Philip Hoag warns of a U.S. surrender or nuclear conflict within five years as China’s military and economic rise outpaces America, citing pre-WWII appeasement parallels. He highlights Russia’s Yamatu Mountain EMP defenses and China’s SS-25 missile transfers, while Bell questions MAD doctrine failures like civilian shelters. Both agree biological threats—from WHO vaccine scandals to gray goo—pose low-tech, high-risk dangers, with Middle East terrorists and Sino-Russian alliances as key players. The June 14, 2001, spy plane incident exposes U.S. vulnerabilities, while callers link ecological crises like ozone-depleted microbes to suppressed government warnings. Ultimately, the episode reveals how complacency in preparedness and ideological shifts could trigger global catastrophe. [Automatically generated summary]
President Bush sparred with EU officials Thursday as they accused him of pursuing environmentally wrong policies.
The president who spurned a global warming treaty in 1997 downplayed their differences, said, We don't agree on the Kyoto Treaty, but we do agree that climate change is a serious issue.
Hey, that's an advance.
Now continuing the quote, and we must work together.
Police arrested more than 200 as Bush met with European leaders at the midpoint of his first overseas trip.
Now, we have been getting a very great deal of reaction to the idea, NASA Ames idea of moving Earth.
The reaction to moving Earth has been rather heavy.
Karen in Portland, Oregon, succinctly and shortly says, our government can't even design a workable missile defense system.
How in the world do they or NASA think they're going to successfully move Earth into a different orbital position without creating some kind of catastrophic event?
Talk about going to college and having the common sense educated right out of you.
They may well be educated, but they're not very smart.
They're going to kill us all.
Thanks for your time, Karen.
Or this.
Mr. Bell, I was fascinated by your story in Wednesday's program about NASA and the possibility of moving the Earth.
Personally, I'm not really for it.
Especially when you mentioned the slightest error could basically wipe out all life forms on the face of the Earth.
I was wondering, while you were discussing the subject, could that be what happened to Mars?
Maybe the, in quotes, intelligent life there had the ability to travel to Earth like they are supposedly able to do now.
Let's say they saw Earth and liked its environment with a warm climate, livable atmosphere, they probably said, let's try and move Mars closer to Earth so we can have a planet just like that one instead of our cold one.
So they put a large group of Martians on a ship and went to Earth.
You know, in the unlikely event that their planet should be wiped out, so their intelligent life tried in whatever way to move the planet.
Instead of success, they were met with great failure.
Mars was eliminated, all life gone, and only the Martians, now earthlings, us, remained.
That would explain why we continue to see them today with UFO sightings.
Think about it.
Maybe the face on Mars is where the entire accident, maybe a comet, crashed into the planet.
Just a thought.
And then Tim writes the following.
A senior White House official scoffed at NASA's plans to use asteroids to move Earth's orbit in order to deter global warming.
Quote, the idea is simply ludicrous given the track record of NASA's recent escapade, said Derek D. Oilman.
Mr. Oilman is the Bush administration's interim national science advisor.
When asked if the administration had any proposals of its own, Mr. Oilman replied, why, of course we do.
I'm pleased to announce that in response to the recent report on global warming, President Bush has now authorized me to implement his own plan to counter this environmental crisis.
I would also like to point out that contrary to what the press has reported, Mr. Bush has been keenly aware of the problem and this plan ready for implementation months ago.
This plan will not only forestall the dangerous warming of Earth, but will also address the terrible energy problems the state of California has recently experienced.
I must tell you that as a scientist, I was stunned by the pure simplicity and elegance of Mr. Bush's idea.
Although the President has no scientific training, his grasp of orbital dynamics and physics is truly astounding.
This, then, is what our president proposes.
On July 4th, 2001, every single able-bodied American man, woman, and child shall be gathered along the California border at precisely 9 a.m. Eastern Time, 5 p.m. or 5 a.m.
Pacific.
When the sun is at the farthest distance respective to the Earth, everyone shall jump up and down three times.
The resulting displacement of mass at this point and at this time will push the Earth farther from the Sun, and the result will be a gentler, cooler planet.
And as an added bonus, the force imparted to the San Andreas Fault will result in the state of California falling into the sea, thereby negating any further problems with providing it any energy whatsoever.
Not to mention worrying about electoral votes in 04.
The president, of course, regrets any inconvenience to the people of California and will expedite their tax rebates to ensure they receive them before July 3rd.
As the President's Interim Science Advisor, I fully endorse his plan and applaud Mr. Bush's courage to make this hard decision for the good of the entire planet.
This is sent to me by Timothy, who says the veil art is thinning like my hair rapidly.
Here's a story.
From Nairobi, Kenya, a primary school in Kenya's eastern province was Thursday closed indefinitely following an alleged invasion by ghosts.
The head teacher of a primary school in Kitui District, that's K-I-T-U-I District, James Mbu told Pant, that's the news service, that he closed the schools after parents withdrew their children following attacks by the alleged ghosts.
