depth.
		I mean, deep enough to detect some of the deepest oil fields, for instance, like here in Alaska, they're around 16,000 feet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Holy moly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right now, to achieve that sort of thing, they've got to drill down deep, I believe, and set explosive charges, don't they?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, they use explosive charges for creating a ground vibration.
		And that's all really localized.
		What they're able to do here, you have to imagine, with the amount of energy can be conceived of on a hemispheric basis, covering a huge, huge landmass in one sweep, so to speak.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, before it penetrates the ground to a depth of several miles, it's got to penetrate everything above ground, buildings, every living thing.
		Every living thing, including us.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes, that's absolutely correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, do you know offhand what kind of frequencies we're talking about?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Okay, you know, the primary frequencies are limited in terms of the range, and it's 2.8 to 10 megahertz, but it's the secondary frequencies, depending on how they utilize the system, because it's a very versatile system.
		It can be used for in the ways that we've already described, but it can also be used to just heat or cause plasma layers to act as sort of reflective mirrors for bouncing signals.
		It can be used in a number of different ways, but when it creates a secondary in the ELF range, which is extremely low frequency range of 1 to say 100 hertz in the case of where we're concerned.
		Those are the biologically active ranges, or at least what research is showing, appear to be.
		And what we're finding is that the military, on one hand, is well aware of the bioeffects of these kinds of radiations, pulsed radiations at low frequency.
		And yet, on this project, they deny any problem with biological life.
		Well, in other projects, they develop what they're calling now non-lethal weapons technologies to take advantage of this very thing that we're speaking about.
		On a much smaller scale, of course.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Much smaller scale, and yet they show effects on the human mind.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and this work goes, we can kind of, this is a good topic to kind of give a little time to because it's one that whenever we speak about it, people get a little nervous and they sort of back off and their eyes glaze over.
		But the fact is, the idea of human behavior being modified by external energy sources, particularly pulsed radio frequency, has been demonstrated at Yale University by Jose Delgado, who worked there for almost three decades in brain research.
		It's been spoken about in documents such as Low Intensity Conflict and Modern Technology, which is a Maxwell Air Force document published in 1986 that talks about the use of pulsed radio frequency as a way for debilitating troops over a very broad area as a non-lethal type of weapon.
		What HARP is, is a rapidly scanning pulsed radio frequency transmitter of just unbelievable size compared to anything that would be used in a tactical system.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What did they decide the effects actually were on human beings?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		In terms of the research, what Delgado found is that he could actually change the behavior of primates and humans, almost like switching on and off a switch, causing...
		In that instance, he had electrodes placed within the cranium of the bull so that it triggered a signal.
		Later, he found that he could create the same effect using pulsed radio frequency at a distance with no implants of any kind and create the same kind of behavioral changes by abruptly changing the frequency, causing that chemical reactions within the brain, changing behavior.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Were they seen to be temporary effects, or were there any permanent effects noted?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, there really wasn't much in that body of data, but what we know is that you can get some permanency in the effect using whenever you disrupt the energy system of the human body, it doesn't necessarily immediately restabilize.
		For instance, if the frequencies that you resonate in correlate with certain resonant frequencies of certain toxins within the body, they could then trigger chemical reactions that might not be so easily reversed by just switching the device off.
		So it would depend on what was happening with the device that was being used and whether the operator was fully knowledgeable about the effects of what might be happening within frequency ranges that they're spanning.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, Doctor, there was a day in America when I thought anybody who would suggest the American government would experiment on its own was out of their mind.
		You know, conspiracy nutcase stuff.
		But I'm sorry to say we have evidence that it's already occurred with plutonium given to children and pregnant women and all kinds of people.
		They just settled the lawsuit.
		Now we hear about this business of biological chemical testing that ought to be done on the population.
		And here we have a technology you're talking about that isn't even covered by regulation.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		And you know, and even when they are covered, this is a really important part.
		And we cover this within our book as well.
		And everything that we're speaking about, we footnote, which is, I think, important when you cover these kind of topics because it is, you know, I mean, it certainly raises controversy, but the more important thing is it raises debate.
		And to raise that debate properly, people need to know, you know, where does this information come from and from what source.
		And most of what we've done is just put the data together that has been compiled by the government, by major media folks.
		I mean, a lot of different people have built bits and pieces, and we just put it together in one place.
		And these technologies, the idea the government would use them, is not new.
		In fact, we cite one presidential report from 1975.
		It was the CIA Commission report on CIA activities within the United States.
		And by way of example, back then they ran a program called MKUltra, which was the idea of mind control.
		But what was covered in the Congress really just scratches the surface.
		I mean, what they talked about was enough to get the Congress off their back, but I fully believe was really just the tip of a very large iceberg.
		But what it showed is that the CIA was using psychotronic drugs, hypnosis, and other means to really experiment on Americans at a time when certainly any time is no time.
		And the CIA has no jurisdiction within the United States to do that kind of thing.
		And yet there they were, and they were caught in the act of doing it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's a lot of things we don't know about right now.
		For example, originally they thought it was a joke that high-voltage power lines could affect people.
		They're not laughing anymore about that.
		Originally, they thought low levels of microwave radiation received by workers like myself who worked in that industry for years just was not a problem.
		They backtracked recently on that really hard, and they now think there is a cumulative effect.
		So when we're talking about the sort of thing that you're talking about here with HAARP and this low-frequency re-radiation and its effect on human biology, they don't know, or maybe even worse yet, they do know.
		I wonder which it is.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		My contention is that the military compartmentalizes, and what's happening with HARP scientists is limited to the atmospheric effects.
		But I believe the military full well knows the effects of ELF because I have documents in my hands that we footnote that say exactly that.
		They know what these things can do.
		They know how they work.
		It's a question of whether it's accidental or purposeful in the case of HAARP, but the fact of the matter is they're going to operate within Frequency ranges that are indeed biologically active.
		The military's own research shows that.
		And it's really a question of whether or not it's intentioned or not.
		And the other question is: is it fair?
		You know, what they've done in all these studies in terms of saying it's safe, is all those safety thresholds are set by analyzing a series of a type of energy sort of as if it were existing in a vacuum at one constant rate.
		And what actually happens with these systems is the interaction between biological systems, other energy sources, and the pulse rates that are established that then trigger different things within human beings.
		And much of this has not been well laid out in terms of the regulatory side, but the research side, there's over a thousand papers showing that these kinds of radiations can have profound physiological effects.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it possible, Doctor, I know it sounds like a scene out of a science fiction movie, but when they crank up toward 100 billion watts, the scientists, the civilian side working on HAARP, will be sitting there working on the ionospheric effects or the effects on communications of this kind of high-intensity radiation while the military is silently sort of standing next to them,
art bell ▲ ● ▼		but in the background, checking on biological effects going on in whatever area is being radiated.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that wouldn't surprise me at all.
		In fact, I would expect that's exactly what's going to happen.
		When you look at any of these technologies, when you look at electromagnetic warfare, people say, well, what's that?
		Well, it's the most important initiative by the United States military at this particular time, and it extends into all areas of branches of service and all areas of research.
		And what essentially it's evolving, they call it a revolution in military affairs.
		In fact, in a document by that name produced by the U.S. Army War College, they actually talk about the changes in technology are so profound right now, it's the equivalent of the changing of technology from the introduction of gunpowder or the introduction of autonomy and nuclear weapons to the earlier part of this century.
		And this whole idea of electromagnetic warfare or new systems that can really have a profound effect on life and on warfare really deserve clear and absolute public debate because many of the things in the past that we've seen have not been places where I think we all would like to travel.
		And the question is, do we really need these systems at this point?
		Do we need to spend this kind of money?
		And do we need to engage in this kind of experimentation without clear knowledge of what some of those effects might be, at least in terms of the general public?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How specific would the area of re-radiation be?
		For example, the Gulf War.
		Would it have been possible, or may it be possible in the future, to radiate this tremendous amount of power and have it re-radiate over a very small, specific battlefield area?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Actually, yes.
		There's one application.
		There's actually three patents surrounding it within the cluster owned by the company that originally had the HAARP contracts, and it was on power beaming using a phased array antenna for focusing energy into a lens that would be suspended in orbit and then refocused or re-channeled back down to the Earth for conversion or use at that location.
		And it could be used in that way.
		I didn't originally think too much about that.
		And the other place it could be used is the same base technology on a much smaller scale, on more of a scale of a tactical weapon system.
		I can see that the same basic weapons technology used in that way.
		In fact, earlier this year, 60 Minutes even had a microwave weapon demonstrated that produced the symptoms of seasickness or dizziness in people that were in the path of the beam.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, we'll talk a little bit about that after the top of the hour.
		Relax.
		You have several moments, Doctor.
		Dr. Nick Begich is my guest from Alaska.
		Angels, don't play this harp.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time, on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Coast to Coast AM from December
		Coast to Coast AM from December
		26, 1996.
		26, 1996.
		Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Premier Radio Networks presents Art Bells somewhere in Time.
		Tonight's program originally aired December 26, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, good morning.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich.
		The subject is HARP.
unidentified		That's H-A-A-R-P.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's in Alaska.
		It's not on the planning boards, folks.
		It's already built.
		Not all of it, but a lot of it is already built.
		And they've already been testing it.
		More tests, I understand, are coming up in January.
		What is HAARP?
		It is many things.
		It is an attempt to heat our ionosphere.
		Actually, literally, burn a hole or push the ionosphere up.
		The implications of it for humans on Earth, Kind of unknown.
		The military applications are beginning to seem obvious.
		Talking to submarines.
		Confusing troops on the battlefield.
		But in the meantime, how are they testing this?
		And who are they testing it on?
		The book is Angels Don't Play This Harp by Nick Begich.
		Nick Begich and he will be back in a moment.
unidentified		The End.
unidentified		The End.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, back now to Dr. Nick Begich in or near Anchorage.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you in Anchorage, Doctor?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I'm just a little north of Anchorage in a small community called Eagle River.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, Eagle River.
		All right.
		It's a talk radio hotspot, by the way.
unidentified		Oh, that's great.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		A lot of us stay up all night.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I guess so.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Listen, have you been up to visit HARP?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, we've been up on the site, and they've had a couple of open houses up there as well.
		And when you look at the outside, it doesn't look so threatening, and they've been fairly open about looking at it.
		But that's like looking at the outside of an ICBM.
		What are you really going to see unless you understand the technology?
		And I think that's part of what's happened in the course of all of this is they've responded, begun to respond to the issues we've raised by having an air of openness, which is great.
		I mean, I just wish they would be honest as well as open and we get to the whole story on heart.
		And what we find is everything that we get from them has been extracted from them.
		And it doesn't need to be that way.
		I think that we should be able to debate the issues openly and make some judgments as a population on whether or not we want to see this kind of technology advanced, at least in this direction.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Can you tell us what the rough schedule is, power-wise, what they're doing now, when the next turn-on will be when they're going to experiment with HARP again?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		The next experiment is scheduled for January.
		And they used to post the schedule way in advance on their website.
		And since the last year or so, they've kind of paced that back.
		There's a big gap in testing from last fall until this fall.
		And then this fall they began from the 15th, so 22nd.
		They called a test of opportunity.
		In other words, it wasn't scheduled.
		It just sort of happened.
		And I don't know that I buy that.
		I mean, what they were testing was interaction with one of our satellite systems and monitoring of HAARP in terms of its frequency and range.
		But basically diagnostic kind of testing, which has been sort of the whole thing this year.
		And what we see now is that the general schedule is shifted up to where they started to talk about the other applications.
		They've tested the ground-penetrating application once.
		And that was one of the contingencies for further funding.
		When the Congress allocated money for this year, it was prove up this aspect because they felt it was priority.
		And then from there, you know, we'll go ahead and continue to fund the program.
		And it's being advanced now is really as a very beginning stage.
		And I think that's why it's, again, important.
		A lot of these programs in the past have sort of happened around us, and we've listened to the public pronouncements on their safety and on their intent.
		And then 50 years later, 20 years later, or even 10 years later, we find out there was much more to the program than originally met the eye.
		In this case, I think we've identified at least some of the risks in the course of the program, and we started to cause a little more scrutiny, which has been our goal all along, was to get people to look at it, ask ourselves the question, do we need it, and is it safe to operate?
		And if not, let's make sure that we back off long enough to be sure when we advance this kind of experimentation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, surely it's not possible to imagine that a government would want to control the actions of its people.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, this is interesting.
