On October 22, 1997, Coast to Coast AM featured Officer X, a U.S. Navy comms officer who revealed a terrifying 1980s incident aboard the USS Ulysses S. Grant—a six-hour blackout during Libya tensions where crew nearly triggered nuclear strikes due to equipment failure and panic. He resigned, warning of reckless "limited nuclear use" theories undermining MAD deterrence, while callers debated his motives and military risks. Bell replayed the segment, despite concerns over anonymity, calling it "dramatic and real," before pivoting to fringe topics like Soviet space stations, alien tech, and Satanist threats—all framed as urgent warnings about government secrecy and existential dangers. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening.
Good morning, as the case may be, across all these many prolific time zones stretching from in the west, the Hawaiian and Peach and Island chains, eastward over flyover country, to the Caribbean.
Gentle breezes, warm temperatures, volcanoes, in the south, in the South American North worldwide on the internet.
This is 12 p.m.
I'm Mark Bell.
I'll write a couple of announcements up front, and we're going to have an interesting morning.
There's no question about it.
submarines have always fascinated me and my guest is an ex-submarine communications officer who has quite a few things to tell us that he Now, I want to issue a warning to my affiliates.
And this goes for those of you who have a particularly sensitive audience.
You may be located dead set in the middle of the Bible Belt or something.
So just consider this fair warning.
I got a fax earlier today from a woman who says the following.
I am 32 years old.
My coven name is Harlot.
I am a witch of the most unholy kind.
I am by no means a goddess.
I use no crystal balls, tricks, nor treats.
I'm from a long line of witches and warlocks, and so on.
She belongs to the coven of the unholy and says, Hail Satan.
Now let me say, Art, I am a good witch by no means.
Even if I do something that someone would consider good, I do with evil in my heart.
Hail Satan.
Well, this one goes a little far for even me.
Nevertheless, I am going to explore.
As a matter of fact, I called her, and on the phone, she was every bit what she seemed to be in this facts.
And I admit, it kind of freaked me out a little bit, too.
You know, I will just about explore anything, and that includes this.
But I'm just kind of issuing a warning to those of you who are in the Bible Belt or feel your listeners may be offended by what they hear, and I was a little offended by some of what I heard.
Be wary, and you might want to have a tape standing by and run a different show and protect your listeners' ears.
Having given that warning, in a moment, we will sound the claxons and we'll go down fathoms and fathoms.
You'll see what I mean.
Here's how my guest, the one that's about to be on the air here, who we are going to call Officer X, got on the air.
He sent me an email reading as follows.
Art, I'm a ham radio operator, and I eliminated his call letters, and a former submarine communications officer, and I thought you might be interested in hearing about some very frightening things that happened with military radio in the 1980s, late 80s, such as a near-complete failure of the low-frequency radio systems used to communicate with SSBN submarines that brought the world to the brink of a nuclear war.
This event and many others were the primary reason why I left the military service as a potential for disaster became very clear to me.
Are you aware there is a second Russian Mir space station in orbit?
This station was in orbit as early as 1985 and its whereabouts in space carefully tracked by the U.S. government as it was dedicated to strictly military purposes.
I would be willing to speak on your show, provided we could protect my identity.
I am still bound by the top-secret SCI crypto clearances that I held while in the military.
While not active in the militia or any other anti-government movement, I can tell you I'm highly suspect of many things the government tells us, particularly with regard to communications and space.
And he signs it with his name for the purpose of this program.
He shall remain Officer X. Welcome to the program.
It's one of the unique branches of the service for that reason.
And so I volunteered and entered after completing basic training, that sort of thing, went to submarine school and learned the basics of submarines, that sort of thing.
And then went aboard, took my first active duty assignment, was on board the USS Ulysses S. Grant, which is SSBN 631.
Still commissioned, I believe, to this day, though probably not nearly as active.
It was a Poseidon missile submarine.
And it was quite old when I came on board.
It had probably been in service 15 years, which made it a pretty old ship.
And I served there.
I did five ballistic missile patrol.
Patrols being the missions that are involved in going out and keeping the vigil in case of a nuclear attack by the Russians or other enemies.
The patrol in question that I'll talk to you about later lasted over five months, and it was the longest patrol that I was on.
Later, when I served on board a fast attack submarine, the USS Dallas, they make what are called med runs or missions to the Mediterranean, and those can last seven, eight, nine months, sometimes even a year, though you're not underwater or even necessarily actively engaged that entire time.
I know only a very few basics about how we communicate with our submarines.
I know that in the upper Midwest, there is this incredible transmitter, an incredible antenna underground, I believe, that is designed to send a very slow, arduous form of communication that can be received at great depths in the ocean.
Effectively, ELF operates at any depth and was a considerable improvement in the reliability of the United States government to communicate with submarines under almost any condition.
And incidents like the one that I'll tell you about later probably prompted ELF, though I don't know that for certain.
ELF was in the testing phase whenever this incident occurred.
It was not active yet and so was not available to us.
And had it been available, the incident might have never occurred.
Actually, the primary method of communicating with submarines is via low-frequency radio waves, which are anywhere from, say, 15 kilohertz to 30 kilohertz, well below the AM broadcast band.
And there are large and very powerful transmitters.
For instance, in Cutler, Maine, which is basically the middle of nowhere, there is a very powerful, one of the world's most powerful transmitters that operates essentially 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
And it sends out, you're familiar with radio teletype or FSK frequency shift scheme, basically a teletype signal that is encrypted and it sends messages around the clock to submarines around the world.
There are also stations in Thursday, Scotland.
There's one in Hawaii, Australia for the Pacific Fleet.
And at one time there was one near Annapolis, Maryland, but I don't believe that it functions.
Those radio waves have the ability to penetrate saltwater, not to any depth like ELF does, but to a pretty good depth, sometimes as much as 100 feet underwater.
So it is possible to trail essentially a long wire behind a submarine.
The wire is submerged, but not very much.
It might be 50 feet below The surface, but the wire is then able to pick up those signals and essentially allow you to establish one-way communication with submarines around the clock.
And that's essential too.
People need to understand that most communications with submarines is of a one-way nature.
Your primary mission, if you're on a ballistic missile submarine, is to remain undetected.
Any radio transmission essentially could almost be instantly direction finding techniques using satellites could almost instantly pinpoint your location.
And there are a number of safeguards set up to ensure that messages, essentially messages like this are called emergency action messages or EAMs.
These are the kinds of messages that would trigger a nuclear response to an attack.
And because they are one-way in nature and cannot be confirmed, you can imagine there are all kinds of redundant safeguards built into that system to ensure that there are no accidental launches.
To my knowledge, that is probably not true at all.
In fact, all submarine commanders, all submariners worldwide have a great deal of autonomy.
It's one of the reasons why it's a fairly elite military force.
I would say that a captain of a nuclear submarine is probably the closest thing in real life to Captain Kirk or a Captain Picard that you would ever see.
You know, most commanders operate under strict control of their superiors and have very little decision-making authority.
Submarine commanders, because they cannot confirm their orders, because they cannot transmit without risking detection, essentially operate on their own.
They, of course, have orders that they follow for a given patrol, that sort of thing.