He explained the pupils became possessed and fell down whenever the ghosts struck.
During such incidences, he explained, boys complained of being strangled, while girls said they were being sexually harassed.
A senior education officer in that district could not persuade the parents to keep their children at the school any longer.
The parents demanded cleansing of the school before they could let the children go back.
Meanwhile, some parents and teachers have accused a retired military officer living close to the school of being behind the invasion of so-called ghosts.
I live in eastern Tennessee, and Bigfoot is simply not at the top of everyone's subject list.
Some folks here see UFOs once in a while, tell ghost stories, but Bigfoot is never talked about.
I had never even heard of Bigfoot until I joined the army in 1980 in the fall of 79.
My brother and I were driving home just about dusk.
There was a light, drizzly rain coming down.
We were on a dirt road and traveling at about 10 miles an hour.
When all of a sudden this huge creature jumped off a six-foot bank just within our car lights, strolled across the road and into the woods.
Needless to say, I stopped instantly, hair standing on end.
As we discussed what we had seen, my brother informed me that he had seen them, in quotes, several times while out hunting.
He said they were at least three of them, one of which was smaller than the other two.
We figured that the younger one.
And I asked if they made any sort of noise, and he mimicked the sounds as best he could.
I asked if they had known of his presence.
And he said that one turned and looked straight at him, and then turned and continued to eat berries with the rest of them, in quotes.
I asked if he'd been afraid, and he said at first, but that past and curiosity took over.
I've shared my experience with very few people, and would appreciate my last name not being used, because I don't want any publicity, or to be aggravated with folks pestering me all the time.
But the creature I saw looked nothing like the pictures of Bigfoot that I've seen.
This creature was hairy from its waist down to its feet, but from the waist up, it looked almost like skin, although it more closely resembled a snake skin, both in color and texture.
It was almost a bronze color, with fine black lines, kind of like a rattlesnake.
I've taken into account that it was raining, and dusky dark, so maybe my eyes were just playing tricks on me, but I want to know if what I was seeing was a Bigfoot, or something else.
The only way to know that is to read this to you, and see what you have to say about it.
Well, now, I'm not so sure about this next one, but I want to read it to you, because I would like some of you to check it out, and tell this gentleman if he's right or wrong.
I'm working and keeping an eye on the GOES satellite webcams tonight, when I notice something a little odd.
A new storm appears to be developing in the Gulf.
The last four shots from the GOES 81R satellite show what looks like a small eye developing, close to the Yucatan Peninsula.
As I looked at the sequence of frames, I realized what had caught my eye.
this storm is rotating, albeit slowly, but definitely clockwise.
And I'm trying to recall, is that the way it's supposed to happen, or is that all wrong?
I'm trying to remember pictures of hurricanes, and it seemed to me that they were clockwise.
Hurricanes should be clockwise, shouldn't they?
Anyway, there you have it.
You might take a look and see if anybody can confirm that.
And then this is kind of interesting.
It comes from a United Methodist minister.
And I'd love to have this fellow on.
His name is Jack.
I won't give his last name unless he contacts me, and I have invited him to do so.
He writes, I'm going to be on the way that I'm going to do so.
I'm going to be on the way that I'm going to do so.
religion.
I've been exploring for several years, somewhat on the QT, in that such openness is somewhat frowned upon by the church.
Anyway, I'm occasionally aware for brief periods in the middle of the night, and I listen to you on my walkman.
Last night, I heard a portion in which you mentioned that two individuals, yes indeed, had said the Bible was a result of about 40 people divinely inspired.
I'm not sure who they were since I didn't hear that program anyway.
The truth is, the Bible is actually the result of maybe hundreds of people.
It is, in most cases, his words, folks, collected snippets from the oral tradition or ancient pieces of writing, incomplete in and of themselves.
Let's read that again.
It is, in most cases, collected snippets from the oral tradition or ancient pieces of writing, incomplete in and of themselves.
In addition, the Bible's contents are the same.
depend on which version you may have.
Various committees or councils made the decision as to which books, which are not books in the classic sense, were worthy of being included.
As has often been said, a camel is a horse created by a committee.
Not that the Bible is a camel, it's just that there are many sacred writings that were not included and many of which are completely lost.
In other words, bottom line, the origin of the Bible was not a clean and pure process succinctly describable.
It was somewhat haphazard in its process, occurring through many centuries.
That fact does not necessarily make it undivine, in quotes.
It merely puts it into the category of the human spiritual experience.
Just thought you might be interested.
Oh, yes, Jack.
I'm interested indeed.
In fact, I found it shocking the other night when both of our scholars involved in the debate agreed that about 40 people indeed, divinely inspired people, it was said, received the word that was then written, recorded, and translated so many times.
In Kentucky, there are some heartbreaking pictures.
This particular picture comes from Arthur B. Hancock, owner of the Stone Farm.