		We quote Zbigniew Brzezinski on that point, and he was a national security advisor to Jimmy Carter.
		Back when he was at Columbia University, he wrote a book called Between Two Ages.
		And within that, he talked about the use of electromagnetic weapon systems that he actually said within that text of that book, if you could electronically stroke the ionosphere in just the right way, you could manipulate the behavior of humans over a large area.
		And then he went on to say that no matter who was in power, liberal or conservative, the temptation to use technology to further political ends would be greater than one's good sense to restrain.
		And this is from a major policy player in American politics back then and today.
		And I think that is the concern that we have, is that no matter who's in power, the temptation to use these kinds of systems is going to be greater than the good sense to restrain.
		And I think on many of the international treaties, and we point to a couple, the chemical weapons treaties and the weather modification treaties, both of which have exemptions for domestic use.
		So even when we enter into international agreements, there isn't necessarily safeguards against domestic use.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, what you can do, Doctor, as men, even with our mighty weapons, short perhaps of nuclear devices, is nothing at all compared to what Mother Nature can do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		For example, a hurricane, a severe one, passing over Cuba can do more damage than we could do with the biggest conventional strike we could ever mount.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You bet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And if HAARP could eventually cause droughts or floods by parking high or low-pressure stationary fronts over specific geographic areas, could it possibly do such a thing?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		There is some evidence of that.
		And what we know, when you talk about weather modification, you really have to go back in time quite a ways.
		But in 1976, the United States and over 60 other countries signed an accord wherein which we agreed to not use weather modification as a weapon of war.
		And that same issue has been revisited by Perry most recently in an article in Defense News talking about the idea that weather warfare ought to be reconsidered on the basis that the technologies are so much better now than they were when those accords were signed.
		And, you know, what's funny is here we are, we have an international agreement.
		It's like, okay, we need some time to catch up on our research, but once we're there and it's Really good, then we want to use it again.
		And that's nonsense.
		I mean, when you start pushing against weather patterns in one area, the inadvertent effect on another area might be quite profound.
		I mean, you look at what the weather is in the States.
		Where does it come from when it hits a lower 48?
		Most of it comes from the Gulf of Alaska and this region.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And weather moves, okay?
		I mean, that's the whole ballgame.
		And if you're going to affect it in one place, to imagine that man can play God and predict what it's going to do in every other place, I think, is ridiculous.
		I don't think we're that sophisticated.
		I don't think our technology is that good.
		I think we're still discovering a great deal about our upper atmosphere.
		Even last year or the year before with the discovery of sprites and some of the other upper atmospheric effects, these are new things not factored into many of the equations leading to HAARP and other programs of this nature.
		And again, one of the reasons you're tampering with the ionosphere, a protective layer, a layer that's more important even than the ozone layer in terms of what it screens out.
		And yet you're tampering with it with energy that's never been projected by man in a concentrated way that is going to hit perhaps triggering frequencies that cause unintentioned and perhaps even cataclysmic kind of events.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, that's an important point.
		Now, it's important that people understand that what we're talking about here is leverage in the sense that the energy that they're going to send to the ionosphere, while it is massive, is still not a great deal in terms of really affecting wide regions.
		The way those regions are affected is a small effect, causing a large ripple effect, right?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		This is sort of a non-linear approach.
		I mean, when you think about it, if you think about it in terms of the primer on a bullet or the trigger that causes the bullet to go off, it's what creates a reaction, a sufficient amount of energy.
		And what we know about upper atmospheric events is within certain frequency ranges or window frequencies or triggering frequencies that cause larger releases of energy.
		In one particular experiment done by Stanford that we also cite, within the text, it talks about a VLF, a very low frequency broadcast, hitting the upper ionosphere many, many miles above the Earth's surface, but then being amplified, picking up energy from what's called the magnetosphere, which is about 600 miles above the Earth where it starts, and picking up energy there and actually amplifying the signal again by up to 1,000 times.
		Now, when you think about HARP energy, which is focused, concentrated, high-energy output, and it can be modulated within that range, then creating an energy release that can perhaps create amplification effects.
		What happens then?
		Well, it can get caught up within the magnetic lines of force around the planet, causing triggering events.
		Who knows?
		Some of the things that have been pointed to as destabilizing kind of events that might actually cause serious disaster.
		No one really knows what those window frequencies might be, but there's been certainly speculation over the years.
		Some people think they know.
		But the fact is, the fact that it's unknown, the fact that we know that energy gets released, we know that there's a lot of effects that are unanticipated, and yet here we are, we're about to play with more power than we've ever played with short of thermonuclear detonations.
		And thermonuclear detonations, which are in the HARP literature, in the patents compared to HAARP systems, what's important to note is they were sort of scattered energy.
		They weren't controlled where you could hit these specific window frequencies, taking advantage of energy releases that otherwise you couldn't take advantage of.
		So you have a much more precision system in HAARP, and yet with huge energy capability.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I know when they lit off the first atomic bomb, a lot of very mainstream scientists had sincere worries that it might actually ignite the atmosphere in a chain reaction.
		Now, of course, fortunately, that did not occur.
		But in a way, this is similar since they have no idea what is going to occur when they really do go to these high power levels.
		And apparently, where angels fear to tread, the Pentagon has no problem.
		Right.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I mean, it is.
		It is what you say about the earlier experimentation in atomic power.
		That's correct.
		I mean, that was always the idea that, hey, maybe we were wrong and maybe we'll have a horrible disaster.
		And the same is true here.
		And, you know, we cite literature going back 20, 30 years in some instances, but certainly material that is as valid then as it is today in terms of projection of what can happen with these systems.
		What was different between then and now is they knew what could happen if they could ever control these upper ionospheric processes.
		And now you have a system that might allow them to do that.
		And certainly the experimentation so far shows that they're on track.
		It's going to do what they think it's going to do.
		But what they don't know and what they've stressed throughout their material, that they're going to hit an energy level that then creates a runaway event that then stabilizes at some higher level.
		It's the idea of creating chaos within an already chaotic system to see how it reorganizes.
		And this is just, again, it's just reckless from our perspective, very reckless.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		When you present these arguments to authorities or to committees that look at this, what kind of reception do you get?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, you know, it's actually been pretty good.
		The first committee hearing we had here in Alaska was very end of the legislative session and really resulted from listeners to this show and other shows like it putting pressure on elected officials saying, let's get to the bottom of this.
		And that initial hearing we had, I had a physicist, an atmospheric chemist, and then on their side they had a geophysicist, the HARP program manager finally came to a public meeting to debate the issue and another gentleman.
		And that discussion was pretty productive in the sense of drawing everyone out.
		What was unproductive in the sense of not getting to the bottom of it was at the end of the session we really needed another hearing.
		Because what that did is get everybody's argument sort of on the table.
		After that, we contacted Geophysical Institute people that were involved in that discussion And said, hey, look, why don't we have an open scientific conference, invite specialists from each camp, the best we can find in the world, to look at this project, assess what we're asserting, and let's come to some conclusion.
		You folks aren't biologists.
		There's no biologists on the project.
		That's another major gap in this whole thing.
		There are no biological scientists with backgrounds in electrophysiology assigned to the project.
		Let's get a full team.
		Let's look at it.
		Let's have open public discussion.
		At the same time, presentation of appropriate papers in the appropriate forum.
		They agreed.
		They suggested we contact the military and propose that that happen, which we did, and the military promptly responded with a no, we're not interested, which was really too bad because I think that would have, at least for the public, answered the questions.
		For us, would have brought the debate to the kind of head that it needed to come to.
		The legislature was receptive.
		I think that we'll see additional hearings if the public continues to ask for them, and that may lead to the right steps.
		At the local level, there's not much can be done except monitoring.
		On an international level, we've been contacted by members of the European Parliament who've contacted independent scientists.
		In fact, one of those scientists is one of the lead medical people as well as a physicist who's been doing the Bhopal disaster, who's just finishing up that work and is now looking at HARP and what it may entail in terms of risk and has come out preliminarily at least confirming many of the major points that we raise and raising this whole issue of space war warfare, electromagnetic warfare.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, back to the biological effects for a second.
		I guess I've heard that very low frequency vibration is able to cause a high degree of irritation in people.
		I've heard that.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, it's a two-edged sword.
		You know, ELF, again, by a skilled practitioner knowing what they're doing, pulsing frequency energy into the human energy system can cause healing effects.
		It can cause damage, depending, again, on the operator.
		That's what's interesting about this whole area is you've got an area of science being used on essentially kill systems, non-lethal, what they call non-lethal weapon systems.
		Well, at the same time, the basic knowledge can be applied to healing systems and has been in many instances with some profound effect.
		But you have the ability to resonate a frequency in to where it affects, actually causes what's called brain entrainment.
		The idea that brain frequencies then lock on to these external signals and begin to move with them, which then cause chemical reactions and behavioral changes.
		That's the whole premise under which these systems work, and they can be delivered by pulsed microwave, by pulsed radio wave, any number of pulse modulations.
		Even light and sound can create brainwave frequencies that change chemistry, that change behavior in certain ways.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there a parallel to radiation?
		In other words, with radiation, as you know, we can treat very, if we use it specifically, and we can kill bad tissue, usually, hopefully, without killing a lot of healthy tissue and treat, say, a tumor.
		Or with the wrong kind of radiation, generally applied, you'll make somebody sick and kill them.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		It's the same kind of analogy can be drawn.
		I know that very specifically in the case of electric current, even pulsed electric current is used in a number of methods for, for instance, electroacupuncture utilizes that principle, again with a low frequency but modulated in a specific way to cause very profound physiological effect.
		But at a distance now, what we know from Yale research and other research is that you can create the same kind of chemical reactions at a distance that aren't necessarily for healthful reasons.
		For instance, if everyone has in the body a certain amount of iodine as an example, if you resonate a frequency in that resonates to the same frequency as iodine externally, you can create a toxic effect or a chemical reaction within the body that when you test a person,
		they have all the symptoms of iodine toxicity, and yet when you do the blood work to see where the iodine levels are or any other test to check iodine levels, you're not going to see a disproportionate amount of iodine to the body.
		But still, you can trigger those events.
		So again, here you have a situation where either purposefully or accidentally, you have a system that over a large area has the potential of triggering chemical reactions within biological systems like people and have serious problems and serious side effects.
		Or directed effects.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		When will they get to the power levels when we've got to begin to get concerned about these kind of biological effects?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, from what was done at Yale University, they found that energy levels at 1 50th of what the Earth naturally produces were sufficient if in the right frequency range for triggering these events.
		And what the military has said about HAARP is that it'll be operating at energy levels approximating what the Earth naturally creates.
		So it is sufficient probably even now if operated within the same window frequency.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Even now.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Over a very large area, that was correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, standby, we'll be right back to you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Nick Begich, author of Angels Don't Play This Harp, right back to you.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
		Tonight, featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Got a black magic woman.
		listening to Arc Bell somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My guest is Dr. Nick Begage, author of Angels Don't Play This Harp.
		And we'll get back to him in a moment.
		For those of you who would like more information about harp, detailed information, Dr. Begich has a wonderful webpage up.
		I just went on it myself.
		It's called EarthPulsePressGlobal.com.
		And it looks just absolutely excellent.
		Boy, good graphics and everything.
		And it's got HARP updates, health and environment, EarthPulse products, Flanagan technologies, new science, all kinds of categories.
		Now, if you go to my webpage, political empowerment, if you go to my webpage, you will find at the very top a link that will take you over there right now.
		And you can learn a lot more about HARP.
		It's also got a rotating globe with something that says 7.83 Hertz.
		7.83 Hertz.
		What a wonderful webpage.
		Anyway, you'll find a link on mine right now to get there.
		It's www.artbell.com.
		www.artbell.com.
		So you can see exactly what we're talking about.
		Doctor, what a great webpage.
		When did you get all that up?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		We put that up in September, actually.
		We spent some time kind of conceptualizing what we wanted to say.
		And really, we wanted to show a little bit more about what work we're doing and provide a lot more information to folks so it was available on the World Wide Web.
		And the web really was a lot of how we put together our basic research.
		We used the web extensively when we were networking with other people involved in this side of the project.
		And so it just seemed like that was a place where it all started.
		We really needed to have a presence there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		7.83 Hertz.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What does that mean?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's Schumann's resonance.