But in times of crisis, like the one that I will describe, there's a great deal of leeway there for all submarine commanders, Russian, United States, whatever.
And that autonomy is what makes them a very effective weapon and a very effective deterrent to nuclear war, but it's also what makes them extremely dangerous.
How undetectable are our submarines versus the Russians?
I know there was a big flap, and again, this was in the media, so we can talk about it, I'm sure, about some technology that passed from our country to Japan to the Russians that made the Russian submarines as quiet or nearly as quiet as ours.
And to be honest with you, Art, though, you know, I found my experience in the military to be very rewarding and very proud to be a qualified submariner and to have had that experience.
I have no real armchair detective interest in submarines.
I won't sit around the house and watch Sharks of Steel or read Tom Clancy novels.
I just really have no interest in them.
So I honestly don't follow developments in submarines very closely anymore.
Can you tell us anything about the capability of a Los Angeles-class submarine in terms of what they carry and what they can deliver and the firepower they carry?
Los Angeles-class submarines could also carry, forgive me here, I'll have to remember the actual designation.
They are Tomahawk cruise missiles.
And I believe the Los Angeles-class submarines could carry as many as four of those.
And those could be armed with conventional warheads, and more likely they were normally armed with nuclear warheads.
And in actuality, one of the reasons why, in fact, the primary reason why I left the service was because after the incident that we'll discuss later, I was questioned by one of my superior officers who basically asked, posed the question, did I believe in the mission of the United States Nuclear Navy, which was basically to retaliate against the Russian government in the event of a nuclear war?
And the inclusion of weapons like the Tomahawk cruise missile with nuclear capability is one of the reasons why I left the service.
Back now to Officer X, and let's pick up where we left off.
You said Tomahawk nuclear-tipped missiles, or that they could be, and they asked you if you were in concert with the mission, which could be retaliation.
In other words, the U.S. or one of our allies would be hit, and then your job would be to launch your nuclear weapons in retaliation, killing millions, no doubt, of people, but it would be in retaliation because the attack would have already occurred.
This culminated in the Air Force airstrike against Mr. Qaddafi that was ordered by President Reagan.
During this time, of course, there was stringent Russian objection to that policy and, in fact, to that whole line of discourse.
And that tension between the United States and Russia had built and built to the point that we were at a very high state of readiness.
I believe we were at DEF CON 3 at the time, which was a very high state of readiness.
And through a series of accidents, misadventures, and just plain bad luck, we, for a period of about six hours, lost all communications with the outside world.
We originally ran over our trailing wire antenna, which is very easy to do.
You can make a sudden turn, as we did, trying to avoid a surface contact, trying to avoid being detected.
We turned suddenly, and the antenna, which is hundreds of feet long, does not turn nearly as swiftly, and you can very easily run over it with your propeller and cut it.
And that's exactly what happened.
So momentarily, we lost communication.
That was not unusual.
It happened a lot.
We attempted to launch a secondary antenna, which is actually a buoy type thing, which floats just below the surface.
And in attempting to raise the buoy, the buoy malfunctioned.
Again, not uncommon.
But for both of them to happen that quickly was kind of strange.
So we didn't have communications.
But we really didn't have any reason to worry about it.
That was, you know, we could explain both of those incidents.
We replaced the wire antenna, which can be done inside the submarine, and we deployed a new trailing wire and slowed down so that it could float to the surface.
When this happened, we could not reacquire our signal locks.
We couldn't, you know, hear anybody, essentially.
That was very unusual.
Now, we did some tests to ensure that the equipment was working properly, that the antenna was working properly, etc.
And everything checked normal, but we had no reception.
We couldn't hear anybody.
And that was very unusual.
And you have to understand, if a submarine is out of communication for even a moment, that has to be reported to the captain, or excuse me, to the officer of the deck.
If you were out of contact for any extended period, that has to be reported to the captain, extended period being about 10 minutes.
At DEF CON 3, which is the high state of readiness we were at, it had to be reported immediately to the captain.
So this became kind of a big deal.
When 20 minutes had went by and we had been unable to reestablish communication, there was a lot of anxiety.
Compounding this was the fact that we had a hostile Russian contact, a surface ship, in the vicinity, very near us, and we were aware of that.
So going to the surface or near the surface to deploy another type of antenna to listen to shortwave, which is, you know, there are a lot of redundant systems to communicate with submarines.
Shortwave, satellites, just like you mentioned, long wave.
But we were precluded from doing that because of the high state of readiness and because of this surface contact.
If you presume the worst, which you have to, then obviously you're not going to go to the surface, particularly if you've got somebody dogging you on the surface.
So now again, to compound the situation, to make it even more unusual, is that we had a navigation officer who is essentially a department head and two steps below the captain.
There's the captain, the executive officer, and then there are department heads like the navigations officer, the weapons officer, the engineering officer.
The navigation officer was an older gentleman who had been passed up for command.
In other words, he was older than the captain, perhaps by ten years.
And he had been passed up for promotion and passed up for command of his own submarine.
And he was kind of bitter about that.
And he was not what I would call a very good officer.
And in fact, I did not have a lot of respect for him, even though he was my superior.
And he became very frightened.
He assumed the worst.
And you have to realize the situation was a lot more heated than any of you are aware of.
What you heard in the media about what was going on was probably a fraction of what really was going on.
And that, you know, is kind of my point in all this.
A lot goes on that, you know, by necessity, people are not aware of, shouldn't, probably shouldn't be aware of, you know.
And this was one of those situations.
So when this officer, the senior officer, the navigation officer, became extremely frightened, he really assumed that the worst had happened.
And you have to realize at this time, you know, I'm a fairly junior officer, and I'm in a panic working with my senior enlisted guys, trying to figure out what is wrong, you know, why we cannot receive radio signals.
And that's my primary concern.
But I am, you know, becoming increasingly aware that this officer is panicky.
The standard operating procedure in a situation like that is basically to go very, very deep and to wait because there's nothing else you can do.
You don't have authorization to release weapons.
You cannot come up and launch a raised periscope or another kind of antenna or send a message.
You can't do anything.
So you go deep and you wait and you hope that the signals come back.
So we did that for a period of about two hours.
And within this two-hour period, the navigation officer became so agitated that he went down to the wardroom where the officers eat their meals and actually went aft in the ship back towards the engineering compartments and the weapons compartments.
And he began to kind of talk up his version of what was happening in the outside world, essentially that we were at war and that, you know, life as we knew it had ceased to exist.
And there became, in this period of a few hours, a kind of a growing movement on board the ship that perhaps the thing to do would be to retaliate, to actually launch weapons.
Unfortunately, everybody in the ship does not have to agree.
About three or four key officers have to agree, and enough of the crew would have to be persuaded that it was the thing to do, because obviously three men can't launch missiles alone.
But yeah, it could happen.
And basically, the situation grew more and more heated.
The weapons officer essentially sided with the navigator and stated publicly that he believed the captain was wrong and that he was being too cautious and that he should go to the surface and try to establish communications, that he should do more to try to resolve the situation.
Essentially, under the rules of engagement at the time, he had no options.
His option was to go deep and wait.
And that was the option he exercised.
The problem became kind of this internal atmosphere in the submarine.
There was no problem with the regulations.
There was no problem with the safeguards.