And your heart would go out to these poor people with their foals dying.
And I'm afraid the headline says, Kentucky breeders still aren't sure what caused the deadly syndrome.
And one of the pictures is of a young boy lying down and hugging his dying foal.
And I suppose these appeared probably in a, well, it says Time Staff Writer from Lexington.
These are some pretty emotional pictures for sure.
And if something will put a tear in your eye, it's a young fellow, you know, he must be, I don't know, eight or nine, ten maybe, lying down holding this poor dying foal.
Well, they have their suspicions, and we've heard a lot of reports, and they've changed about what could be killing the foals back there, but they still don't know.
Bottom line is, the real bottom line is, they don't know.
In Salem, Oregon, no, correction, Salem, Ohio, I'm sorry, they're receiving mass shots against meningitis.
I guess you've heard about that.
With grimaces and brave looks, the first of up to 5,800 Ohio school students and teachers rolled up their sleeves and started to get the shots Friday in a mass inoculation against a meningitis-related outbreak that has killed two teenagers there.
The outbreak has spread fear and confusion through this blue-collar area about 40 miles from Cleveland.
Classes and graduations were canceled Friday as thousands of students and parents stood in line around vaccination centers set up at schools.
And I think there's going to be more and more and more of this sort of thing.
West Nile virus, the dangerous West Nile virus, probably is going to, they say now, spread well beyond the Northeast.
As a matter of fact, CNN has been running a report suggesting that all 50 states have now got to be on the lookout for West Nile because it's common.
In a report on the Western Hemisphere's first known outbreak of the mosquito-borne virus, researchers urged physicians to test aggressively their patients, report any suspected cases to public health officials so any new outbreaks can be controlled.
Now that in itself, to me, is an interesting sentence.
So any new outbreaks can be controlled.
If they had controlled the outbreaks they had, it would not now be spreading.
They had the fear that during the winter, the West Nile virus would sort of hibernate and then re-emerge as it has done.
In the first outbreak in the New York City area in the summer of 99, at least 59 patients were hospitalized with West Nile infections.
Seven died.
Hundreds more had serious infections.
People with diabetes or those 75 years of age or older were about five times more likely to die than others.
Healthy people generally have mild flu-like symptoms or none at all when bitten by an infected mosquito.
They estimate only one in 100 West Nile infections causes symptoms.
But, you know, so they can quickly get it under control.
Well, of course, we should be vigilant and let them know when it's in the area.
But if they had the ability to get it under control, one would think we wouldn't be worried about its spread, eh?
I got an interesting press release from Lycos, the search engine Lycos, today.
And they have measured according to how many people, I guess, search for information on talk show hosts, the top 20 talk personalities based on internet searches.
Leading the pack is Howard.
Howard Stern, congratulations, Howard.
Then Rush Limbaugh, number two, and I am number three.
Followed by Dr. Loris Lesinger, Paul Harvey, Don and Mike, Opie and Anthony, Don Imus, Jim Rome, Tom Joyner, Mancow, G. Gordon Liddy, Larry King, Phil Henry, Tom Lykus, Joan Rivers, and so forth, on down the list.
And I thought that was very nice, so thank you very much, Lycos.
Kind of cool information to just get dropped out of the blue.
At any rate, Keith found a related page on Lycos, so that's on the Website right now.
All right, let's break here at the half hour.
Then we'll do open lines directly ahead on Coast to Coast AM.
unidentified
You're listening to Arch Bell somewhere in time on Pre-Year Radio Networks.
Tonight, an oncore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from June 14th, 2001.
Solo.
Listening to the strangest stories.
Wondering where it all went wrong.
oh Hold on, hold on, hold on to what you got.
Hold on, hold on, hold on to what you got I can dream of a meal tomorrow Thank you.
Waking in the morning sun.
Music.
Out of the street, I was talking to a man.
He said the songs were mine that I was there.
You shouldn't worry about that, that ain't no crime.
Cause if you get it wrong, you'll get it right next time.
Next time.
Next time.
You need direction, yeah, you need a name.
When you stand at the crossroads behind, we're looking.
After a while, you get to recognize the sign.
So if you get it wrong, you get it right next time.
Next time.
Next time.
I'm a liar, yeah, liar, but a cheap.
If I believe you wanna go around, I'm wondering if you don't beat.
No reason waiting, don't you worry, don't you whine?
Cause if you get it wrong, you'll get it right next time.
Thank you.
You're listening to Art Bell somewhere in time, tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from June 14th, 2001.
For those of you to some degree in electronics, you might get a kick out of this.
I have here at the house an uplink transmitter.
It's a KU-band uplink transmitter, and it transmits a show, to satellite, from here, and then on, you know, the various steps to get to Big Bird to get to you at the radio station.
This is the first hop, as it were.
And earlier today, one of the pieces of equipment in the rack that transmits the signal to satellite was making a real racket.