		And that's actually the pulse rate, or was the pulse rate of the planet at the point in which it was measured.
		And again, Earth Pulse Press.
unidentified		It seems a good logo for who we are.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've got a fax here, a three-page fax, from somebody.
		I'm sorry, I don't see a name here.
		Yes, I do.
		Ken.
		Ken says, ART attached is an email reply that I received from the HARP facility itself.
		Naturally, they deny everything.
		I thought you might like to take a look.
		And they cover, well, let me read it.
		There are no ELF, VLF safety risks.
		None, it says.
		And then they go into the details about how there are absolutely no risks.
		Major point two, HARP has no ability to affect the weather in any way, it says.
		As you may know, weather exists and is formed in the ionosphere, a troposphere rather, at altitudes below about 30 to 40,000 feet.
		HAARP doesn't interact with anything below altitudes of 250,000 feet.
		It will not affect the weather.
		Major point three, HARP cannot be used as a weapon.
		Again, the rumor mills have distorted fact from fiction.
		The site is not surrounded by fencing as the rumor mongers would have you believe.
		You can walk onto the site any time of the day or night.
		Snowmobilers have a trail that passes within a quarter mile of the antenna system, and so you can walk right up to it if you want.
		Major point five, there is no safe containing secret HARP papers.
		The project is as open as you can get.
		If you'd like to research HARP, when it is eventually ready for that, you'll be free to submit proposals along with other interested scientists throughout the world.
		So they go through it here point by point and deny everything.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And that's been the standard line from the beginning.
		But again, we were very careful in how we put our materials together.
		Most of it is their own material.
		It's well footnoted.
		There's over 350 footnoted sources, most of which are government documents, military documents, and major media reports.
		And the facts are the facts.
		I mean, I think that you can make the statements, but they fail to challenge us on the points that have been raised in any meaningful way aside for that blanket denial.
		And that's been the standard fare for every military program, every military initiative.
		And quite frankly, show me the research projects the military is involved in that don't eventually become weapon systems.
		They're just not out there.
		These kinds of programs at this level of sophistication and with what they've laid out quite clearly show it as a weapons technology.
		Now where they can deny it at this stage is small in terms of a developmental prototype compared to where it's going.
		So I mean at this stage you can make a lot of claims about what it can't do with some reasonable surety, but at the same time you can't deny where this project is going because it's sure on records that say where it's headed and what it can do.
		And everything that we have said has come from them ultimately.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, page 126 of your book.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Begich, would you please expand on the difference for the non-technical person between total radiated power and effective radiated power?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Okay, what they've talked about in terms of the energy levels, when we asked them about the effective radiated power, it was after calculating an antenna gain.
		And this is one of the points where the Air Force and the Navy and we have had some sharp disagreement in terms of power.
		Because whenever they want to talk about the system, you know, it depends on whether you're talking about the power going in, the Power on the ground, or the effective radiated power, which is the way they measure the energy coming off the array.
		And because of the antenna gain, which is up to 1,000 times, this is where the effective radiated power ramps up so vigorously in the course of all of that.
		And that's really what we're talking about.
		At this early stage, it has huge capability compared to anything else ever utilized.
		But where it's headed is even more important because these are in the regime of areas that no one really knows.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I've got, so that people understand the amount of power they're going to be running, I've got big clear channel radio stations that carry my program, 50,000 watts of AM.
		I've got some FM stations that run as much as 100,000 watts.
		The ultimate power to be run by HAAARP is 100 billion watts.
		That's an inconceivable amount of power.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, and that's exactly what we're talking about.
		I mean, you read a statement, and we have a link to them through our webpage, because we think people ought to look at both sides of the story.
		But the fact of the matter is, you can't have all of that power and not have it, too.
		And on the one hand, they want to tell us, oh, don't worry about it.
		It's nothing that outstanding.
		On the other hand, when they're going after the money to get it funded, they're talking about how big it is.
		And you can't have it both ways.
		And I think when you look at the technical gobbledygook, if you will, surrounding this project is huge.
		I mean, we had to learn a lot along the way.
		We relied on a lot of outside experts to assist us along the way.
		And I think we've put together a very compelling argument for what we've laid out.
		And the power levels are what they've laid out.
		We've just put it in one place to be grasped and read and understood.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I'm reading from your webpage.
		It says, vandalism in the sky.
		This article is a summary of the U.S. military's Project HARP.
		It describes a weapons system which could influence your mental state, provide a system for weather warfare, and be part of the government's plan to control the environment or maybe even destroy it in the name of national defense.
		Destroy the environment.
		What possibilities really are there?
		How could you envision our environment actually being destroyed?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's a couple ways to look at it.
		One of the things that the military has said is, and in fact, John Heckscher said it on Canadian television.
		He said that in the course of blowing holes in the ionosphere, it wasn't a problem that they would quickly replenish or refill.
		And yet we know the ionosphere keeps out cosmic radiations and X-rays and various kinds of radiations that would make life impossible on the planet if they were allowed to come through.
		People think of ozone depletion as a major problem letting UV in, which can cause sunburn and some types of skin cancers.
		But here we're talking about something that if those holes don't readily fill in, if the runaway effect that they're anticipating creating doesn't restabilize as they hope it will, perhaps that these holes stay open, what will happen then is it will have an effect on the entire genetic blueprint of what's under it.
		I mean, it can alter genetically what happens then on the planet.
		The idea that cosmic radiations and X-rays can cause genetic mutation is well known.
		The idea that ELF, in fact, a primary frequency range that they intend to create with this device, can also create genetic deformation.
		There were six Navy studies commissioned that actually showed that.
		And now what do you hear in the Midwest?
		In fact, your show has covered it.
		The upper Midwest, what do you have in the amphibious populations in the area of the old ELF transmitters in Michigan and Wisconsin?
		You have genetic deformations in amphibians that you might link to chemicals or you might link to other sources, but you certainly could make the case that it could be an interaction between ELF and chemicals within the immediate environment causing that deformation.
		And that would go a long way in explaining that as well.
		The research is there.
		It shows the effects.
		Where it's controversial, and again, where heart planners can deny it, is there's about probably 2,000 studies, I think, now that the Navy's cataloged on the effects of what's called non-ionizing radiation, low-level radiations, including ELF.
		Some say its effect is profound, others say it's not.
		And yet, when you look at those studies, the most recent studies from 95 and 96 even, those are showing increasingly so that ELF frequencies do in fact cause and can cause within window frequencies profound biological effect.
		And this is now being exploited, and it's documented well in the military literature in terms of non-lethal systems.
		When you look at Star Wars weapons, the end of the debate, this presidential debate, in terms of weapons technologies, when Star Wars was raised, there was a lot of discussion about the cost of Star Wars dropping.
		And what tagged along with that, for those that pay close attention, was the reason it dropped is the intention is to go from a totally satellite-based system to a ground-based four ground-based systems augmented by satellite technology, which starts to sound a lot more closer to what HAARP is, at least on a prototypical level, and what HAARP will likely become if it's ever fully deployed as a Star Wars weapons system.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, from San Francisco, if HAARP can really detect incoming ballistic missiles from far away, and maybe even whether or not they are nuclear, doesn't that constitute a violation of the ABM treaty?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, in fact, the treaty itself, this is interesting.
		Our U.S. Senator here raised this issue in the media during the summer.
		He said, look, you know, Alaska and Hawaii aren't covered by the shielding systems that our treaties allow for.
		And yet, here you have then at the same time this experiment.
		It's not a weapon system, remember, it's just an experiment.
		It just happens to have the same capability of over-the-horizon radar, not only for detecting incoming objects, but at high power levels, they can create a field around those incoming objects that using gamma-ray detectors, which is part of the patent project, our patent package on this project, you can then tell which are carrying nuclear payloads, and then at a higher level you can disable them.
		You can call it a research project, but its capabilities are still within that realm as they increase the power levels, but tagging it a research project masquerades it so they are in compliance with that treaty and others.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I wonder what the civilian scientists up there think.
		I mean, they're milling around doing their work, thinking it's a pure research project, but they must be wondering, aren't they?
		What are all these military folks milling about?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think they are on the one hand, and on the other hand, it's kind of like an institutional denial.
		I mean, let me tell you something about the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
		In the early 60s, their program with the military was a Project Chariot or Project Plowshare, which was the idea of detonating in Alaska six thermonuclear weapons on the North Slope for excavating a bay.
		You know, today we look at that and we laugh, and we think, you know, what are you going to do?
		Use it in 10,000 years, you know, when it cools down.
		But the university embraced that then.
		The biologists that opposed it were blackballed.
		It took 35 years for them to finally be recognized for what they did, but they stopped that project in the 60s.
		The same university is now embracing this military initiative with the same enthusiasm.
		And yet, this time there are no biologists on the team, no electrophysiologists on the team to really speak to the issues that we're raising and many of the issues other scientists are raising.
		And it's just like, you know, draw the money out of the money flow and put it into the academic establishment and develop the science.
		And it's as if the science were somehow devoid of any deeper thinking in terms of how it might interact in other scientific areas.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I believe we also at one time had a fairly serious plan to use thermonuclear devices to blow a canal through Nicaragua.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, and this whole thing was actually part of the same program.
		And when it was conceived originally, it was believed that you first had to show that it was okay by doing it on U.S. soil.
		And the place they wanted to try it was the North Slope of Alaska.
		The problem would have been, had they actually done that, they could have created a huge fallout problem.
		Right now, for many that don't know, Alaska, the North Slope, is the primary producer of domestic oil products in terms of oil to a million and a half barrels a day, very important for national defense.
		It may have been seriously impaired in terms of its development for strategic purposes if that actually had been taking place.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Gee, make all the worry about yellow snow be nothing, huh?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, I think it would have had a little bit, certainly a little more toxic effect.
		But the whole situation is, again, it's an idea of recklessness in this particular area of science.
		The idea that you can come to Alaska, play these games with our immediate environment on a small scale with the intention, the stated intention on their part of taking it much, much higher.
		I think that kind of science deserves international debate, certainly national debate.
		And, you know, Star Wars was voted down.
		If this is another skirt around the law, which just says a skirt around Congress and every one of us, that's ridiculous.
		And that's what I believe a large part of this is.
		It's a question of semantics to avoid the intent of Congress when it said no to Star Wars.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, now, Star Wars may have been voted down, but I recall a recent news conference when they found water on the moon.
		And the Pentagon, of all people, held the news conference.
		And the people in the audience, the newspaper people, asked, excuse me, why is the Pentagon doing this?
		And they gave a rather straight answer.
		They said, well, you know, we have all this Star Wars technology, and we didn't know what to do with it.
		And we needed, their words now, a target.
		And the moon was a convenient target.
		So they took this thing to the moon to test Star Wars technology.
		And that's ostensibly how they found the ice.
		Who knows what else they did?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, the whole situation, and I think HARP is another reflection of it, is so much of, and you said in the introduction, my father had served in the United States Congress.
		And, you know, for me personally, to see what's happened in terms of national government, I think is, because I agree with you.
		You know, 20 years ago, 15 years ago, we would have said, hey, our government wouldn't do this kind of thing.
		Today, because of the amount of information that's come forward about what's happened within the federal system, I think a lot happens without the consent of the population.
		A lot happens by bureaucracy running on its own without appropriate oversight.
		And I think that's really what our issue is about here, is about this whole branch of military initiatives is not being properly scrutinized by the American population.
		And I think that's really the real crux of the issue, is here's just one more project that is headed down a road that's going to get quite large.
		They acknowledge it up front, and we have not properly debated the merit or the risks associated with it.
		And I think those kinds of risks need to be discussed so that we all understand what the trade-offs are as we pursue new technologies to make sure those trade-offs are rational.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, so if you would agree with this from Laguna Hills, weather is a zero-sum game.
		When you look at it globally, there is only so much heat and rain.
		When one part of the world is dry, another one is wet.
		When one is hot, another is cold.
		There is no way for HAARP to change the weather in one area and not change it somewhere else.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I agree with that, absolutely.
		In fact, we'll carry it a little bit further.
		When you think about the whole global system currently, what can we observe about it that we can all agree on?
		A, we can agree that the weather patterns internationally are bizarre, that they're more intense.
		We can agree that earthquake intensity, depth, and frequency has increased significantly over the last 30 years.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No question.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		We can look at studies on the North Sea and tidal heights, which show tidal heights steadily rising over a 35-year period.