All that was in place.
All that was working.
It was all fine.
But, you know, the internal politics, human nature was the problem.
And essentially, it got to the point where the crew was so agitated that the captain felt the need to post literally an armed guard at the small arms locker because the weapons officer has a key to that locker and so do a few other senior officers.
And he was really concerned.
He posted an armed guard at the small arms locker to make sure that no one gained access to these rifles and shotguns and 45s, that sort of thing.
And the situation continued.
It lasted about six hours and eventually ended up with heated, very passionate arguments on the CON, the control room center, between the navigations officer and the captain and the weapons officer and other people.
And eventually the executive officer, who was kind of a small, mouthy kind of guy, bookish kind of individual, really kind of took charge and became, in my eyes, maybe the hero of the whole situation.
He very calmly and very rationally stated what the options were and how that under naval regulations we really didn't have any other option and basically counseled the captain in a very wise way.
And the captain eventually made the decision that what would happen was that we would risk going to the surface to deploy another antenna, which was really contrary to what his options were.
But he felt like that with the internal situation, he didn't have a choice.
And he was fearful enough of that to disregard the standard operating procedures and go to the surface.
Not surface the submarine, but go close enough to the surface to deploy a periscope-like antenna that just barely broke the surface.
It's an HS antenna that receives shortwave.
When we did that, sure enough, the signals returned.
And I cannot tell you, Art, in a room that normally is clattering with five teletypes going all at the same time, silence in a room like that is deafening.
It was the most eerie thing I had ever heard.
I'd never heard that room be silent in my life.
And when we broke the surface, it takes a few minutes for the signals to lock up because they're encrypted.
They don't immediately start.
But about 45, 60 seconds after we surfaced, they started.
Teletype started working.
And we knew everything was okay.
Yeah, and absolute pandemonium breaking out on the ship.
Massive relief all the way around.
And then shortly after that, when we returned from the mission, by the way, we found out later that what had happened was that the antenna that we had deployed, the trailing web, was faulty.
It had a short.
Now, it has a circuit to test that, but it had shorted in such a way that the circuit to detect it didn't work.
So the antenna read normal, it appeared to be normal, but in fact, it did not function.
And that was compounded by the fact that the station in Thursday, Scotland, one of the stations, which should have never been off the air, especially in DEF CON 3, had an accident at the transmitter site that forced it off the air for a period of about 12 hours.
And it was the closest transmitter.
If it had been functioning, even with the antenna shorted, we probably would have still heard it.
But because it was down at that exact moment, we heard nothing.
So it was a series of things that went badly wrong.
But there was a board of inquiry, and you can imagine it was kind of a big deal that all this had transpired.
And eventually the navigation officer resigned from the Navy.
And I recall that after that action happened, that I approached the executive officer and I said something like, you know, I'm really glad that Commander so-and-so is leaving.
And, you know, I don't think that a man like that needs to be around nuclear weapons.
And his statement at the time was, the navigator was doing his duty.
The navigator was saying what he believed to be right with all of his heart and his conviction.
And his actions were motivated by the desire to do his duty.
And he addressed me and basically said, I believe your actions were motivated primarily by fear.
And, you know, the navigator was prepared to do his duty.
Well, basically, it was motivated by that incident, by, I guess, the realization that despite all the safeguards, that even if it was a very small percentage of a possibility that there could be an accidental relief, there was that possibility.
No matter how remote, that possibility existed, and that had been demonstrated very visibly to me.
And that terrified me.
The fact of or the thought of slaughtering millions of innocent people who have no more control over their government actions than you have over yours, to me was just terrifying.
I could not imagine being part of an organization that could put millions of people to death for no other reason than they happen to live in the wrong country.
Suppose, just for the sake of the question, that we had been at war.
Would you then be in concert with the mission to release, or even at that point, would it be, in your opinion, useless and slaughter to kill millions of people in retaliation?
In the process of this discourse, when there was all this discussion about what was going on in the outside world and therefore what we should do, of course, a lot of people were theorizing that, you know, basically we had no home to go home to and that everybody we knew and loved was dead.
Boy, if this one doesn't cause you to slow down, you can't be slowed my guest.
Is Officer X, a communications officer on the um Ulysses S. Grant and the Latinos class, Dallas, submarine.
He just finished describing an incident, in which for a period of six hours, the Ulysses S. Grant was out of communication, during the crisis with Libya.
During that time, a number of the crew, not hearing any communications at all, began to lean toward the idea of launching their nuclear weapons.
Fortunately, I guess you really wouldn't want to call this a comedy of errors because there was nothing funny about it.
But that ended, and they did get back in communication again, but it changed a lot of people.
Some left the service, including actually my guest.
For the purpose of anonymity, we're going to call him Officer X, and we're going to address that question here in a moment.
Back now to my guest, Officer X. Welcome back.
Let me read you a fax I just got, which is really the obvious, and see how you respond to it, okay?
It says, Hello, Art.
Please ask Officer X the following.
Considering the rather detailed information given about his education duty assignment, subnames, and official onboard duties, etc., why be anonymous?
By the end of his own introduction, Naval Intelligence would know exactly who you are interviewing.
Maybe were not to know who Mr. X is, Officer X, but if he's the real thing, you can be damn sure Naval Intelligence knows.
And to be quite frank with you, that's something that I've thought about almost since you contacted me.
In reality, when I sent you the email, it was after a particularly long day of having some kind of philosophical discussions along these lines with people that I used to serve with.
And quite frankly, I didn't really think you'd ever respond to the email.
And when you did, after a considerable delay of time, I was kind of taken aback and really kind of debated whether or not I wanted to talk to you at all about it for just those reasons.
I don't have any desire to have my life made difficult by the United States government or anybody else.
I have no doubt that there was some, you know, that's a very common thing in the military.
If there's an accident or a breach of operational procedure or whatever, any kind of an incident, really, it's written up and widely reported so that everyone can learn from others' mistakes.
So I have no doubt that that was reported widely, at least within the submarine community, for just that reason.
And in some ways, I suppose all that it really proves is that the system works.
Gentlemen who are selected to be submarine commanders are a very special and unique type of human being.
And I would assume that that's probably true for Russian submarine commanders as well.
And basically, these are individuals who can handle those kinds of stresses and those kinds of situations and deal with them in an effective and cool-headed, logical kind of way.
Having said that, obviously, even in your case as an officer, you would have been, they would have had a great big file on you, and I'm sure lots of psychological profiling is done and that sort of thing on anybody who serves on a nuclear submarine, correct?
Well, I mean, I think, you know, when I entered and went through the psychological evaluation, I did believe in the mission in a way.
I think the problem with the military, especially nuclear war in the military, is that it's kind of an abstract idea.
You know, you train for it, you talk about it, you discuss it.
But the consequences of that action are almost never discussed in military circles.
In other words, when you're going through training and you're discussing what would be involved in launching nuclear weapons, no one sits there and says, by the way, do you realize that if you take this action that millions of people you don't even know will die?
Nobody says that because basically no one believes it'll ever happen.
And so it's kind of a game, I guess almost.
And I hate to phrase it that way, but I don't really know how else to put it.
It was never real to me.
It was always an abstract ideal.