I mean, I was sure, I'm sure you've heard fans before where the bearings begin to go out, and it's kind of going like that.
I can't really duplicate it for you.
But making a really weird noise, like, boy, those bearings are on the way out.
So I took a look, and I couldn't find any vents, as in where a fan would push air out.
Immediate tip-off.
Maybe there's no fan.
So I call the network, they call the manufacturer, and they explain the problem.
And the manufacturer says, oh, those would be capacitors.
We can take a lot of global warming until we decide to move the Earth.
Can you imagine that the moon would be stripped away from the Earth?
Now, that would have pretty dire consequences.
If you strip our moon away, aside from the fact that we're going to go tumbling off into space to our new location, whatever that is, to lose the moon, that would probably have very serious consequences here on Earth.
Yeah, but the people who are at NASA Ames say that their scheme to move the Earth would mean, in all likelihood, I could read you the quote here.
Let's see.
The plan has one or two worrying aspects.
Let's see here.
Oh, yeah, here it is.
There is also the vexed question of the moon.
As the current issue of Scientific American points out, if Earth was pushed out of its current position, it's most likely the moon would be stripped away from the Earth.
unidentified
You have to do it just right.
You have to run it directly between the moon and the Earth.
How can the two guests that you had on the other night about the Bible code honestly believe without any data that the Bible was inspired, quote-unquote, by God?
In other words, neither of them were there 2,000 years ago or 4,000 years ago to see someone say, oh, oh, I feel inspired.
Well, there are several people already way ahead of you who have written extensive emails and faxes to us about exactly that, that the frame rate or the strobe rate adjusted properly will indeed cause you to begin to see these people or B, have an epileptic fit.
unidentified
Yeah, I bet.
Well, I haven't heard anybody really talk about that, but I kind of figured there might be some people out there thinking about that.
As I prepare to consider taking off in my RV, my measly little maybe 30,000 pounds.
But I'll tell you to me, who mostly spends his time driving at Geometro, that is our primary car here at Geometro, the concept of converting from that to a 30,000-pound vehicle is an interesting transition.
And it takes a little shifting of the mind to avoid catastrophic occurrences.
You have to think and act in a very different way when you have something 40 feet long.
To me, see, that's long.
These guys, they laugh at 40 feet.
That's nothing to a trucker.
But to me, going from a little geo to 40 feet, that's west of the Rockies, you're on the air.
You know, I suppose there could be a set of systems situated in such a way that it would cause a storm like that to begin rotating in the wrong direction.
Of course, we should keep an eye on it.
It seems to me if it keeps going in the wrong direction, then we have a number of questions we should be immediately asking.
So this lawyer, without naming the lawyer or the video game company, because I don't want to hear about either one.
Right.
What is he suing them for?
What's the claim?
unidentified
Interestingly enough, it is very similar to...
It's very similar to like the Joe Camel advertising where they claim that they're being affected,
but they are targeting children, specifically teenagers, and that the companies that produce these games in the same way that cigarette companies producing cigarettes know that, no, and then that there's supposedly internal documents.
By the way, somebody sent me a little sign in the mail that I really liked, and so I held it up for my webcam and I'll leave it there for a little while.
It's kind of a cool sign.
I think it...
It's about vegetarians.
That's all I'll tell you.
It's on my webcam.
I'll leave it there for a little while.
All right, coming up in a moment, Philip Hogue, who is author of a book called No Such Thing as Doomsday.
Of course, he may not have heard about NASA Ames' idea.
How to prepare for earth changes, power outages, war, and other threats.
Well, that's timely, isn't it?
Always, I suppose, in mankind.
Always.
Think about it.
Earth changes, power outages, war, and other threats.
Philip's message is not doom and gloom, he says, but practical, experienced, how-to information.
His book, No Such Thing as Doomsday, shows people how to turn their concern into constructive action.
Mr. Hoag is an expert in the field of disaster preparedness.
Philip is also heavily involved in research.
He's been studying Russian and Chinese military activity and the U.S. defense issues related to them for the past 12 years.
Philip does interviews on radio talk shows around the nation, including a number of previous appearances right here.
He's been a featured speaker at preparedness shows held in different parts of the U.S. has written articles that have appeared in American Survival Guide and the Preparedness Journal.
Philip gives lectures, teaches classes, does consulting in areas of shelter building and general preparedness.
Over the last 10 years, he's been involved in the design, organization, and construction of numerous disaster shelter projects.
Philip lives in Montana on a small farm with his wife Arlene and their five children.
So he must have a big shelter.
Philip is involved in emergency services.
He is an emergency medical tech, helps manage a local volunteer ambulance service that he began eight years ago.
Philip also has an affiliate company, Yellowstone River Trading, that offers preparedness equipment and supplies to the public.
in a moment the polls Well, welcome to the program once again, Philip Hogue.