		All of these things indicate something every one of us is well aware of, a big exchange of energy taking place, a big shift in energy taking place naturally on the planet.
		And yet, and within all of that, within all of that moving, complex system, we're going to inject in a precision way, surgically, into the acupuncture meridians of the planet, into the magnetic lines of force surrounding the planet, bursts of energy to create specific weapons effects.
		And the question we've raised and we continue to raise is, which is the straw on the camel's back?
		How much energy can you input?
		Do you hit those specific frequencies that cause resonance effects, the kinds predicted by Tesla and others, that are cataclysmic in nature?
		Do you create the kind of effects that scientists like J.F. Gordon McDonald, who is a geophysicist, who's also science advisor to Lyndon Johnson predicted in terms of human behavioral changes that Delgado predicted and actually demonstrate in terms of behavioral changes?
		All of these things are coming underneath one banner of HARP and yet you have a highly destabilized system that you're now adding energy into that you may not be able to stop the effect that you trigger.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Doctor, hold on.
		We'll come back and try to get to the phones after the top of the hour.
		Relax.
		You've got several moments.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich.
		His book is Angels Don't Play This Harp.
		If you've never heard about it, stick around, you will learn.
		If you have, stick around, you'll get an update.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time, on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		I don't keep asking what's going on.
		Why don't you ask me to read the stories of the world?
		Oh Oh, my God.
		Don't say that you love me Just tell me that you love me Just Don't say that you love me
		Don't say that you love me You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Once again, here I am, and we're speaking with Dr. Nick Begich about a project called HARP, H-A-A-R-P, and it is not something on the drawing boards.
		It's something that's already reality.
		and we'll get back to it in a moment.
		Earlier in the day, I spoke to a gentleman in Moscow on iPhone, actually.
		I saw him too.
		And the temperature in Moscow right now is 60 degrees below zero.
		I just heard on a newscast this last hour that in Portland, 100,000 people, the Portland area, 100,000 people are without power.
		The Northwest is getting clobbered.
		In Northern California, they are experiencing up to, or will have up to, 10 inches of rain.
		We are having a hell of a winter.
		Now, I know we're now at lower power levels, but Doctor, is there any possibility that through some sort of resonance effect, the weather could be affected already?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, that keeps getting raised by a lot of the people we've worked with.
		And, you know, and I'm not, you know, you can't, here's the difficulty, is we could say with, you know, again, the military is announcing a schedule as terms of operation that we have to accept essentially on faith right now that that is what they're doing and believe that they're reporting it correctly.
		But there's no way to do that and know that conclusively from our perspective given their history without independent monitoring.
		Could it create a chain reaction?
		I think that that's within the scope of possibility.
		At this power level, could they generate enough power to create huge weather changes?
		Directly, no, but indirectly by releasing energy within certain frequencies.
		I think that's possible, and I think others will agree with us.
		And the only question is, is it responsible for the weather that we're immediately seeing?
		And that we can't answer.
		But this whole area of scientific inquiry in terms of weather modification, what we really want to emphasize is, A, it's not new.
		B, HARP isn't the only system that can modify weather.
		That's something that has been out there a long time.
		It was experimented with as early as the early 70s using electromagnetic means at China Lakes, again, on a Navy project.
		There's a lot to be said for weather modification technologies.
		And what's more important even now is that we have a system that has already demonstrated clearly out of balance situations that adding more power to can certainly not help.
		And I think that's where we take a strong part company as far as the military's view of it being benign and safe.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, the other aspect is human behavior.
		And again, in this last newscast, they reported yet another case where somebody walked into a McDonald's.
		I forget where.
		No robbery.
		In fact, there was no robbery.
		They just walked in, killed three people, and took off.
		It's aberrant human behavior, and there's more and more and more of it.
		It's either a social aberration of some sort, or there's an external effect.
		Is it possible?
		Is it possible?
		There's beginning to be an external effect.
		People are acting in totally indecipherable ways.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, it could be related to HAARP.
		It could also be related to just the overall...
		First of all, it creates stressors and agitation.
		So you have already situations that then become destabilized.
		But what we know about these kinds of weapons technologies, whether they're applied deliberately or accidentally, is they can raise the overall stress levels.
		They can cause chemical changes in the body and again create aberrant behavior.
		One of the things that's spoken to in low-intensity conflict in modern technology is the idea that by resonating frequencies in at a high enough range, you create high states of agitation and anger that break out irrationally.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And so here you have this spoken about, but at the same time, when you think about the human body, what do we do in Western medicine?
		We look at the outside of the body, then we look at the body parts, and then we might do some blood tests and do some chemical workups, and we kind of stop.
		But if you think about the human body as energy, atoms, molecules, chemicals, compounds, body parts and body, what you affect at an energy level can have a profound effect throughout the living system.
		And this is what HAARP is getting at.
		This is what these kinds of weapons technologies are getting at.
		And this is what a lot of debate around the world taking place now about the effect of energy fields that we're immersed in within our modern society might be contributing to our overall ill health.
		Look at cancer increases, look at all of the physiological kinds of problems and the psychological snappings, if you will, that get reported from time to time.
		All again, you know, what's the cause?
		Is this contributing to that overall effect?
		And we believe it is, and we think there's plenty of evidence to support that.
		And now you have weapon systems that are being specifically designed to capitalize on that knowledge.
		HARP happens to be a huge weapon system that has operating frequencies within that capability.
		And how we know this is from the HAAARP planning contract document measured off against an International Red Cross document that we cite within our book that talks about specific frequencies which are within the capability of HAARP for creating biological changes and creating a number of the weapons effects that we've spoken about beyond what's actually spoken about in the HARP planning documents.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Doctor, how about this one?
		We know that aircraft navigate in a variety of ways, some of them with signals from the ground, some of them with backup signals, GPS type things from satellites.
		There have been an awful lot of aircraft accidents recently.
		And I have had a couple of private reports by email of people flying commercial aircraft to the Far East.
		And as you know, when they do, they get very close to your coast there in Alaska.
		And they have had complete navigation system shutdowns.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		This would be, you know, this technology for interfering with airplane avionics, there's actually a short book called Revolution of Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War by the U.S. Army War College, written in 89 that at that time they had that technology to use for that specific purpose, and they talk about it.
		But when you look at HARP's effect on airplanes, the military says, don't worry, we've installed all these safeguards.
		And yet, there have been occasions where people have raised the issue as, hey, could this be interfering with my flight path?
		And in one instance, I know I understood that HARP was operating at a time when an aircraft experienced exactly what you're talking about.
		And that's the kind of effect that you would expect to see in anything crossing the beam of this transmitters that would interfere with this avionics to the point of causing serious problems, not just with navigating, but also many of these aircraft now have what are called fly-by-wire technologies, where the radio signal goes to the flaps, for instance, and tells the flap motors what to do.
		If you have something coming in, telling a flap to move when it's not supposed to, you can cause an airline disaster, not just a miscalculation on where you're flying.
		And so this, again, is another area that we're highly concerned about.
		When you look at, you know, here's a weapon system, a universal hammer, a tool that has huge potential capability from a military perspective, and certainly many of those applications the military has sought for years.
		I mean, we have evidence going back 30, 40 years of looking for this specific technology, and now they have it.
		And their intention is to develop it, exploit it, and use it.
		And they'll take a certain amount of risks along the way.
		I don't think those risks should be taken without the proper consent of the population that might be effective.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, that leads me into this question.
		There are a lot of known technologies that, once they're known and utilized, become regulated.
		I mean, there's oversight of varying sorts with regard to the technology.
		But with these newer technologies, whether it's biological warfare, chemical warfare, the development of those substances, or something like HAARP or any other cutting-edge science, who the hell watches over the people that are getting ready to do this?
		Or do they just do what they want to do to hell with the consequences?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I think they move it along until the bell rings and people start saying, hey, wait a minute.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And I think that's, I mean, look at any of the technologies that now we're trying to sort of sort out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Genetics.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, genetics, nuclear, atomic.
		I mean, all of it.
		You look at the whole thing.
		Now we're looking back and saying, geez, you know, there's some good applications here, but look at the mess we've made.
		And I think we can say the same here is, look, it's early enough.
		It's different.
		It's not like waiting 50 years after atomic tests in Nevada.
		We're early in the game here.
		Let's look at it prudently.
		And the people that will create the oversight and what we've seen, this has been a very interesting thing for us, is we published a few articles.
		We published a book with the idea of getting this issue debated.
		And to a large extent, that's happened by virtue of the fact that people have acted on what they've heard, which is, I mean, that's what talk radio has been.
		That's what all of the medium that we've been able to go through to raise this issue.
		And that's the way the issues get addressed.
		And what's happened now in the technologies that are present today in the world has allowed for much quicker response and ability to collect data and disseminate data.
		And I think that's what's led us into this whole array of dealing with the heart problem.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, suppose they fire up the 100 billion watt model and they blow a hole in the ionosphere and it doesn't close.
unidentified		Uh-oh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Uh-oh, too late.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, and this is not a, you know, this, look at this In these terms, the ozone hole that we all think, or at least we've been led to believe, are created by aerosol cans is the big villain.
		Yet, when they launched Skylab in the early 70s, they discovered that it made a hole in the ozone layer, that every time you launch a rocket or satellite, it creates a hole.
		And it's not like an aerosol can, it is a huge millions and millions of aerosol cans worth of hole.
		And what they said about that was, oh, don't worry, because we washed it for several hours and then it gradually dissipated.
		It's like, you know, pulling a cup of water out of a pond repeatedly and saying, oh, look, everything looks at the same level, but eventually the pond's dry.
		It's the same analogy, only it took 20 years of satellite launches to make a hole big enough to now create a huge problem, but they want to blame on aerosol cans.
		And I think they're just as culpable, and yet they fail to measure up to being accountable for their culpability with that problem, and yet they're willing to take on new technologies, experiment again, and who are they going to blame next for things that they contribute to as a consequence of experimentation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, let us try a few phone calls here.
		First time caller line, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begage.
		Where are you calling from, please?
unidentified		Oh, this is Chris in Ashland, Oregon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I can barely hear you, so you're going to have to speak up good and loud.
unidentified		Okay, this is Chris in Ashland, Oregon.
unidentified		Thanks for taking my call.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
unidentified		And you covered some of the material I was interested in already about the behavioral effects and how the heart might act as a stressor, a biological stressor on human beings.
unidentified		And just carrying that a little further, one of the things that keeps on cropping up in the media over the last, I don't know how many years, are the new levels of violence on the part of young children and heinous behavior on the part of young children and whether there might be some correlation there in terms of younger organisms being more vulnerable to that kind of agitation and that kind of effect.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's right.
		It's not just children either.
		If you drive the highways these days, there's almost no tolerance.
		People have almost no tolerance for each other anymore.
		It's like they're on a hair trigger.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, I think that there's a lot of things that contribute to that.
		I mean, you can look at with young children, first of all, the ELF effects genetically on young children.
		That's what the research showed in embryonic and young pre-adolescent organisms is where you get the greatest genetic effect, including human beings.
		But what you also have in terms of stress contributors right now, in terms of young kids particularly, you know, diet contributes a lot to that.
		I think electromagnetic pollutions of various kinds affect that.
		In other words, add stress onto an already stressed system.
		And then just the nature of living anymore.
		I mean, you think about how households have changed over time.
		But all of those contributing factors, anything you add onto that with a lack of understanding in terms of stress and what the results of that stress are, I think are manifest throughout our society in terms of behavior, in terms of disease and disorders.
		You know, you can look at cancer rates, you can look at heart disease, you can look at all the markers for a healthy society, and you can say, look, we've got some problems, and most of those problems are stress-related.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, I've got one for you.
		Whether it's the ozone or whether it's HAARP or something else, we've begun to notice over a wide area, the U.S., Japan, Canada, all over, deformed frogs, doctor, lots and lots and lots of deformed frogs in some areas of the upper Midwest.
		More deformed than regular.
		Scientists are baffled.
		We had a headline here in the Las Vegas newspaper about four weeks ago.
		Deformed carp in Lake Mead, which, by the way, is drinking supply water for Las Vegas and point south into Southern California.
		Deformed carp.
		Now, these are canary-like things, are they not, with regard to the environment?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, yes, I think they're good markers.
		And when you look at Lake Mead, you're talking about a huge hydroelectric facility there.
		You're talking about 60-cycle ELF, essentially, there.