I entered The service because I wanted the training, I wanted the job skills, I wanted whatever.
And the thing that I mentioned about the Tomahawk missiles on the Dallas that was also very frightening to me was that at the time when I left the service, when I entered the service, there was one prevailing theoretical, tacticianal type train of thought.
It was called MAD, or Mutually Assured Destruction.
You launch your weapons, and I'll launch all of mine, and we'll all die.
And the theory there is that that deters anybody from launching any weapons.
But when I left the service, there was this beginning to develop a theory, a tactical theory, that perhaps a very few, a very small number of nuclear weapons could be released to address a political situation like the one in Libya or others, and that you could get away with that.
In other words, that if you launched only one nuclear weapon, maybe the Russians didn't want to fight bad enough to launch all of theirs.
If the Koreans decided they wanted to come rushing across the DMZ and that's a distinct possibility, I would think that with 40 or 50,000 U.S. troops in South Korea, there would be some quick thought about the limited use of nuclear weapons, of course, with some concern about China becoming involved.
But again, with the same theory that China would not want to enter the mad scenario, so they'd stay out.
And, you know, just me as an individual, that train of thought, to me, seemed to border on madness.
I don't know any other way to put it.
I firmly believed that if you launched even one, that the possibility became very distinct that they'd all go up and that, you know, we would all be in a lot of trouble.
And so I left.
You know, when my tour of duty was over, I resigned.
On that day, going back now before your resignation, but going back to that day on the grant, if it had gone the other way and somehow the captain himself had become convinced and the preparations became underway to launch nuclear weapons, could you have done it?
You know, while we were returning to Scotland, there was talk of that.
And, you know, in a very kind of hush-hush kind of way, no one wanted to openly stand up and say that because it's tantamount to, you know, you would probably be released from submarine service because essentially you'd be viewed as somebody who wasn't willing to do the mission that you were there to do to begin with.
So while there was talk of it, it was not very open talk.
Well, at that moment, during those hours, for those who believed it, the assumption would have had to have been their mothers, their fathers, their wives, their daughters and sons were all dead.
And well, I think maybe the entire reason why I even wanted to talk to you about this was because I think people have this notion now that because the Cold War is over, that they're safe and that the chances of nuclear weapons ever being used by any country are slim.
And I think, in fact, quite the opposite is true.
I think that you mentioned Korea, and I think that's a very real possibility that you would have some sort of limited use of nuclear weapons there that could escalate.
While I think Russia probably has a good handle on their nuclear assets, I think some of the other republics do not have a good handle on their nuclear assets.
I think there's every possibility that there are nuclear assets that are missing.
Unfortunately, you have a situation in some of the former Soviet republics where you have submarine crews, for instance, who haven't been paid in eight months, and yet they're still out on a submarine.
And that submarine, conceivably anyway, has nuclear weapons.
And desperate times make desperate men, and that sometimes translates into desperate action.
You might be tempted to sell one of those or to lease one of those.
And that's a very frightening possibility.
I think unfortunately it's a real possibility, and people should be aware of it.
And unfortunately, the government doesn't always tell us what's going on.
Well, I guess the first three or four hours I primarily was concerned with the equipment and what was going on in my own little part of the world.
I felt a tremendous need to restore communications because basically I felt like I was letting the captain in and that I was hampering his decision-making and basically just not doing my job and I was not comfortable with that.
After a period of about three or four hours, it became clear that the discussions that were taking place outside of the radio room were becoming pretty heated and that it was maybe a bigger deal than I thought it was.
And that there were actually, I never believed, I want to tell you, I never believed for a second that the Russians had launched anything.
I believed that it was purely and simply a mechanical, technical failure, an error of some kind, and that absolutely nothing was wrong.
And I guess maybe that's because of, you know, if you grow up around radio since you're seven years old, I've seen them work very well, and I've seen them break, and I've seen propagation do all kinds of crazy, weird things.
And, you know, I just, I didn't believe it, not even for a second.
And so, you know, I never really even considered the possibility that the unthinkable had happened.
But I did consider the possibility that not everybody felt that way.
I think that military leaders and political people must be held accountable to their citizens.
I think that to a certain extent that the public has a right to know if theories of war are being developed that maybe don't make a lot of sense, like the kind of limited nuclear engagements that we were talking about.
Unfortunately, I'm not a person who believes in conspiracies or things like that.
I hate to hear people talk about the media having an agenda or politicians having an agenda because basically I don't think things like that are possible.
I don't think you can get hundreds of people to keep anything secret.
And the media and political figures are basically made up of individual human beings who are just trying to live their lives every day like you and I are.
And I think the danger of that is that sometimes we don't hold those people as accountable as we should.
And we think things can never happen.
The one constant throughout all of history is human nature.
When all the senators got together in Rome and decided they would kill Caesar, that was politics.
That was men who wanted to be powerful, acting together.
And basically, nothing has changed since then.
Politics is still politics, and men still want to be powerful, and men will still do desperate things to become powerful.
And people shouldn't forget that.
That's kind of what I'm trying to get across, is that unfortunately there are people in the military who were trying to advance their own career by expressing these kind of outrageous theories of war because it got them noticed, it got them attention, and it helped advance their career.
But if that kind of thinking grows and becomes the norm, then all of a sudden, if there ever is an invasion in Korea, perhaps you have a commander on the ground who thinks about using a nuclear weapon.
Well, let us discuss the philosophical implications of that for a moment.
I can almost understand the limited use of a nuclear weapon in that case.
For example, if you had a half a million North Koreans crossing the border, probably slaughtering 40 or 50,000 Americans and untold numbers of South Koreans, it wouldn't be an easy choice.
In other words, do you sacrifice those 40 to 50,000 Americans lives, or do you use a weapon that will end a conflict right there and then and save their lives?
And I mean, those are kind of advanced, you know, military, tactical-type discussions, and obviously philosophical discussions.
And that's, you know, I think every individual has to kind of figure out where they stand.
You know, obviously where I stood was that I think that's ludicrous.
I think that using one, unfortunately, there's another axiom, kind of like MAD, that basically says, use them or lose them.
And you hear that a lot in the military.
In other words, if somebody launches a nuclear weapon and I don't use mine, the next nuclear weapon launched may be launched at my launch sites or at my submarine or at my whatever.
I believe I mentioned to you when we started the conversation that I would be able to continue until about 2 a.m. and that I had a project that required me to be at work fairly early in the morning.
While we were away at the break, I had a call-waiting call that came through, and there is a situation at work that's going to require my attention.
I'm going to have to leave and go there now.
And I apologize for that.
I will attempt to listen to the show on the way to work and see if I can glean anything from your other response.
I apologize if that leaves you in a bit of a lurch for programming.
That is Officer X. And I guess we could imagine, particularly based on his last comment, we could imagine, or I guess I could imagine, that he has been contacted.
Now, I have no way of knowing that is true.
But if I were forced to hazard a guess, I would guess that he has been contacted, just was contacted, and told to shut his mouth.
So I guess we should consider ourselves fortunate to have heard what we heard.
Because indeed, in his original email to me, I quote, Also, are you aware there is a second Russian Mir space station in orbit?
The station was in orbit as early as 1985 and its whereabouts in space carefully tracked by the U.S. government as it was dedicated to strictly military purposes.