Usually when we have a hurricane, Philip, you know, CNN will dispatch people to go stand in the eye and hang on a pole so we can watch them trying to get blown away, and they'll talk about it approaching and showing, they'll show pictures of people boarding up, you know, nailing boards on and all the rest of it, and or sandbagging, getting ready for flooding.
We're just seeing the quickening that you talk about, Art.
And I think that the average American person is so wrapped up in chasing prosperity and going to the shopping malls and watching sporting events on TV that quite a bit of this just kind of goes by right over their heads.
Well, we're talking about it, but it goes a little deeper than that.
When we take, for instance, the situation with the Chinese, and we'll talk about it in detail, but they've basically built a weapons infrastructure based on the profits they've made from the most favored trading partner status.
President Bush is talking about building a fairly comprehensive anti-missile system, which really amounts to sort of a revival, or at least partially so, of SDI.
And I asked this on the air, and you'd be the perfect guy to answer it.
Who would you say we're building this defense system to protect against?
Would you say it is China, which has a moderate to low capability to deliver a large number of nuclear warheads?
They could deliver some.
Or Russia, which still has capability but is in a political disastrous zone.
I am a little bit, because it was kind of my understanding, Philip, that it wouldn't be within our reach to protect against the numbers of weapons that, say, the old Soviet Union could muster or even Russia could today muster.
But against perhaps a limited attack like China would be capable of right now, we could probably build something without going broke.
Well, the main thing that they talk about in the U.S. proposal for missile defense is protecting us against, quote, rogue nations.
And so the key here is we don't want to, or the political people in power don't want to affront the Russians, don't want to affront the Chinese that we're worried about, quote, Maybe Iran or maybe North Korea.
But the reality is the Russians have their own missile defense system, and it's far superior to the one that we're developing.
We're trying to develop a system that, in essence, is like trying to shoot down a bullet with another bullet in the air, where the Russians have developed a system where they actually use nuclear devices and they can detonate in the proximity of incoming missile and destroy it.
And they have a multi-layered system completely in violation of the ABM Treaty.
So it's kind of interesting, and actually I think it's kind of a trite issue at this point because the, I guess what I would call the Marxist caucus, congressional caucus, has dragged their feet so long and done everything within their power to scuttle the deployment.
And if somebody is in opposition to the building of a missile system because they don't think it's practical, let's say, and because it'll cost so damn much money, and they just don't think it's practical, then I'm not sure that makes them a Marxist exactly.
And let's put the pieces together, and then we'll get the big picture.
Now, you take Mr. Clinton there, and he actually instituted a new policy where in the event that our surveillance satellites detect the launch of nuclear weapons from Russia or China, our previous defense posture was to launch immediately.
Sure.
Now, the new policy which Mr. Clinton instituted was that we would absorb a first strike before we would launch retaliation.
so but what do you mean we'd absorb a first strike what kind of idiotic Now, I'll give you the warp logic behind this.
It's like, we're doing this as a show of good faith.
what i'm not going to be half of what kind of good faith do you did there is Right, but you see, from the Clinton administration, the rationalization was we're going to take things off a hair trigger.
Well, it's like if you've got a guy running around your neighborhood with guns, you've decided if he pulls a gun on you, you're not going to draw your sidearm and defend yourself.
I mean, I am not that critical of any more of Mr. Clinton than I am Mr. Bush.
Because Mr. Bush, we're going to talk about some other things that happened during the Clinton administration, and he could have rescinded these things.
But the point is, if we absorb the first strike, we will lose our ability to retaliate against hardened targets.
But what you need to realize, a lot of people say, well, you know, it isn't that bad because we've got our submarines.
Now, wait a minute, folks.
Most Americans don't realize that the weapons that we have on our missile submarines are not large weapons and they don't have the capability for taking out hardened targets.
They're strictly for retaliation against population centers.
They're a deterrent.
So if we sit there and we absorb the first strike, they're taking out our ability to retaliate against their hardened missiles, silos, their command and control bunkers.
Can you tell me roughly how many nuclear weapons we have prepared to deliver in one form or another, either from silos or from aircraft or from submarines?
How many nuclear weapons do you guess that we have that we could deliver?
You know, I don't have those exact figures in front of me, but it's pretty clear that the Russians presently have two to three times that amount minimum.
Well, see, the whole idea of the submarines is they can hide under the oceans.
And it's hard to track them and figure out where they are.
And in the event that some enemy launches a first strike against the United States, they can lay low until things cool down, and then they could rise up close to the surface.
And the subcommanders, in the event that they were separated from U.S. command because of a nuclear war, had the authorization to launch those missiles.
Clinton took away from the subcommanders the unilateral right to launch those missiles.
So the point is now, those subcommanders, if our command and control, our communication nodes are cut off, they have no capability to launch.
The Russians have built a national civil defense network capable of housing 70% of the civilian population.
That doesn't speak about what they've built for the military, for the leadership.
Now, we can't be too critical of the Russians trying to shelter their elite and their leadership because the United States government, although it hasn't spent a nickel.