		You're talking about a situation where it's a question of is it chemicals in the water or is it a combination of naturally occurring chemicals or man-made chemicals interacting with electromagnetic fields?
		There's been a lack of study in terms of electromagnetic field interactions with chemical compounds, but a sufficient body of study has been done to say, hey, look, electric current can create profound chemical changes which translate into all kinds of changes as well as genetic changes.
		And this research has been done and sponsored by the same military establishment developing HAARP, and yet they have none of those experts that ought to be associated with this project involved in the oversight on this project.
		And I think that's, again, you know, a big demarcation point.
		When you're talking about genetic alterations around the world, I think you have to look at, you know, 100 years ago, man-made energy into the naturally occurring spectrum wasn't there.
		You know, I mean, we've added all of these things in with the expectation they have no effect.
		I mean, that's ridiculous when you consider, on an energetic level, the understanding of energy exchanges in humans going into acupuncture and some of the other sciences that are clearly showing a large amount of effect with minimal amounts of energy.
		And now you're adding in all of these things and expecting no effect.
		I think that's absolutely ludicrous.
		And I think the research is showing that there are profound effects, and they show up first in lower species and eventually show up in man.
		And I think that's, again, we need to be aware of these things, not from a standpoint of being afraid or fearful, but of being knowledgeable and proactive.
		Let's look at what we're doing and make good judgments about which directions our technology goes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, interestingly, there was just a study showing that in men, since World War II, there has been a 300% increase in non-smoking-related cancer.
		Now, that's a very non-trivial number, and I can't imagine why.
		Since World War II, a 300% increase non-smoking-related, they were forced to add.
		Now, that's coming from something.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		When you look again at all of this, you can look at the breast cancer figures for women, and you can look at all of these various markers, and what we know is they're increasing.
		What do they want to blame that on?
		Where's the villain?
		And yet, you can look at any number of things that are contributing to that, but I think we can't discount the effect of various kinds of electromagnetic radiations having a profound effect.
		And that, I think, is really the way it goes.
		But at the same time, as we gain and get greater understanding of that, and many people do have an understanding of that, and are applying it in the healing arts and developing the whole area of electromedicine for positive effect as opposed to using it on weapons technology.
		And this is kind of the big loss within HAARP in the sense that within these kinds of programs, within programs in the non-lethal weapons programs, you're developing knowledge of biological mechanisms for creating physiological changes.
		They're doing it for destruction as opposed to enhancing human health.
		Well, other researchers independently in the world are developing methods of healing based on the science of the body being electromagnetically mediated that are quite profound and quite exciting.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, sure, but you're dealing here with people with missions.
		Colonel, do you want to try to orient this energy so we could try to cure cancer?
		Or do you want to try to disable an entire battalion of troops on the battlefield?
		And what do you think the Colonel is probably going to say?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And we know.
		And that's the problem with this kind of technology resting without proper accountability in the hands of the military.
		I mean, when you were talking about secret projects, there's a good example.
		In the Washington Post this summer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'll tell you what, hold that thought, Doctor.
		Hold that thought.
		Thank you.
		And what we've leaped there was a touchstone, which we didn't want to get on the network.
		Can't have touchstones on.
		All right, we're going to break here at the bottom of the hour.
		Dr. Nick Begich, author of Angels Don't Play This Harp, is my guest.
		If you have questions, we're going to be getting on the phone heavily in the next half hour.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time tonight, featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		I hear the drums echo beat tonight.
		She is holding whispers of some quiet on the stage.
		She's coming in for a burning fight.
		Bullet wings reflect the stars that guide the torture salvation.
		I stopped an old man along the way, hoping to find some old forgotten words.
		Premier Radio Networks presents Art Bell Somewhere in Time.
		Tonight's program originally aired December 26, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is.
		Good morning, everybody.
		Here's the wire copy on what I told you about a little while ago, hours ago.
		An unidentified gunman stormed into, of course, a McDonald's restaurant in Vallejo tonight, shot three female employees in the head.
		One of the victims, a 17-year-old from Vallejo, is in critical condition now.
		Another victim, a 21-year-old, in fair condition at a Vallejo hospital.
		A third victim is now in stable condition.
		So three shot in the head.
		It was not a robbery.
		Nobody has any idea what the motive might be.
		He just walked right in and shot three people.
		You tell me.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich, and we're talking about HARP.
		That's H-A-A-R-P.
		and we'll get back to it in just one moment All right.
		Back to Dr. Begich in Alaska.
		Doctor, this is an interesting question.
		Could HAARP be used to kill?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, at this power level, I don't see that possibility.
		I think the technology, the basic root technology certainly can be used in that way on smaller scale tactical weapons with high power.
		On a large scale, as HAARP ramps up, then that possibility becomes more likely or more probable.
		It just depends on how it's used, the intent of the operator, and how much power they have and how they shape it.
		For some people, it's like certain biological frequencies will have certain effect over things like heart rhythm, for instance.
		So in that sense, you could create a high enough energy state that causes a change in heart rhythm.
		For some people, you might be able to induce heart attack.
		In fact, that's actually spoken about within a document by Maxwell Air Force Base called Low Intensity Conflict in Modern Technology.
		And they talk about developing weapons for that specific purpose.
		Now, HARP, as it currently fits, I don't see that as it grows and gets larger and the capability becomes more broad and the power levels higher.
unidentified		Those possibilities are there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Lots of people on the phone, so let us go here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich in Alaska.
unidentified		Good evening, Doctor.
		Just an observation question.
		You know, the Soviets developed the LIDA machine, which at very low power levels was able to put people to sleep.
		Oh, and I think we probably got first news in this country during and after the Korean War.
		It had been used in brainwashing.
		But I've discussed, you know, some of the aspects of HART with friends of mine, and, of course, they throw out from their engineering viewpoint applications of the inverse square law.
		But one thing they don't understand, the LINA machine operated literally in very low RF fields.
		When you start poking stuff out at the alpha and delta brain waves, RF in that area, you start causing problems.
		And you brought out, of course, stress.
		And I'll throw fatigue in that.
		Does anybody ask the questions why so many of the kids are on Ritland?
		Why do they have this attention span disorder?
		Why do more people, they're off the road because they're going to sleep at the wheel.
		There's a lot of questions that haven't been answered.
		And of course, the main physiological differences with the body are associated with the higher frequency where you have a whole body and a brain cage resonance, two differences, usually whole body and centers at 150 meg brain cage up to 450, at which point you can start getting actual audio and neural flow.
		And you've, of course, some of your writers in your book, Doctor, which I congratulate you on, have brought out.
		You can actually hear things in your mind.
		Well, the thing about using HAARP is you can ionize the upper atmosphere to the point that you can use it as a reflection for these frequencies where normally they would not reflect back normally.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, that's exactly what he's talking about.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, and the LEDO machine we actually cite as well in terms of what it did, and it was used for putting prisoners of war in a trance-like state for extracting intelligence using a very low frequency with a radio frequency carrier.
		But when you're looking at this technology, we use a number of examples, cite a number of examples of how this technology could be applied.
		And most recently, we started demonstrating some of this technology using an ultrasonic carrier for transferring sound through the nervous system into the center of the cranium where you perceive sound signals in the brain.
		Now, we know it's possible.
		We know they can do it.
		We know they can also do it with modulated microwaves.
		We also know there's a lot of possibilities with heart modulating ionosphere to create behavior effects.
		What we don't know and we haven't been able to show is whether or not you could transfer specific ideas or specific information, if you will, carry information on that.
		But what we also know about military planning right now in a project called Spacecast 2020, forecasting what's coming up in the next century, the idea of using at a distance technologies that could actually cause a person to have memories that were false memories or get information that's perceived as if it were internal but it's being externally driven.
		It's all within the capability of planners, and certainly we believe it's within their capability now, but it's within the planning sequence as to what they're issuing to the public as where they want to go.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, here is a question again from the group on AOL, and it's really a good one.
		It's a basic one, and it's simply this.
		Is HAARP really necessary?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, I don't believe so.
		I think that, you know, at this stage of the game, when you're talking about weapons, at least the weapons applications here, you know, I don't know that we really need it.
		I think there are certainly something to be said for the idea of being able to detect and intercept ICBMs or nuclear carrying apparatus.
		But at the same time, there may be other ways to achieve that.
		I'm sure there are.
		There are that we have now.
		So let's look at the technology.
		What do we need to maintain a secure world?
		But more than that, what do we need to advance science along more humanistic lines?
		I don't think HAARP is necessary at all at this point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good answer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		East of the Rockies, you're on the...
unidentified		I have four things to bring up.
unidentified		Nick, have you met Wayne Green?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		The name is familiar.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I'm trying to place from where, though.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		73 magazines.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yeah.
unidentified		Yes, I had a lot of terror to last year almost about this time.
		All right.
		I wonder if you are taking into consideration that we are in the minimum of the Silver Flux cycle.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We are, yes, that's true.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We may just be starting up the upside, but we're very near the minimum.
unidentified		We've seen the very bottom, absolutely.
unidentified		Have you been to Nicola Tesla's Museum in Belgrade?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		No, I haven't.
unidentified		You should do that.
		It may be too late.
		I hate to say it.
		I was there a few years ago.
		It was fascinating.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, sir.
unidentified		That man was thinking ahead.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, in fact, if you look at his book, the subtitle is Advances in Tesla Technology.
unidentified		Well, I've got like five of his books.
unidentified		I liked especially the Colorado Springs notes.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, Tesla was doing some interesting things.
		In fact, this whole basic technology, when you look at the base patents surrounding it, they all reference Tesla's work.
		And, you know, in the body of the patent where they talk about references and for where the inventor drew his creative stimulus, they always point to certain things.
		In this case, it was to Tesla's work with energy systems weapons technologies.
		And kind of the way HARP started really dealt with an oil and gas company in Alaska going to a physicist and saying, hey, look, we want to figure out a way to burn natural gas, create a market for gas that's huge.
		What is out there?
		And this guy went off and developed this weapons technology, but based largely on Tesla's ideas about energy weapons.
		And many of the same things Tesla was talking about in New York Times articles as early as 1915 and then 1941 ends up being presented as new technology within the context of the HARP original patents on the HAARP concept of focusing radio frequency energy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi, Art.
		This is a time programmer from Portland.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		And I just wanted to ask Dr. Begich if he has ever heard of a test the Navy did involving nuclear weapons detonated in the ionosphere that produced these kind of effects, you know, the psychological effects.
unidentified		It was called Project Argus.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, what we understand about that, and we cite it again within the book, its footnote, it is that, you know, it caused power failures in Hawaii for several hours.
		This was the upper atmospheric detonation of nuclear weapons where they discovered, in one instance, the electromagnetic pulse, the idea of creating a pulse that would knock out electronic circuits.
		What HARP, in the HARP patents, when you look at them, it talks about HAARP technologies or this technology of pulsed radio frequency replacing thermonuclear detonations in the upper atmosphere in the sense of being able to create an electromagnetic pulse that could disrupt not only electronic circuits, but we believe also biological circuits, if you will.
		But the technology is there.
		It's more precision.
		They're able to hit specific frequencies that they want to hit, like tuning your radio into the right station.
		They can tune the frequency to create very specific effects.
		And then by shaping the waveform, a number of different ways they can manipulate the beam, they can create innumerable effects along the various weapons lines that we've talked about tonight.
		And that's the crux of it.
		What you've got is a versatile tool, depending on the intent of the operator, can be used for innumerable effects.
		And yet, again, it's compartmentalized research.
		When we were talking just before one of the breaks here, we were talking about how much is hidden from the American public.
		Sure.
		You know, the Washington Post ran an article this summer written by Sweetman that showed that up to 40% of the Air Force equipment budget are black projects.
		Projects are secret.
		Even the U.S. Congress doesn't know what they're funding.
		40% of the equipment budget of the Air Force, that is a huge, huge amount of money that's being spent without proper oversight.
		And that's the kind of thing that we don't need to know the nitty-gritty of how do you create these kinds of weapons, but we certainly need to know what their effects are, what the potentials are, so that we can decide whether the trade-offs are reasonable ones.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, over the last couple of years, we have had at least two truly massive, unexplained, ultimately unexplained, power failures that have affected about the western two-thirds or more of states.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And they never have been really adequately explained.
		They finally end up talking about, well, there's a power station or that in Idaho.
		Took down the whole thing.
		The whole thing.