So I'm just guessing now, and I'm just speculating now, and it may well be the man was simply called away to work early.
But I don't think so.
And I also think that what you just heard over the last hour and 40 minutes was absolutely real.
In fact, the first hour of programming this evening was about as riveting as I've ever heard radio programming be.
And I believed every word of it.
And I'm going to contemplate what I'm going to do with that hour.
Anyway, I would like your assessment of what you just heard.
What do you think happened there just now?
Let us go to open lines.
Anything you would like to talk about is Fairgame.
Again, I would like to warn my affiliates and, for that matter, my audience, about a show coming up tomorrow night.
Tomorrow night, I got a very, very serious facts earlier today, and I followed up by making a phone call.
I'm telling you, what you're going to hear tomorrow night, what we are going to hear is going to shock you, upset you, surprise you, maybe disgust you.
And I'm still contemplating what I heard from this young lady today.
In fact, I'll tell you what I heard.
She writes, I'm 32 years old.
My coven name is Harlot.
I'm a witch of the most unholy kind.
I am by no means a goddess.
I use no crystal balls, tricks, nor treats.
I'm from a long line of witches and warlots.
She gives a number.
The coven of the unholy, hail Satan.
Now, let me say, Art, I am a good witch by no means.
Even if I do something that someone would consider good, I do with evil in my heart.
Hail Satan.
When I called her, she said to me, I understand you've been on vacation and you were just at the place where Christ was born and then crucified.
She said, I would love to visit that location myself so I could desecrate it.
But if you have a station that is in the Bible belt and your listeners would be horrendously offended, then make note now and run some alternative programming.
So I guess she is a devil worshipper.
I asked her about Wicca and she had some pretty nasty things to say about Wicca.
And I might add that I've also scheduled a couple of Wicca guests, you know, as we approach Halloween.
But this one tomorrow night, this is something else indeed.
One more note before we go to the phones.
That is that I'm going to be doing the only book signing I will ever do for this book, The Quickening, on the New York Times bestseller list.
I'm going to do one, one, one book signing.
And it is in a really neat place just north of San Diego.
Where, by the way, we just got a call from KO Geo Kogo with a big congratulations for the latest survey numbers that just came rolling in.
where we are once again way out far and away number one in san diego so the book signing is actually going to be just to the north in encinitas california it's going to be at barnes and noble which is located at 1040 north Camino Real.
Now, I will be there at 10 o'clock sharp.
My advice to you is to Get there early, as early as possible, and I will sign my little heart away at the very least.
If you can imagine this, I'm going to sign books from 10 o'clock in the morning till at least 8 o'clock at night, which is a good solid 10 hours of signing books.
Pity my poor hand.
But I am going to do that, and I will simply do as many as I'm humanly able to do personally to you.
So it is the one time I'm going to do this.
I'm never going to do it again.
It's a one-shot deal.
Barnes and Noble, this Saturday.
Today is already, well, it's still Wednesday in this time zone, but it'll be Saturday at 10 a.m. in Encinitas.
So if there's any way you can pencil it in on your calendar, I would love to see you there.
All right, we've got lots of reason now to go to the phone lines.
Man, what an interview.
And I'm going to have to sit back and see what I think about what we just heard for a while.
West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Good morning.
I didn't push the button.
There, now.
West of the Rockies, you're on the air now, I think.
Hey, about 10 last night, I was kind of, I don't know, I was kind of surprised that she was upset that she felt that she was upset at you because you were mad at her or something.
But she was, you know, I had a little more respect for her up until she kind of was upset because something you did.
I didn't really understand it.
But anyway, hey, you know, I wanted to ask you, one time, I know you're not going to take any more Spanish words on the phone because one time someone pulled a trick on you.
The Air Force says two airmen, one, a visiting pilot from Britain's Royal Air Force, were killed when a T-38 training jet crashed after apparently colliding in mid-air with an F-16 over Southern California's Edwards Air Force Base.
Yet another military accident.
Boy, there have been an awful lot of military accidents going on lately.
Well, I think one of two things occurred, and this is just me speculating.
Either over the period of the hour and 40 minutes we did the interview, either A, he became scared on his own, or B, he got a call, as he mentioned, during the break, but it wasn't from work.
So, yeah, that was the only thing I saw that was wrong.
I just, you know, and the things about the pointing wires, hell yeah, we used to cut those things all the time, especially if you were to broach every once in a while, which means your sail kind of sticks out of the water a little bit when you're in rough seas.
Maybe he's hoping there'll be some kind of change.
I'm not really sure what kind of change can change the hearts and the minds of individuals faced in a crisis situation the way he was at that point.
So I'm sitting here trying to think, you know, his motivation might have been to produce some sort of change in procedure or the thinking of the military, he complained about that, that a limited nuclear war might be possible or is becoming more possible now.
unidentified
Yeah, but he was a lieutenant, junior grade in the service, you know, coming on the air and saying, oh, that's not going to change a thing.
They're pretty, you know, military set in its ways.
You know, a typically traditional institution.
And, you know, they're going to listen to the general before they listen to Lieutenant J.G. So.
We just got finished talking with a man who I call Officer X, who was a communications officer on board the USS or the Ulysses S. Grant, a submarine, and the Dallas, a Los Angeles-class submarine.
And he spent about an hour and 40 minutes detailing one of the scariest damn things I've ever heard, a period of time when they were out of communication due to a non-comedic series of errors that resulted in the disagreement among many of the ship's officers about whether or not to release nuclear devices.
I think it was absolutely real, and I'll leave it at that.
If you didn't catch that first hour, and you catch the first hour as the last hour of the show, then you still have an opportunity to hear it.
I'm sort of flirting with the idea of repeating that hour sometime in the next couple of hours because it was so incredibly, incredibly, incredibly dramatic.
But it will repeat as a matter of course.
You know what, though?
I could repeat that hour, say, in about an hour, and then change the course of the repeat show toward the end.
I might do that.
Just in case there's audience out there that didn't hear that, that was one of the damnedest hours I've ever run on talk radio.
Anyway, we're going to open the lines here in a moment.
By the way, I am booking an interesting guest next week sometime.
There was an Associated Press story titled, Astronaut Says Aliens Have Landed.
And I'm going to read it to you now once again from Phoenix, Arizona Associated Press.
Former astronaut Edgar Mitchell is among those who believe aliens have crash-landed on Earth.
Mitchell, who in 1971 became the sixth man to walk on the moon, wants congressional hearings into what he calls a secret U.S. government that knows all about it.
He believes some military and other planes use technology derived from alien spacecraft that have been captured and dissected.
Quote, when I went to the moon 26 years ago, it was conventional wisdom, religiously and philosophically, that we were still the biological center of the universe.
Mitchell told a spiritual gathering called the Prophets' Conference on Saturday, continuing the quote, few, if any, thinking, knowledgeable people accept that theory anymore.
Well, as I told you what I would do, I followed up and I called Edgar Mitchell, Dr. Mitchell, and he said, give me a call Tuesday and I'd be glad to appear on the program sometime next week.
So we'll probably arrange that and ask him about this story.
When he heard about the story, he chuckled a little bit the moment I mentioned the Associated Press.