Way back in the McNamara era, the Russians came up to us, we talked to the Russians, we said, we have got this idea, comrades, and it is we will eliminate nuclear war because you will agree not to build shelters for your civilian population, and we will agree the same thing, comrade.
And then, therefore, you will never launch attack against us because we will obliterate your civilians.
And you will never attack us, excuse me, and we will never attack you because you will obliterate our civilians.
The only problem was, is they took technology that Oak Ridge Labs spent 12 years developing, civil defense technology, and as soon as the ink started drying on that treaty, they started building a national civil defense network for their civilians.
Well, if you talk to somebody like Dr. Michio Kaku, you may recall, Dr. Kaku said, the thing most likely to disqualify us from proceeding as a type 1 civilization will be the discovery and ultimately the use of Element 92 that he thinks most civilizations, the cosmos, don't make it through their discovery of Element 92.
And Philip, I'm wondering, in your heart of hearts, Philip, forget everything else, and just go straight to your heart of hearts, how likely do you think it is that we will end up with a nuclear exchange?
Well, you've got a case of incrementalism here where slowly we disarm, slowly we become more and more vulnerable.
And it's like if you've got a neighbor that, you know, you keep trying to appease him and you sell your guns and say, hey, look, I just sold my guns.
We're going to be friends.
And you say, I'm going to lend you money now.
You know, we'll be friends.
And he takes the money and he buys more guns.
He buys more ammo.
And one of these days, you know, he's either going to come over and there's going to be a real fight with you or you're going to say, hey, you can have the house.
No, it's just a political, global political game, and the UN is becoming more and more hostile toward the United States.
And a lot of people in other foreign countries are kind of tired of living in the shadow of the U.S. And they see another superpower is coming on the horizon.
And so you're seeing a lot of third world countries.
And that's the same thing that happened previous to World War II.
The Japanese didn't even have steel.
They were coming over here with ships and picking up all of our scrap metal.
It was U.S. investment, it was U.S. technology, and it was U.S. resources that made the Japanese war machine.
And the same thing happened in China.
We have shipped our prosperity there.
We have shipped our jobs there.
You've got Motorola, you've got Boeing, you've got all these major corporations that are downsizing in the U.S. that are increasing their operations in China.
And the idea that I guess the apologists would suggest is operative here, and the difference here with China is that we will slowly change them, that they are economically going to go one way or the other.
I mean, they're taking off now, and whether we help them or not, it'll only make a little difference in time in how fast they get going.
And so we're taking the tack that if we get them economically involved with us, and we're all holding hands, nobody's going to want to blow each other up.
The U.S. leaders are falsely expecting to modify communist behavior.
But in reality, we're leaving ourselves vulnerable as we ignore the long-term consequences.
Now, the Chinese teach their people that as long as there are class differences between the oppressed and the oppressing, there can be no peace in the world.
And they're talking about the United States.
And, you know, they may have some valid points there when we look at the corporate makeup of the U.S. government and our kind of ruthless economic domination and raping of resources in a lot of third world countries.
I mean, the average American person doesn't realize what the third world perspective of the United States is.
The people can starve, but the high priority is the weapons.
That's true.
But anyhow, Art, jumping back to, we didn't quite finish up what we were talking about, about the MAD doctrine, the fact that, you know, it really is MAD.
It's insane to think that you would allow your enemy to hold your civilian population as a hostage, as a nuclear hostage.
And that's what we agreed to.
And then they re-negged on the deal, and we never did anything to protect our civilian population.
And, of course, you know, we've, the government of the United States has gone to great extents to, in the perpetuation of government program, to build facilities and regional FEMA command posts that are all hardened.
Well, it's part of the program for the perpetuation of government or the preservation of government.
And they actually have a complete duplicate government which is always standing by and ready to move into action in the event that our existing government officials were killed by some surprise attack.
and they actually have people who are referred to as mister president service president uh...
they got represented is there from all the uh...
department including
I mean, who would pick Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker of the House, Mr. My understanding is they're already selected and it falls under the category of emergency powers and which steps outside of the arena of the Constitution and moves into more executive, direct executive rule and power.
Well, whoever they've got in there that's sitting at that polished desk, he's not president now, but in the event that the president and the vice presidental succession is, you know, whoever's sitting in that chair is going to take over command and make decisions.
And I think we talked about this on previous shows, that even under Yelson, when they were bellyaching that Russia was so bankrupt and we had to bring this infusion of $200 billion into Russia, they were building Yamatu Mountain, which is in the Urals, and it's the largest underground complex in the world.
They say it's as large as the area inside the Washington Beltway.
My understanding is they have the capability to take out Cheyenne Mountain.
I don't know if they have the full capability to take out Mount Weather.
I know the U.S. during the Persian Gulf War started developing deep penetrating weapons for taking out underground bunkers, but I don't think the United States has anything in its inventory to take out Yamato Mountain, is my understanding from people I've talked to.