		For extended periods of time.
		And I know that sunspots or solar storms are capable of affecting long-line electrical transmission lines.
unidentified		Right.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And this is, again, this is something that has come up repeatedly.
		When you look at the HAARP planning documents by the military, they talk about other transmitters around the world being similar.
		Several that they point to are in the former Soviet Union that back in the mid-70s were attributed in the early 70s to creating the woodpecker signal, which was interfered with ham radio operators as a little...
		Yeah, yeah.
		And it also was attributed to having caused a significant power outage in Canada that was actually investigated.
		And I met the congressional investigator in the course of lecturing this summer, and he shared with me a number of the documents.
		And what apparently had happened is this experiment was conducted that caused a huge power failure, caused problems within the power plant that caused it to basically knock out.
		And they attributed it to these signals.
		Those stations are pointed to as being a reason why HAARP ought to be considered safe.
		I mean, they say, look, these other things have been operating, and yet the same ones early on were thought to have caused these various problems.
		The idea that HAARP could do that on December 15th, which was one of those major power outages in the western states of I believe it was 94, it was the same day of the beginning of a test series for HAARP.
		Now, it could be coincidence.
		Again, without really good independent monitoring, we won't know ever, probably definitively, whether that was them or whether it was just a coincidence, if you will.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I wonder if they wonder.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		They probably do.
		You know, the same time, you remember the AWACS plane crash up here in Alaska.
		That was the day after a testing series ended with HAARP.
		And again, the question is sort of in the minds of many people, was it related to this project?
		And you can bet the AWACS plane was up here.
		And when it was here as an opportunity, I'm sure they were monitoring the testing going on in those preceding weeks going up to that event.
		At the same time, you've got a lot of things that anecdotally start to say, hey, we're right, but you need that independent monitoring so we can say definitively, look, they're firing it here.
		These are the ranges they're firing it, and these are the effects that we're seeing, and start to draw those correlations.
		We would hope that they would be drawn on the drawing boards rather than by experiencing the events, because we think that as they move further along, those events are going to become more pronounced and extreme.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And Doctor, what about the operators of HAARP?
		I mean, here are people that are right at the very center of the area that the radiation is coming from.
		And while there may not be a lot of lateral radiation, surely those working at the facility would be subject to intense amounts of radiation, particularly up toward the 100 billion watt level.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And once they get there, it's going to certainly have the effect.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		But the other thing people need to recognize is the way the contracts were drawn on design, this can be operated remotely from any location in the world.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, they may want to.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It doesn't have to be there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I see.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And so they can send in whoever they want to do monitoring for their weather instruments and some of their other diagnostics.
		But the fact is everything is set up remote.
		They don't have to be even in the same state.
		They can be completely around the world and operate it with Comlinks.
		So you've got a system that can be remotely operated.
		I mean, recently what we've seen, and the reason they sort of report the effects is you've got a team of scientists show up in a community that has no people in it to speak of in terms of large populations.
		It's easy to see people that are there that are out of place.
		Check into the local hotel and do their experiments.
		But there's a lot that can be said for how much of the facility can be operated off-site because that's how it was designed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I've worked near 50,000 watt AM transmitter towers, and I can tell you the maximum exposure any human can stand is about four or five minutes.
		After that, You better get out of there or you're going to begin cooking.
		Now, that's 50,000 watts.
		It's inconceivable to me.
		VHF range, 100 billion watts.
		I wouldn't want to be anywhere near that.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		And, you know, this is the whole situation with the community that's in this region of Alaska.
		You know, this is a small community in terms of population.
		They're highly concerned about what's happening in the US.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm going to be too sure.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		More importantly, and not to discount that, but when you think about the ionosphere as a global system, not something regionally unique, but something important to all of us, and the fact that these systems are designed to grow consistently over the years, when you look at the whole scheme of how weapons programs advance, before you know it, it's got a major initiative tied to it, and then the game is over.
		It's too late to really start to look at it, and much has gone down the road.
		I think in this case, you have a system that needs that scrutiny.
		It's starting to get that scrutiny, and we're finally seeing political bodies that have the power to make a difference start to take a look at it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are there any of these civilian scientists on staff that have had questions that they've had the guts to vocalize?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Not that we've seen.
		I mean, I know there's been a lot of questioning on the part of scientists privately, but even with us, when we raised the issues after the legislative hearing, we were attacked on the one hand by some geophysicist, and on the other, after a discussion of, look, here's what the research shows.
		Go look at it yourself, dial it up on your database and see it.
		We need to ask these questions out of your specialty area.
		Who from these requisite specialty areas is on the site?
		And they had to say, well, we don't have any biologists.
		We don't have any electrophysiologists.
		And I said, how do you know?
		And then look at the research.
		And their answer was, well, let's do that.
		Let's look at the research.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, there are a lot of scientists in the audience listening.
		We've got a link to your webpage.
		If somebody goes on to your webpage, Doctor, is there enough hard information there that a scientist can sit down and draw some of his own conclusions?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I think there's enough to trigger some serious looking, but we don't give as many footnotes on the website as we probably do in our book.
		And I think that's really where you have to go.
		If you want the data, the detail, look at our site, look at the military site.
		We're linked to them too so that you can see both sides.
		There's a good overview.
		If a scientist is reasonably and willing to take a look at the data, we can provide any of our footnoted source material and have done so to folks that are in opposition to this project.
		And the evidence is there.
		I mean, there's enough in the literature to lead any prudent person to similar conclusions.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm going to be honest with you, Doctor.
		If I was a high official in the government and I examined behavior as it appears to be developing in the civilian population right now, and there was a possibility that I could embrace a technology that might modify human behavior, I might be tempted, I guess I would be tempted, to pursue it, at the very least, experimentally, to try and determine if I could control human behavior.
		And I suppose that makes me sound like a Nazi.
		I'm not saying that I absolutely would do it, but I certainly would pursue experimentation.
		And I just can't help but believe that that's exactly what they're doing.
		You betcha.
		They are.
		Doctor, hold on.
		We'll be back to you in a moment.
		Good rest here at the top of the hour.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich from near Anchorage, Alaska.
		And we're talking about HAARP.
unidentified		That's H-A-A-R-P.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And it's a pretty wild technology.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Stay right where you are.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time, on Premier Radio Networks.
		Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Coast to Coast AM from December
		26, 1996.
		Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time on Premiere Radio Networks tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from December 26th, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In a moment, back to Dr. Nick Begich, who is my guest, we are discussing, among other things, the HAARP project in Alaska, which is where Dr. Begich is.
		coming right up the All right.
		Doctor, earlier in the year, I had an interesting gentleman on.
		The show just recently repeated, a fellow named Ed Dames, a remote viewer.
		He predicted that the jet stream would literally come down on deck, causing tremendous winds.
		And then surprisingly, or maybe not, here recently, I've heard people on the weather channel talk about, I'll be doggone, they're talking about the jet stream coming down, and we've been getting 100, 125 mile an hour winds in some parts of the western coastal areas, Oregon and California, with the jet stream literally dipping down.
		Is this also a possible effect of HAARP?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, it's the idea of diversion of jet stream we explore a little bit in one section of our book.
		And what we say essentially is we talked earlier about the idea of lifting the ionosphere to create sort of a void where the lower atmosphere rushes in.
		Another way that we see weather modification perhaps taking place with this system is by creating, if you will, a standing wave of energy that actually acts like a wall deflecting wind patterns.
		And this is a question that we ask, you know, could you do this?
		Could you actually do it on a full jet stream size scale?
		And I think once you get into the 100 billion watt range, those things become very possible.
		But I think even in the lower ranges, and this is again what we've raised, is the nonlinear effects, the idea that you can act as a trigger for releasing larger amounts of energy that then cause effects that otherwise wouldn't be expected.
		And I think that's really part of all of this.
		We looked at one document in particular, it was actually a book called Unless Peace Comes with a chapter by J.F. Gordon McDonald talking about, he was a geophysicist actually at UCLA, but he talked about how to create natural releases of energy using triggering events, nonlinear energy releases.
		And he was also a science advisor to Johnson.
		And he predicted all of these kinds of things from triggering earthquakes to tidal waves to massive winds to even biological changes in humans as being possible if you could manipulate the ionosphere.
		And at the time, 1969, when that work was written, that wasn't possible.
		The technology wasn't there.
		What HAARP offers military planners today is a technology that they've long sought, and now they have the capability, which is to operate within the radio frequency regime into the upper ionosphere with a focused amount of energy, a laser radio beam, if you will.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I can almost, I mean, I'm sure they have theories about what might occur, but I can almost see them up there going, well, let's push this and see what happens.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I think that's fair because when you look at, I mean, your show and others have reported on those high atmospheric phenomena, electrical phenomena sprites, which were detected by the Alaska Geophysical Institute just a few years ago.
		Now, none of that was factored into the equations on what HAARP would do as an added energy input into that system.
		So here you have upper atmospheric electrical phenomena that are just now being discovered, not being factored into any models globally in terms of what might happen if, and now they're going to inject more energy without really knowing the system completely that they're trying to affect, and yet at the same time acknowledging, look, we're going to create a runaway effect and see where it stabilizes.
		That doesn't make me feel too secure.
		No.
		And I don't think it's the kind of issue they want to be confronted with.
		But at the same time, pure research as such can't exist without some moral deliberation and some ethical deliberation on the potential effects.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm sure if you ask them, if you say, when you focus this 100 billion watts, do you know exactly what's going to happen?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm sure their answer has to be, uh-uh.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's the nature of experimentation, right?
		They want to find out.
		And unfortunately, or, you know, I mean, from our perspective again, I mean, you know, we want to believe, and I think everyone wants to believe that our government's acting in our own best interest.
		The fact is, it doesn't work that way in all instances unless the population forces them to be accountable to something.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They're interested in us.
		I'm not sure they're acting in our best interest.
		First-time caller line, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich in Alaska.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hello, this is Bill.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Bill.
unidentified		Nick mentioned briefly MK Ultra.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		That's the mind control program.
		And there's a number of MK programs that are connected with the germ warfare.
		Germ warfare and mind control is connected.
		The spin-off in the germ warfare, they used also in the mind control program.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That whole mind control program, many people say, well, did that really exist?
		And it's in the congressional record.
		It's pretty easy to reference.
		And it's in a number of governments.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What exactly did they do?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, what was released were the use of LSD, for instance, on servicemen without consent to see how they might modify behavior of these folks, as well as a number of hallucinogenics, chemicals, as well as hypnosis, hypnotherapy, a number of things.
		What they didn't get into that they certainly had access to at the time were electromagnetic means of altering brain states.
		And this is well known within the literature, even back as far back as the 60s with the discovery of the LIDA machine that they captured during the Vietnam era, with what was coming out of Korea during the Korean War.
		I mean, they knew about these technologies, but yet in the congressional hearings on mind control, that got skirted, and what we got were really the grains of sand on the beach of what was going on enough to, you know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, I think it's fair then that the American public, look, everybody, ask yourself, if you have a government interested enough in mind control to give people, without their permission, LSD, or interested enough in the effects of radiation to inject pregnant women, children, and people with terminal diseases with plutonium to see what would happen, imagine the kind of technology we're talking about now.
		And are you going to really sit there and say, well, they wouldn't use that?
		Come on.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich.
		Hi, Don.
unidentified		Hi, Mr. Dr. Begich.
unidentified		How are you?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Very good.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
unidentified		I have a three-part question for you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, sir.
unidentified		Where are you?
		This is Tony, and I am in Las Vegas.
		I can't listen to you off the air, though, because KXNT is transmitters down.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I know.
		By the way, I ought to tell everybody, they had a fire in their transmitter.
		They're hoping to be up by noontime later today, but they had some damage, and they're trying to get it repaired.
unidentified		Awesome.
unidentified		I've got a three-part question that I could say all at once and get the short or in three parts, get the short answer, or say all at once and get the long answer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		Okay.
		Does the doctor see, quote, visually, the heart projects affect through cloud and storm directional dynamics and or physics?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Not at this point.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I mean, from where I'm sitting at a good distance and a couple of mountain ranges between us.
unidentified		Okay, so you can't see it on the weather channel, right?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Not observable from where I'm sitting.
unidentified		And do you think Red China and Russia are countering with applications and or warfare-related or maybe even UFO short-circuiting applications?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Let's cover the first part.
		Do I think that other countries have the technology?
		Yes.