So we'll see what there is to it, but we'll have Dr. Mitchell on the air next week, I think.
Officer X's statement, quote, nobody believes it will ever happen, end quote, referring, of course, to nuclear exchanges or war, would make a great title for a book about nuclear topics.
Your guest's articulate and rational thought process is chillingly similar to Dr. Michio Kaku's view of the slippery slope upon which nuclear capability rests.
I was wondering what Mr. X's educational background is and if he was exposed to any formal ethics training.
That's from Tom in Tucson.
Tom, because of the abrupt manner in which he terminated the interview, we cannot ask that.
But again, because of the abrupt way in which the interview was terminated, I think that I lean toward believing that somebody made contact with him.
And I wonder what you believe.
One other item I'll throw in, then we'll go back to the phone lines.
President Clinton proposed a plan today to avert the, quote, unacceptable risk, end quote, of global warming, but immediately drew heat from many sides.
His proposal, Clinton's, for a treaty to fight global warming would require industrial countries to limit emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2008 to 2012.
It would also require reducing emissions after that, but some environmentalists said the proposal, which falls far short of the goals sought by other major industrial countries, was insufficient to win international approval or to prevent environmental disaster, while some U.S. business lobbyists said it could wreck the U.S. economy.
And I would like to talk with you about this a little bit.
I think the argument about global warming is a continuing valid disagreement.
In other words, whether it's real or not.
I think what the two sides, and I mentioned this last night, the two sides do not disagree about one thing, and that is our climate is changing.
There's no question about it.
Our climate is changing.
And it seems like advocates on both sides of the global warming issue agree on that one fact.
They simply disagree about why it is changing.
Now, in 40 to 45 years of use at present levels, we are going to run out of oil.
And a good friend of mine the other day said it would make an awfully good topic to ask your audience, since we're not developing alternative methods at any great rate at the moment, what's going to happen when we run out of oil?
That's a really good question.
What is going to happen?
When United Airlines and Air France and British Airways and Southwest and TWA, when they don't fly anymore, when ships don't have fuel to cross our oceans with cargo, when cars don't have gasoline to move, what will happen?
Will we worldwide regress to an earlier period?
So it seems to me one of two things must occur in the next, oh, I don't know, four decades.
Either we've got to develop clean energy sources, or we're going to undergo a massive change in our standard of living.
What do you think would happen?
I mean, really, particularly in our society where we are particularly dependent on power and transportation, which is provided by the use of fossil fuels.
Today, in the President's speech about global warming, the President mentioned that because of the efforts of reducing the levels of CFCs in our atmosphere, our ozone layer has begun to thicken.
Quote, the ozone hole over Antarctica is as severe as ever this year.
New Zealand's Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research said Friday.
Institute scientists at Scott Base on the frozen continent have reported readings of the ozone layer's thickness at close to record lows, and satellite data from NASA show the ozone hole covering 9.65 million square miles.
The extent and severity of the 1997 ozone hole is about the same as in each of the past five years, about 60% less ozone than prior to 1980.
Do you think, do you believe that man's presence on Earth, whether it's ozone or global warming or whatever it is, do you believe that our presence is what's causing the change in our climate?
You know, I really, really, really do not believe in channeling.
You know that.
I don't believe in channeling.
I don't dismiss channeling altogether.
I'll tell you why I'm saying this.
I don't dismiss it altogether.
I simply believe that there is a very great deal of room for fraud.
You know, that a lot of people who claim to be channelers, oh, let me go into a trance.
Here I am, the great Rosinsky from the Roman era, and I'm going to tell you, you know, that kind of thing.
I think there's a lot of room for fraud, and so I generally tend to dismiss channelers.
And my very own sister, who lives in Berkeley, is a channeler.
So I dismiss it.
I don't embrace generally information that comes from so-called channeled sources.
That doesn't mean there may not be valid channelers.
It just means there's so much bunk out there that you can't separate the wheat from the chaff.
Now, having said that, this book that I wrote, The Quickening, which unfortunately is unfolding now as absolutely true, what was written is unfolding before my eyes in a way that damn near scares the you know what out of me and when I wrote the book it wasn't
great labor it poured out of me it just came out now it may well be that I had simply mentally prepared over the years having talked about this subject so much that it just gushed out but there have been a few quiet moments where even I have wondered if the information came totally from me so now you see my comments about about channeling.
I don't want to believe that this information came sourced from anywhere but my own little brain.
But it came out too easily, too quickly.
And so I have a few little reservations about its source.
Strange, huh?
Anyway, that is the book.
It is called The Quickening.
It is rising rapidly on the bestseller lists right now on the Business New York Times bestseller list, number four.
It's number four.
And I'm going to do one repeat, one and only one ever book signing for The Quickening.
It's going to be in Southern California at or in at Barnes and Noble at 1040 North El Camino Real in Encinidas.
I'll be there at 10 o'clock Saturday morning, this coming Saturday morning.
And if there is any way you can make it, I recommend everybody come early.
If there's any way you can make it, I will sit there and I will sign books for as long as humanly possible.
Well, recall that even Dr. Michio Kaku, one of the nation's premier physicists, scientists, suggests that though we are on the threshold of becoming a Type 1 civilization,
we're presently a Type Zero, the odds of our attaining Type 1 civilization status, in other words, getting past the possibility of blowing ourselves up, the chances of that are very, very slim.
He's hopeful, but remember, he said the chances are very, very slim.
I hope we make it, but I'm not sure.
unidentified
You'll listen to Art Bell somewhere in time on Premiere Radio Networks.
Tonight's an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from October 22nd, 1997.
Without your love, oh, baby, don't leave me this way.
I can't think I surely need your tender care.
Don't leave me this way.
Oh, baby, my heart is all blowing in love with you.
You started the fire down in my soul.
Now can't you see it's burning out of control?
You can dance, you can die.
You can dance, you can dance, you can dance.
See that girl, watch that sea.
Digging, dancing, queen.
Friday night and the lights are low.
Looking out for a place to go.
Where the place of art music, getting in the stream.
You'll come to look for a king.
with me.
Anybody could be that guy!
Pre-Vear Radio Networks presents Art Bell somewhere in Time.
Tonight's program originally aired October 22nd, 1997.
I'll tell you what I'm going to do, and I don't do this kind of thing very frequently.
The first hour of the program was so dramatic, so important, and so real that I think at 2 a.m. Pacific time, or in a little less than an hour and a half, as the last hour of the normal show, I'm going to start with the first hour because I want the latter audience to be able to hear what occurred in that first hour.
And I'm telling you, run a tape, prepare yourself to hear something that's going to scare the living tissue out of you.
So we'll do that.
If you've missed it, then you haven't missed it because I'm going to rearrange the replay schedule.
I was just I guess the reason I was calling was I'd like to see if you would be interested in having some guests on that are not aware that I'm calling you who have a different perspective, I'd say, on the UFO phenomenon.
If I understand it correctly, it's essentially that he does believe in the abductions.
However, he feels that rather than being extraterrestrials or extra-dimensional beings as the one-caller, I guess, from the Payphone when you're showing off the air would suggest, he feels that it's more likely an extension of the military and the CIA's MKUltra experimentations and mind control.
Mind control.