And basically the Russians have, based on their experience in World War II, and they have a completely different cultural mentality, they lost millions of people during World War II, they have decided that they could engage, wage, and survive with acceptable levels of loss nuclear war.
Because, you know, every time we talk about missile defense, it goes back to the 70s.
We had all the technology.
We could have put it in place.
As soon as we started talking in Congress about doing it, the Russians came over and said, this is going to escalate the arms race.
It's like if you lived in a bad neighborhood and you started talking about buying some body armor, all right, because they're drive-by shootings, all right?
Well, the only thing I would say is the following.
If you put a defensive shield in space, fine.
It's body armor, as you point out.
But once you've got that stuff up there, Philip, you know, and I know, that what is classified as defense could quickly be, I'm sure, utilized in some fashion for offense and or taking out the other side before they take you out.
So it could be looked at, if you put yourself in their shoes, it could be looked at that way as not purely defensive, but as potentially offensive as well.
Well, there may be some truth to that, but let's look at our body armor and their body armor.
We've got no body armor.
The average American after the Gulf War, you know, sees the heroic footage of the Patriot anti-missile system, and they think, hey, we've got an anti-missile system.
We've got those Patriot missiles.
Sorry, folks, doesn't work that way.
That's a theater missile defense system.
It will not take out an incoming intercontinental ballistic missile.
And not only that, because we're trying to be such good guys and be in compliance with the anti-missile treaty, we actually took the Patriots' missile system and we tied one of its arms behind its back.
Just to be because of the heavy disarmament camp in Washington and the fact that we had to be so compliant with these treaties that the Russians and Chinese were violating.
And he also seemed to recognize that that missile defense would be regarded by our enemies as an unacceptable advantage.
And that's when I recall that he offered sharing some technology with the Soviets at that point for that reason.
So they would not feel overwhelmed and feel the need while they're slipping backwards economically to use the nukes they have and just get it on while they still can.
Well, just to give you an idea, the Russians have a multi-layered missile defense system.
They've kind of camouflaged it.
Their ABMs, they've kind of written them off and represented them to the West as service-to-air missiles.
But they've got a very effective multi-layered defense system of interceptors, and they use small nuclear devices, low-yield nuclear warheads, that are very effective because you only have to get close to take them out.
And I know people who work for the Department of Defense who are working on our missile defense program, and every time they argue about the present course of the U.S. missile defense system and say, well, why don't we do it like the Russians, they get fired.
The only thing I can figure when you look at some of the insanity of the other things that we see going on, that you say, how could anybody do that, is there are people behind the scenes that don't want it to see it happen, that are trying to run it into a dead end.
Well, I don't know that we're orbiting nuclear weapons.
I know for a while, you know, I happen to know an installation where they put in a laser cannon that could take out anything for 40 miles around, which is in violation of a treaty.
Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from June 14, 2001.
Coast AM from June 14, 2001.
Coast AM from June 14, 2001.
I can feel it coming in the air of the night, oh Lord.
And I've been waiting for this moment for all my life, oh Lord.
Can you feel it coming in the air of the night, oh Lord, oh Lord.
Can you feel it coming in the air of the night, oh Lord.
you were driving out of the hand You're listening to Arkbell somewhere in time tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from June 14th 2001 We're talking about good old Element 92 and the same old you know what though?
there's really a couple of new things to think about the world of element 92 one of them we mentioned uh...
at the very end of last hour and i want to inject that again a couple of other things will do another hour with uh...
philip hove and then we'll do some open lines but there are a number of topics that i want to cover with him changes really since the days of the cold war and there have been a lot of changes they're all around us in the air and i think i think it's based just going into the uh...
news break at the top of the hour uh...
philip you said that you believe the russians are orbiting nuclear weapons now if that's true everything is more or less moot anyway and i don't know what good a space-based defense does you the surprise attack comes from orbit in other words if instead of and and i cdm launched from land or c which gives you as you pointed out earlier with those five satellites why we can
we can see them launching and we can go oh my god and do whatever we're going to do but if it's orbiting already and all somebody does is deorbit a nuclear weapon it explodes instantaneously without any warning over U.S. cities.
What I was referring to, and I agree with you, and I think that's really a brilliant observation.
But what I was referring to is weapons in space, in satellites, that would be detonated as a prelude to a nuclear launch, and they would not have any direct effects down to the surface of the Earth.
In other words, they wouldn't damage anything on the North American continent other than the electromagnetic pulse, which you being a good ham operator understand, and it would just devastate electronics.
Number one, back in the 1960s, the nuclear war scenario that the Defense Department and the U.S. government used to operate on was the doomsday scenario.
Right.
Where we'd all kick them loose and, you know, blast the heck out of both countries.
And those few people who had fallout shelters would hunker down for two to four weeks.
And then they'd come out and restart civilization after the gamma radiation decayed.