		Do I think the Soviets, former Soviet Union, has technology?
		Yes.
		The situation with this type of technology, however, is that it's very observable.
		It takes a large land area to put the antenna array.
		It's easily observable with any sophisticated country's technology today.
		You could spot these kinds of facilities, not like an ICBM in a silo hidden under the ground.
		They have to be on the surface.
		So in that sense, I think people are developing it, but it's the kind of technology that you could really verifiably, in a comfortable way, know whether or not it was being deployed and used and developed.
		So I think it's, first of all, controllable.
		Secondly, I think that the idea that the Soviets are advancing it, at least they are upfront about it.
		They acknowledge these types of phased array antenna for specifically weapons applications, specifically a ground-based Star Wars application, and they're just more upfront about it.
		But I think the technologies go back years.
		I mean, you can go back to the microwave beaming of the U.S. Embassy, which was again purported at that time in the 60s to be responsible for behavior modification.
		We believe that is exactly what it was.
		And I think that it's a case of the technology finally getting more and more well-known, but still has remained hidden from the average person for decades when it should have been debated decades ago.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich in Alaska.
		Where are you calling from, please?
unidentified		Yeah, this is Jim from Fort Myers, Florida.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Jim.
unidentified		I have a question.
		I was the other day, actually, I was looking through in this computer system, and I heard you're talking about high frequencies before, and it said something about 24.5862 gigahertz.
		And I was wondering if that had anything to do with the HARP thing?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Their primary broadcast frequency is 2.8 to 10 megahertz, but the actual range of frequency they can affect, either with primary or secondary frequencies created with the system, run from ultra-low frequency to visible light, which is a really broad chunk of spectrum.
		And that came out of a 1995 executive summary prepared for the Congress by the HARP planners out of one of the Maryland universities.
		I can't remember the name.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doctor, you said visible light.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there a chance that we will all see some strange glow in the atmosphere?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's a possibility from this facility.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It's within its capabilities.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wow.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		One of the other things that they've done is using barium-laden rockets launched into the path of the radiation for actually for a combination of things.
		For marking, first of all, the magnetic lines of force surrounding the planet have been mapped using 200 barium-laden rockets over the last 10 or 15 years here in Alaska.
		And what they are able to do is by sending energy in, you can create a light effect that looks like actually when they did this with HAARP, it created a corkscrew kind of effect around the magnetic line of force moving the opposite direction of the normal flow of energy, which was sort of unexpected.
		But that's kind of, that's what led to this whole idea of global shielding, which is sort of the other part of your question.
		In the UFO context, it's out of my area, I really can't say, but in terms of disrupting an electronic circuit on a global basis, that was the original intention of PARP, was to create a shield that when you visualize that shield surrounding the planet, it can be looked at like an envelope around the planet, that anything passing through its electronic circuits are disrupted, causing the object to malfunction or crash.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, gee, Doctor, if a glow were to begin to emanate, say, just above the area being radiated, Alaska, nobody would notice.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Alaskans would think, oh, more pretty northern lights.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		And that's, you know, here you have the active auroral, you know, high-frequency active auroral research project.
		And, you know, it's, again, it's sort of the misnomer.
		You know, you title things to, you know, lead people to believe one thing when something else is going on.
		And that's very deliberate on the part of military planners.
		That's something that's actually laid out in their instructions to contractors and subcontractors is how to make a project appear one way while it's doing something else.
unidentified		anything else color i was just wondering about that specific frequency that i told you that had anything uh...
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		any significance to I don't see where it would from what I've seen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Hi.
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		Hi, I'm Frank in Seattle.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Frank.
unidentified		Hi, one of the weather-affected areas.
unidentified		And we've got quite a bit of snow here, probably about eight, nine inches or so.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've heard that that's unheard of in Seattle.
unidentified		Yeah, we didn't have anything yesterday, and then it all came in today, and it's still going.
		And it's really icing up.
		It's really bad.
		But anyhow, my question to you, Dr. Bagich, is this, and I don't know if you know this yet or not, but are you familiar with a Title 50, Chapter 32, Section 1520 of a United States Code regarding the chemical and biological agents testing on American citizens by the Department of Defense?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I may be, but I don't know the citations.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		you'll have to refresh me It simply basically says that the government can experiment on American civilian populations, Given 30 days notice to local authorities, unspecified, dog catcher, whoever.
		And within 30 days, they can then begin experimenting biologically or chemically on the American civilian population.
		I know it seems bizarre, and people sit there and say this can't be true, but caller, I'll bet you've seen it, haven't you?
unidentified		Well, listen, I called you once before, Art, in regards to this.
		I have a friend, and he's in a lawsuit against the government right now in regards to a radiation experiment that were done on him back in the 60s, okay?
		And what I did is I did research for him on the internet, and I picked up his files, pulled his files, and got him to him, okay, those files, on his experiment, on his radiation experiments, okay?
		And so he has given all this things to his lawyers and others in a class action lawsuit against the government.
		Sure.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, if I can comment on that, the idea that chemical and biological weapons could be used in the United States, we cite within the book the paragraph and section of the Chemicals Weapon Treaty that was recently signed last couple years.
		And within that treaty, as well as most international treaties, is an exemption.
		And the exemption is you can continue to utilize these kinds of systems for domestic use.
		And specifically, what they call for is riot control and police actions.
		And what's interesting is on the whole non-lethal weapons technologies, which chemical and biological certainty would fit within, there's been a huge transfer of technology between justice and the Department of Defense, which we also cite within the book.
		Because the Department of Defense can no longer develop those weapons systems for warfare purposes against a declared enemy, Department of Justice and others for domestic policing actions are specifically permitted under those international agreements.
		This is what's very important about this is that when these international agreements pass where we agree to not use something against an enemy of the United States, a declared enemy of the United States, we should also consider parallel domestic legislation that forbids the use of that same technology against Americans, and we don't.
		And that's a big mistake in all of our major international treaties is we're allowing things to go through that we can use against ourselves that we can't use against someone else.
		That's ridiculous.
		And that certainly is not the intent, I think, of most Americans when they review these treaties.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Ridiculous, yes, yes, but true.
		And here, let me ask you a question.
		Answer honestly.
		If you were the president of the United States, doctor, and Los Angeles, or at least a good part of it, was going up in flames, rioting, or any other big American city, and they came to you and said, look, Mr. President, you may not have been aware of this technology because it's been a black program for some time now,
		disguised as scientific inquiry in Alaska, but we have the ability to literally throw a switch and calm the residents of Los Angeles and a few hundred miles around, and this riot will quickly quiet down, Mr. President.
		Do we throw the switch, yes or no?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You know, and this is this, it gets to the root belief of the individual.
		And for me, the answer would be, you know, the cost of human lives is there, but, you know, when we start messing with the way people believe, what they think, how they feel, as objectionable as it is, once you open that box, you'll never close it again.
		And I don't believe that we can interfere with the thought processes of human beings in any way and do it in any humane way.
		I think it's a violation of who we are in terms of the very essence of who we are.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But I would argue, Doctor, I'm the military guy here for the moment.
		I would argue, look, we can calm this whole area.
		We've got this situation well in hand.
		We know that if we radiate the ionosphere and direct it, that Los Angeles will be very calm.
		People will be going to sleep all over the place or at least relaxing.
		We know it'll work, Mr. President.
		And right now, stores are burning and people are dying.
		What do you think?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It would be a tough call.
		I mean, for me personally, that's the reason we stand in opposition to this project.
		I don't believe interfering with human beings' thought processes is appropriate, humane, or moral.
		And I think that it's just like chemical weapons.
		We could say, well, we could gas everyone in that neighborhood, too, and have the same effect, but we've decided that's immoral.
		You know, I think we really have to look at the whole picture and say, you know, is this what human beings are becoming?
		Are we going to become manipulated, modified, and who's going to make those decisions of what's right and what's wrong?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, probably the guy I just talked about.
		Doctor, hold on.
		We'll be right back to you.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich to get a copy of this program, and I'm getting a lot of questions about that already.
		Please call, beginning now, 1-800-917-4278.
		Looks like we'll go the whole way.
		It'll be a five-hour program.
		That's 1-800-917-4278.
		In addition, if you would like to ask questions, I'm in a chat room on America Online.
		And the way to get there is just go on AOL and type in keyword art bell or keyword periscope, doesn't matter either one.
		And when you get there, when you get to the Periscope area, click on the Grassy Knoll chat room.
		And there you will find a lot of people arguing about what we're talking about and much more.
		That's Keyword, Art Bell, and then the Grassy Knoll chat room on AOL.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time.
		Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Coast AM from December
		26, 1996.
		Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		Coast AM from December 26, 1996.
		You're listening to Art bell somewhere in time.
		Tonight, featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from December 26th, 1996.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is the power up, Doctor?
		Yes, it is.
		Well, let's push this button and see what happens.
		Well, look at that.
		The entire ionosphere is glowing red.
unidentified		Cool.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Simplified, yes, but you get the idea.
		They don't really know what's going to happen.
		I'm Mark Bell.
		My guest is Dr. Nick Begich.
		The book is Angels Don't Play This Harp.
		And if you would like to ask a question or engage in a conversation, we have a chat room going right now in America Online.
		So if you're an America Online subscriber, simply log on and go to an area called, well, actually, go to Keyword.
		They've got a Keyword.
		You know, you just click on Keyword up there and enter a keyword, Art Bell, or Periscope.
		Either way, you'll go to the same place.
		When you get there, click on the Grassy Knoll chat room, and you'll be in with the group.
		and if you submit a good question, I'll ask it on the air.
		Back now to Dr. Nick Begich.
		Doctor.
		Not very long ago, there was a shuttle experiment in which they had a tether.
		You remember the tethered satellite?
		Well, the tether began glowing like a giant slinky in space.
		I mean, really glowing.
		It was very, very bright, and a lot of people thought that possibly HAARP was radiating energy as an experiment to try and light that tether up.
		Could that be?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's a possibility.
		I think it was probably, you know, the atmosphere has a lot of energy in place, and I think it was picking up a lot of energy that was in place.
		But it could have very likely been used in conjunction with the HAARP facility.
		I know that was proposed by Hoagland, and we had even been on the air a little bit with him on that subject.
		And I think everything that he suggested is quite plausible.
		And here, again, is where we face a dilemma.
		We have no way to concretely say, okay, this experiment did this effect in this instance.
		But what we do know about the tether is it was not, again, a project not disclosed fully to the American public or anyone else.
		I think they were experimenting with ELF, and I think they were also experimenting with tapping energy, which has all been part of that whole mystique behind much of what's been associated with HAARP.
		In fact, our U.S. Senator, when HAARP was first debated, was talking about tapping the ionosphere for energy and utilizing this system.
		And he was kind of poo-pooed by the scientists involved with the project, which was kind of strange because he was the guy in control of the funding.
		It was a very unusual situation, but it was as if he had said too much and they needed to be quiet about the project rather than he had made a mistake.
		And I think that the fact that he went on to be an advocate for the project even after being embarrassed by the very planners who would be the beneficiaries of the funding was out of character with Senator Stevens in that sense.
		And in the same sense, here he is advancing a project, talking about in our newspapers here about not being covered under global shields for or shields for ICBMs and those kinds of things and looking for that technology.
		And here we have this project, a research project, mind you, that has that capability.
		I think it really goes a lot further than what's been said.
		And I think the tether was probably very likely a part of this whole experimentation happening here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, doctor, east of the Rockies, you are on the air with Dr. Nick Begich.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello, where are you?
unidentified		Hagerstown, Indiana.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		Yeah, I was wondering, 50 gigawatts, right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		100 billion watts.
unidentified		Okay.
		I know what it takes to power a million watts.
		I've seen the six-foot tubes.
		What is it going to take to power something that big?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's an excellent question.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The power to achieve 100 billion watts, Doctor.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		What they're talking about after factoring an antenna gain is using a number of magneto-hydrodynamic generators, which are gas-fired electrical generators for creating pretty large amounts of power.
		But when you factor that into an antenna gain is where they would eventually get that.
		That's what's always been spoken about from the very base patents all the way through is to utilize these kinds of power sources.
		What's interesting about that is across the North Slope of Alaska are the old Dew Line sites, which was their early defense warning system sites, which include base installations, small installations, as well as for many of them, magnetohydrodynamic generators as their fuel source.