And I think one of he quotes from the Zero Project.
Yeah, the other thing was I guess another reason why he feels that way is I guess people like William Cooper, who are fairly prominent in the UFO lecture circuit, he feels that a lot of these people have military intelligence backgrounds.
And that's a red flag, I guess, for him.
I think you might have said at the beginning of the evening that the guest that you had on was going to speak about, at one point, Star Wars technology, how he's skeptical about that.
Obviously, well, I shouldn't say obviously, but in my opinion, somebody got to him.
unidentified
Yeah.
Well, there's another researcher, an author, Alex Constantine, who's the author of Psychic Dictatorship in the USA, as well as Barbara Honeger, who wrote The October Surprise and was in the Reagan Justice Department from 80 to 83,
have spoken about this, and they both feel, if I'm not mistaken, that the money that was supposedly going into Star Wars research was actually going into mind control technology and non-lethal weaponry and areas in that regard.
Sorry, I have numbers for them if you'd like those off the air that I could.
Now, a lot of people, I've got a special fax machine provision that puts any incoming facts into memory, and anything in excess of three pages is wiped out before it prints, so I never see it.
So no matter what you do, do not send more than three pages, or I'll not see it.
People call me up all the time to see my facts.
No.
How many pages did you send?
30.
Well, no, I didn't see it because the machine didn't print it.
Obviously, there's a limit to how much paper can be consumed, so I have that provision in my facts machine.
And this one time when he was on leave, he came to see me, and I said, how do you feel being a navigator on a nuclear sub?
Right.
Because we were a Catholic school.
And I had hoped that I had given him some kind of ethical training as a child.
And he told me, he said, he was given a questionnaire in which he was asked what he would do if communications were blocked out and his commander told him to navigate a missile toward a target that he knew personally would kill innocent people.
He said he was called in by the brass, and they said, that you are the kind of person we want on these submarines because we don't want trigger-happy guys.
But as my guest, and you will hear it because I have decided I'm going to repeat that one hour, about an hour from now, I'm really going to do a lot of thinking about what this man said.
And the situation that he really thought that he might have been in, and a lot of people on the Ulysses S. Grant were in, was that nuclear war had already occurred and that their mission was retaliation.
No signals, no shortwave, no broadcast, no military signals.
They thought, at least some of the crew obviously thought, that nuclear war had already occurred and that they should carry out their mission and launch their special so-called weapons.
And, you know, I sat here thinking myself when this man was speaking how I would feel about that.
In an all-out exchange, or after roughly the land arm of our nuclear triad had been used and the air arm, that there might be cities more or less left, and that their mission would be to destroy those cities, along no doubt with military targets, but make no doubt.
You know, there's no doubt about it.
I mean, Moscow and Ladovost and no doubt St. Petersburg and other civilian areas would be without doubt targeted.
And so would you, could you, under those conditions, push a button killing millions of people?
It's not an easy answer.
It would not be for me.
Even after I knew my relatives, my mother, my son, my wife, my family were gone, could you continue the madness?
Could you extend the madness?
Could you push the button and kill millions of people who might be very much in disagreement with their government's policy?
Right now, I'm working three jobs just trying to make ends meet and to see all those crazy ways that we're living stuff will be a refresher for me.
And I wanted to ask you, when you had Merle Hagert on before, you had said that you were going to try doing that cayenne pepper, lemonade, and water for a while.
Tonight, featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from October 22nd, 1997.
I see them blue for me and you.
and i think to myself what a wonderful world I see the skies so blue.
The skies so white, the brightness of day, the dogs say goodbye, and I think to myself, What a wonderful world The colours of the rainbow so pretty in the sky on
the floor You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks.
Tonight's an on-tour presentation of Coast to Coast AM from October 22nd, 1997.
Dear Mr. Bell, you should try to call Officer X back later and see what happened to him.
I wouldn't give up until I find out you owe him and your listeners that much.
Well, I doubt he'll tell me, call her, Faxer.
He goes on, I have no doubt that the Navy Command faxed an arrest warrant to the local marshal where Officer X lives.
If the Marshal was closed or not accessible, they faxed an arrest warrant to the local police or sheriff, who went forthwith emergency call status to arrest Officer X. I was shocked that more was not done by you and Officer X to conceal his identity.
It is a no-brainer that Naval Intelligence could figure out who he is without a doubt.
But I believe your phones are wiretapped anyway, so that only made their work easier.
It could not be coincidence that he was cut off right when he began to tell what he knows about an additional Mir space station.
The government probably already has a continuous wiretap on your telephones, no doubt, and already knew who he was before you put him on the air.
That may well be.
Well, let me tell you this.
I discussed with this officer earlier in the day extensively the fact that obviously there was going to be enough information given regarding the boats he served on and the positions he served in, even though there may have been 30 or 40 officers with regard to Grant in and out, obviously they can identify him.
He knew that.
He knew that.
And we talked about it.
And it was his choice to go on the air with that information.
That was his choice.
And he was fully aware of the risks involved with regard to identifying himself.
So he had no illusions about that.
He chose to go on with that information for you based on his philosophical and ethical decision, no doubt not made easily.
I'm not sure that I agree with him.
And I'm not sure I disagree with him.
I'm going to be somewhat thoughtful on the matter, but I surely believe it was the absolute truth.
It certainly was as dramatic as radio comes.
And it should be provocative, and we should all think about what he had to say.
We came that close.
And that is why I'm going to repeat the hour.
Because it should be heard.
It's not going to do any more or less in terms of identifying him than has already been done.
Wasn't there a time when, was it Roosevelt went and had it to where they went and did some kind of thing where if people had gold, they'd go to jail and a big fine and all that?
Well, you know, it's written that in them days which we're in now, it says that people's going to be cast in their gold and their silver in the streets.
And I think I'd rather have a garbage can full of rice and beans versus a whole bunch of gold.
All right, so if you had a $20 bill back then and you had saved that bill all this time, today, what would you get for that $20 bill?
unidentified
Yeah, you're right on that.
But you know, also back in them days, people could go and build a little wheelbarrow and go pick some apprils and they could stand out on a street corner and make a day's ration to feed themselves.
But they're making it now to where people can't even work for themselves.
You know, they're like tying people's hands in behind their backs, you know, to where everything's got to be all accounted for.
You know what I'm talking about?
It's like they discourage you on even wanting to start a business.
We live in a very fragile civilization from a lot of points of view.
Have you heard the figures on how many people in America today live from payday to bayday and how many people would go under very quickly if the economy turned sour and they lost their job within a very short time, indeed, they would lose their home, their car or cars if they have them, and just about everything else they have.
In other words, they have no reserves.
Americans are not saving.
It's a very dangerous, very tenuous situation.
As long as the economy remains basically sound, it should be okay.
But any sort of downturn would produce dramatic, immediate results for a lot of people.
And we were talking about one of your colleagues, I think, said something about when they clone you, that part of your spirit would go with that clone.
And for any of you who would like to order a copy of a program that we have done, Sean David Morton, Gordon Scallion, Michael, Gordon Scallion, whatever.
Gordon Michael Scallion.
East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
Good morning.
Hello, hello.
Goodbye.
Wildcard Line, you're on the air.
Hi.
unidentified
Hi, Art.
With respect to this global warming issue, I think this is something that's been going on since the very beginning of time.
After all, we've gone through innumerable ice ages and warmings.
Were there despicable lies told by people on the right about Somalia and our mission there and what we were going to do and when we were going to leave?
unidentified
People on the right said we had no business being there in the first place.
I know, but what I'm saying is, if you're going to call a troop extension wherever it occurs, a despicable lie, well, then these despicable lies have occurred on both sides of the aisle, haven't they?
unidentified
Yes.
Yes.
But what's going on here with this global warming thing is what they want to do is impose an energy tax on us.
They want to cut down and chop down our standard of living to those of some mud-hut third world country and to bill and recovery.
All right, let me stop you there and ask you a question.
Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that we continue as we are now, allowing population to increase, allowing that population to continue to use fossil fuels at an ever-increasing rate.
What do you think that's going to lead to?
unidentified
I don't think that that's going to particularly lead to anything in this country.
The most population increases are coming from other places on this Earth.
But this is being used as an excuse, and this is my number two, this is being used as an excuse to hand over to the one-world odor of the United Nations that which has up until now been our sovereignty.
The sovereignty of our constitutional republic is being handed over to these one-world odor bureaucrats of the United Nations, which Bill Clinton is in lockstep with.
And he has doled out our troops in 100 here, 200 there, all over the world.
We have troops in over 100 countries.
This coming from a man who did not want to go to Vietnam himself.
I mean, talk about a despicable liar.
He's also a coward, and he's a murderer.
Talking about Waco.
But this global warming is a farce.
Anybody that falls for it is a sucker, and I feel sorry for them.
And I am here to help them, to show them the way to the truth.
We have only in the last couple of decades been able to see things from above, from in orbit.
We've only in the last couple of decades been, we've only had the capability to see thinning patches in the ozone layer.
They have always been there.
They have not just recently got there.
They've always been there.
But, you know, tell that to Woody Gore.
You know, this is being used against us in a hysterical campaign of lies, disinformation, and half-truth, which is to destroy the sovereignty of our constitutional republic and to drive our standard of living down to that of some mud-hut third world country.
I wanted to let you go ahead and get that out because I wanted everybody to hear that.
Now, that is the standard ideological myopic view of somebody on the far right who, with blinders on, will suggest that everything that is being suggested by anybody who has an environmental consciousness of any sort is an absolute lie designed to simply destroy our sovereignty,
I believe he mentioned, and reduce our standard of living to that of a mud-hut third world nation.
His words.
There's a lot of that point of view out there, and it's pretty frightening as far as I'm concerned.
And I will ask the rest of you again now, because I think it is a very important question.
Do you or do you not believe that the climate change which is underway right now is at least in part due to the activities of man?
Wanted to make a quick comment on your guest tomorrow.
I was hoping to be able to get through to talk to her, but I don't know if I will.
So I'll pose a couple of questions to you that you may ask her if you wish.
Sure.
One thing that you need to know is that if, as you said earlier when you were talking about her, that you might be slightly afraid, perhaps, of having her on, is that there is no reason for you to be afraid.
You are, in your body, you reign supreme.
There is nothing that anyone can do that you do not want them to.
So there is no way, unless you say, okay, and be that, you know, whether subconsciously or consciously, go ahead, put a hex on me or, you know, do your worst to me.
Yes.
Unless you, you know, want her to do this, there's nothing that she can do or her coven, no matter how powerful they think they are.
I'm not afraid to explore anything, and I know that a lot of people are going to be disturbed by what I do tomorrow night.
I got a fax earlier today, which I will read to you, and I will read it to you so that you might be warned.
And I advise my affiliates to listen to what I'm about to read.
I advise you, the listening audience, to listen, to give you every opportunity to tune out, or to give my affiliates an opportunity not to run tomorrow night's show, but to run something else if you think your audience can't handle it.
Here is what she wrote.
Hi, Mr. Bell.
My name is Blank.
I'm not going to give her name.
I'm 32 years old.
My coven name is Harlot.
I am a witch of the most unholy kind.
I am by no means a goddess.
I use no crystal balls, tricks, nor treats.
I am from a long line of witches and warlocks, and so forth.
She then gives her address and phone number, and goes on, the coven of the unholy, hail Satan.
Now let me say, Art, I am a good witch by no means.
Even if I do something that someone would consider good, I do with evil in my heart, hail Satan.
That's pretty serious.
So I called her and had about a, well, I don't know, 10 or 15-minute conversation with her.
And when I was done, I felt like I had talked with somebody truly devoted to pure evil.
So tomorrow night I am going to explore this and consider yourself to have received fair warning.
All right, so that was somebody who was going to tell us something, no doubt relating to Officer X, and decided when I didn't alter his voice not to proceed.
Well, the soul, we really have an understanding of the soul as being spiritual or something of the spirit.
Where our soul, if we can really understand ourselves as being sensual beings or sensory beings, and then having being a sensory being rather than a spiritual being.
And as we develop our senses and tweak them to a very, very high degree, what happens is we start to get the impression of a spirit or a spiritual entity.
Where actually what it is is just the senses highly developed.
All right, I think that's quite reasonable, and I don't reject it.
I don't necessarily embrace it, but I don't reject it.
And I think right now, science regarding the possibility of cloning human beings, for example, taking cells from you, and growing an exact duplicate of you, minus ahead, minus a central nervous system, is jumping way too far ahead of our understanding of what a soul is.
And until we have a better understanding of what it is and what it isn't, to do such a thing even causes me great pause.
Here is a fact I feel I should read.
We're about to repeat an extremely unnerving one-hour segment with Officer X. High Art, Officer X did not do a very good job at remaining anonymous.
At least anyone with whom he served in the Navy.
I have a sinking feeling, no pun intended, that he's in very deep doo-doo.
I agree with him, philosophically.
Any nuclear weapons launch is a lose-lose situation for the entire planet.
I hope everything's okay with him.
I hope you can contact him again.
This kind of stuff is completely unnerving.
A fond regards, Linda in Auburn, Washington.
Well, I certainly agree with you about the unnerving part, Linda.
Rarely, rarely will I do a repeat of an hour as I'm about to do.
But it was that dramatic, that real, in my opinion, in the opinion of most people who have faxed here, that it bears repeating.
I want it repeated.
I want it heard.
So prepare yourself to hear something coming up after the top of this hour that is almost in a class all by itself.
All right, West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
One, I don't think that global warming is contributed to by us as people.
I mean, scientists have studied this since the beginning of science, and I don't know, one month or one three-month period, they say the temperature is dropping a degree or two.
Then they say it's going up.
If you look back in the history, you know, 20, 30 years back, they've said it's gone up, then they've said it's gone down.
Well, look, if there is a God, I wish I had more time to discuss this, but if God is real, then I think the other side is probably real too.
And so, in light of that and my continued exploration, I am going to air what I'm going to air tomorrow night, and the weaker part probably ought not to listen.
All right, my friend, thank you.
Thank you all very, very much.
It has been another, yet another, truly intriguing night of ever so many.
Talk radio the way it ought to be.
Free, open, unscreened.
You just never know.
And this proves it again.
Have a good night, everybody, from the high desert.