		Now whether you use one large array or perhaps even a series of smaller array across that old Dew Line infrastructure, that's probably the more likely scenario.
		I think what we'll see with HAARP where it sits today is to develop the technology, develop the idea, and then transfer that idea out to these remote sites where it can be warm.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, here's one.
		Since it penetrates the Earth, is there any possibility HAARP might have an adverse effect on the Earth's molten core temp?
		That's from the Internet chat room.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That I don't know, but when you talk about resonant frequencies of the Earth, and we had talked a little bit about Schumann's resonance earlier, 7.83 Hz, there were some ideas of Tesla, again, dealing with these advanced weapons technology, that if you could resonate a frequency that correlated to the Earth's frequency with the right kind of oscillator, you could actually create such things as earthquakes.
		In fact, he proposed you could even split the Earth entirely.
		But what he was basically talking about was this, again, nonlinear releases of energy, small amounts of energy in the window frequencies that harmonize with frequencies that are naturally in place, causing large energy releases.
		Could it melt the core, increase the temperature?
		That I don't know.
		But certainly a nonlinear event could occur that are cataclysmic along the lines of earthquake activity if, in fact, enough power is generated at the right appropriate frequencies to cause those kinds of triggering events.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		First time caller line.
		You're on the air with Dr. Nick Beggage.
		Where are you calling from, please?
unidentified		I'm calling from Salem, Oregon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, you're going to have to speak up good and loud.
unidentified		I'm calling from Salem, Oregon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, ma'am.
unidentified		This is Charlotte.
unidentified		And I'm wondering, Dr. Begich, was there a specific time that they began testing this particular system in Alaska a certain year, or was it something that's just been recent?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's a good question.
		Let's get the whole timeline.
		When did they first begin testing, Doctor, and what's lying ahead?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		What they did is the first test was December 15th, 1994, which, as we said earlier, correlated with a large Western state's power outage.
		They've tested then in March of that year.
		They then tested again in November of that year, in September of that year.
		They broke for almost a year until this November where they began a testing series on the 15th and ended on the 22nd.
		They're scheduled again for testing in January.
		And each of these tests is progressive.
		I mean, they add more power.
		Initial tests were dealing with the circuit itself, making sure everything worked properly.
		They had some problems with it, but they adjusted out.
		But this year, it's 48 antennas, which is the most antennas they've had in the array operating at one time.
		And for earth-penetrating tomography, which is what will lead then to further funding.
		That particular application is very important from a defense perspective, but also is the one that we consider the most intrusive in terms of its potential effects on life, including human beings, because of the frequency ranges they're going to operate within.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, again from the chat room.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Somebody wants to know, in your best estimation or your best guess, Doctor, what is the end objective most likely of those operating HAARP?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		From my perspective, they're going to try and get the full power capability.
		I think they're going to try and replace the satellite-based Star Wars defense system with this ground-based technology.
		I think that they'll extend the use of that technology as far as the perimeters will allow.
		In other words, covering all the areas that we've spoken about today, the ones that they can legitimately do within the boundaries of international agreements, they'll do.
		And the ones that they can't openly do, I think they'll do covertly.
		And they'll continue to operate experiments and tests in areas removed from public view unless the public demands that kind of scrutiny, both in the United States and elsewhere, because it really is an international issue that just now, in the last few years, electromagnetic systems are just now beginning to be debated in the international community.
		I think that's where ultimately this will go.
		I think people all over the world that we've spoken to about this project, we have our book out in Japanese this month.
		It's on two minutes second printing.
		And a lot of people are becoming familiar with it and are acting on that knowledge constructively within their own political systems.
		I think that's what eventually will change the direction of this project, if anything does.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, again, somebody on this group would like to know, Doctor, how much accuracy ultimately can be achieved with this energy?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In other words, in reflection, how tight an area might they beam down to?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		That's really for me at this point impossible to say.
		You know, we've heard people say it can be focused pretty narrowly.
		From what they say, it can be focused from reflectors into a really narrow path that then could convert the power back into electrical energy, which indicates something fairly small.
		I think that's fair to say that that can happen.
		How much directional control within all of that would depend on what they had to augment this system on the ground, because it can't be just the system on the ground.
		And this is part of how they've masqueraded this project.
		When they talk about HAARP as such, they negate the fact that it interrelates with a number of other programs, like they have a supercomputer at the University of Alaska, which is funded separately.
		We have a rocket launch facility funded separately.
		We have diagnostic equipment funded separately, satellites funded separately.
		But as these programs interweave and interrelate, which we tried to show in our work, how they do connect, clearly show a much, much broader, much bigger project than originally meets the eyes in terms of HARP specifics.
		So when they say HARP is totally open, parts of that may be true, but when you look at what it's connected to that isn't totally open, then the whole story takes on a much greater dimension that people do need to pay attention to.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Dr. Phones, West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich.
		Hi.
unidentified		All right.
		Good morning.
		This is Joaquin in Yuma, Arizona.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yuma, yes.
unidentified		Right.
unidentified		I have two questions, one for Art and one for the doc.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		Art, did you get my floppy for the black helicopters?
		And you can answer when I hang up.
		But anyways, Doc, in about the 60 era, over here we have proving grounds and Yumote Proving Grounds.
		Well, I was involved with it a lot later in the 80s.
		And we've only done two tests since the 60s.
		But the 60s, we used to do extensive tests.
		I remember when I was a little kid, I used to watch this thing go off all the time.
		What I'm talking about is a Navy gun.
		It's the big 1650 Navy gun, which are on the big Navy ships.
		And there's an extension that is extended on that.
		It's like a gun, and then you put an extension on it.
		And we send these projectiles, they're almost 20 pounds shy of a ton, into the, I guess it was the ionosphere.
		They said 25 miles high.
		And we used to send these things off, and of course it was classified.
		And, you know, I did my test, and I only knew what I did on my test, and I was a flash x-ray technician.
		Well, anyways, this thing would go up into the sky, and it would leave a vortex or a contrail.
		It would turn blue, green, and purple.
		It was so beautiful to see the thing go up.
		And, of course, it hit impact somewhere, as we were told.
		But I'm sure that they were sending Something in space and maybe a pressure plate, it would open up the projectile.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or at the very least, into the lower atmosphere.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		You're right.
unidentified		I don't know how high 25 miles is, but this thing went super high.
		And for being so heavy, you know, it could have probably, if they lightened the load, it could have even went higher.
		But I said this to say all this.
		This project was also known as HARP.
		The gun is called HARP.
		Now, I don't know if it's two A's or just a single A. Huh.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		I don't know it's connected.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		It's interesting, but I don't see how it's connected.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that would be, what, 125,000 feet or a little better than that.
unidentified		So that'd be below the ionosphere.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It would, but it would be on up there.
		That's interesting.
		Very interesting.
		Wild card line, you're on the air with Dr. Nick Begich.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Yes, ARP?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Oh, yes.
unidentified		This is a Chris from Northern California.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		I called you a couple weeks ago, you know, and brought up the subject of HAARP being the star shield.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, here's the man to ask.
unidentified		Yes, one of the things that I understood was that the HARP was running in the multiple terawatts, not in the hundreds of billions of watts, but more like a thousand times that.
		And that, you know, basically, I mean, with those sort of wattages, it's going to do a lot more than some of the small things that they claim it to be doing, you know.
		Anyway, what's your comment on that?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, all I can do is quote from the literature, which is their literature.
		And going beyond that, there's a lot of, the thing about the HARP story that's important to note, at least at this stage, is there's been a lot of speculation beyond what I think the literature really shows, but I think the literature is enough to cause concern.
		If it goes beyond the power levels that we've described, I certainly think it's possible, particularly when you take in nonlinear effects, that it could go well beyond what we've been talking about.
		And I think the overall issue here is, you know, how far do we want this to go and under what constraint, if any.
		And really that's the crux of the issue.
		For us, we're going into an area that's way beyond what we think is safe.
		We're going in a direction that we think is unnecessary militarily.
		But more than that, it gets back to the fundamental trade-off.
		Here we have a weapon system that either accidentally or purposefully can influence human behavior.
		We think that's wrong.
		I mean, fundamentally, we think that's just a big mistake in a wrong direction, and one that's not new.
		It's been sought for decades.
		Occasionally, it's surfaced in congressional hearings and been dealt with to some extent.
		But the program marches on.
		And non-lethal weapons technologies, HARP and electromagnetic warfare technologies are all part of that.
		And I think that needs an open airing.
		It needs the kind of discussion that we're having tonight.
		I mean, if it wasn't for these kinds of programs where we could explore it for a long enough period of time to explain it, this issue would have never, ever been even in the point in which it is today of being discussed.
unidentified		And I think that's they'd just be doing it, wouldn't they?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, exactly right.
		I mean, at least at this point, they're responding.
		They're making the attempt to deal with the issue, at least in a public relations vein.
		But at the same time, enough scientists are looking at it that are saying, hey, wait a minute, the points have been raised here should be looked at and scrutinized more carefully.
		And that's happening, and it's happening independent of us, which was always our hope to begin with, that people would take the issue up and explore it.
		And with that comes all extremes on all issues as it is in debate.
		But that part has happened.
		That is happening.
		And it can continue to happen as long as people express concern over the issue.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Doctor.
		Somebody here, again, on the group on AOL is asking about relay stations.
		I'm going to modify that question a little.
		I'm going to ask, are there other HARP installations other than the one near you there in Alaska in other parts of the world that are doing similar, in quotes, research?
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yes, absolutely.
		In fact, the military in their planning documents and press releases indicate Arecibo, Puerto Rico, Turismo, Norway, and a number of other locations around the world, including the former Soviet Union, where these transmitters exist, except most of them, up until recently, were configured differently.
		So like when we talked earlier about how the energy dissipates with distance from the transmitter for most transmitters, that's how the earlier versions were set up.
		The newer version, the HARP version, which is a phased array antenna allowing focusing, there are two in Alaska.
		One is HiPass near the University of Alaska Fairbanks and the other is HAARP.
		Both are used together for a number of the weapons effects.
		You also have Arecibo, Puerto Rico being retrofitted, and other facilities we understand being retrofitted to have this focusing capability.
		So there are other facilities that are being used.
		And again, when you look at HAARP, it is one of many, one, the leading edge, if you will, in terms of the technology, but it will be replicated around the world if it just continues.
		And that's, again, where we want to see that international interest in taking a look at this before it goes too far.
		Because as we said earlier, the United States Congress said Star Wars no, and yet programs continue.
		What we also show is that our allies march forward, realizing that with a change of administration or a change in the Congress, those issues get revisited.
		So everyone marches along and then they sort of wait for us to catch up.
		But this kind of project goes on.
		There's a number of facilities and how they're being used in conjunction with HAARP.
		Some shows up in literature and other issues don't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it possible, Doctor, that, again, they will conduct tests unscheduled, not telling us, maybe even higher power, with no notice?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In other words, just do it.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, in fact, that's what they just did in November, the 15th through the 22nd.
		They called it a test of opportunity, an opportunity to do this experiment because a satellite was positioned in just the right way to diagnose the transmissions emanating from HAARP.
		And when you look at that, you go, wait a minute, you know the flight path of your satellite.
		This isn't a test of opportunity.
		You knew where it would be and when it would be there and when the systems would be operating, and you did your test.
		And then you announced it after the fact because you didn't want to announce it before the fact for whatever reasons those were.
		But it's ludicrous to imagine that this planning group does things by accident.
		I mean, that's just out of the question.
		They plan it, they map it out.
		It's just when they disclose it is really the issue, and that's been our objection all along, that they don't properly disclose, and when they do, they don't give the whole story, and the evidence is in.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Doctor.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we have come to the end of the program.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Amazing.
		We did five hours.
		It was fine in a hurry.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whoosh, just like that.
		There are so many questions and so many angles to this that you could probably do 25 hours on it.
		At any rate, it has been a pleasure, pleasure, having you here.
		And I wish you luck in the continuing fight and be safe.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Thank you very much for all of your support.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Begich, good night.
nick begich ▲ ● ▼		Good night.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Bye-bye.
		That's Dr. Nick Begich in Alaska.
		And the subject was HARP, H-A-A-R-P.
		Well, folks, that's it for tonight.
		Don't forget, tomorrow night, we begin the process of prediction for 1997.
		We've got last year's predictions from the Bell Family Vault, and we will begin constructing a list for next year.
		Well, that's actually tonight.

▲