Once they began to let fly, the escalation would be I could see, you know, they'd hit several strategic locations, for example, or cities or whatever, and we would respond, and then they would let it all fly, and then we'd let it all fly.
And I think it would be that fast.
It would be, I mean, nuclear war is not like horseshoes, or maybe it is in the sense of close counts.
And in a way, the point is, it would escalate to a full all-out thing pretty quickly.
Well, I think it's in military strategy, it's pretty well established that in any nuclear war, your primary objective is to knock out your opponent's ability to mount a military retaliation.
So that would be the primary thing.
You know, they wouldn't really be concerned with harassing population centers as long as there doesn't have to be a strategic target right next to a population center.
But they're after military bases, silos, sub-bases, command and control facilities, the White House, things like that.
That's what they would be after.
Now, if the United States suffered a decapitating first strike, which eliminated most of our military retaliatory capability, then the next step would be that the Russians would communicate, or the Chinese would communicate with the existing remaining U.S. leadership, and they would say, okay, we're going to start out with, let's see, with Buffalo, New York.
We are going to devastate Buffalo, New York if you do not surrender within the next 30 hours.
So we don't surrender.
They take out Buffalo, New York.
We say, okay, we are now going to take out Houston.
But you need to realize there's a lot of disinformation out there from the unilateral disarmament groups that want to suggest that the planet would be sterilized by nuclear war.
Not only might they orbit nuclear weapons, anybody who's smart to fight a space-based defense would orbit nuclear weapons, number one.
Number two, what about the prospect of some guy just coming across our border with backpack nukes, or several of them?
Boom, attack.
Who even hit us?
We wouldn't know.
Eventually we'd know.
We'd, I'm sure, figure out where the materials came from, but that still wouldn't mean that somebody didn't buy it from the Russians or the Chinese or something or another.
And if you read Sun Tzu's book, The Art of War, which is the main military textbook of both the Russians and Chinese, it's never a smart principle of warfare to aggressively directly attack your enemy.
And it would be preferable to have some surrogate come in with a backpack new, detonate it, and then you would come on and say, this is terrible.
We're going to send a Russian medical evacuation team and a mobile hospital to help with this disaster.
This is just terrible.
We totally decry this event.
But as you say, a covert nuclear or biological terrorist act is much preferable, especially if you can do it through a third-party surrogate that it can't be pinned back to you.
Because you accomplish your objectives without receiving direct responsibility for retaliation.
So yes, and the U.S. government is sorely concerned about the threat of biological terrorism in this country.
And that kind of leads into another subject that I'd like to jump into real quick after we finish one more point.
And that is above and beyond the fact that we don't have civil defense, we don't have missile defense, we now have inferior nuclear strategic weapons to our Russian friends.
But Russia and China did something that we never did.
They developed and deployed road-mobile ICBMs, intercontinental ballistic missiles.
I think that we have sufficient numbers of ICBMs, submarine-launched missiles, and God knows what else that we're not talking about, that war really is unthinkable.
Well, one of the problems that we've got with our submarines also, above and beyond all the great things that the presidents, our executive leaders have done in our interest, is that the vulnerability to spying has really compromised the stealth capabilities of our submarine fleets.
The Walker brothers and a few other of the spying cases gave technology over to the Russians, which really enhanced their ability to track our submarines.
Let's go back to just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.
If we had been living in the economic and information age then that we are now, don't you think we would have been absolutely aware of what the Japanese were up to?
You're talking to, you're on a network right now that's on 500 radio stations nationwide, literally blanket coverage of the entire nation and well beyond.
Great, but what I'm saying is in Russia, the average American didn't hear anything about how our money was going down the rat hole over there, how they were taking, how we were financing the payrolls of Russian weapons scientists, how we were paying for the conversion of military weapons factories to consumer goods that never happened,
how we were subsidizing their space program that they were using on rocket programs, and on and on and on, how we're cutting up their old submarines and at the same shipyards they're building new submarines, how we paid to scrap their old ICBMs, but that was just cutting up the rocket and they took the warhead and put it on their new topels.
You never scrapped the warhead.
It goes on and on and on.
And the average American didn't hear anything about this.
no we have a certain we have a definite control the And that is that if we get too far ahead of them, if they see us getting too far ahead of them, either on the ground or at sea or in space, then there is a danger.
There is a danger on that side as well.
If we get too far ahead and they've got nothing but antiques that may or may not work after a certain amount of time, and they see us in space with all kinds of heavy-duty stuff, before we get too far ahead, they may decide to roll the dice.
And ultimately, when we look at this situation and we look at other situations, we look at earth changes, we look at the plagues that are on the planet, I kind of look at it.
It's ultimately what I would call a spiritual crisis.
And I know in my own life, when I was young and crazy and doing things, at one point in my life, life came up and hit me over the head with a 2x4.
And I think mankind is in the process of getting hit over the head with a 2x4.
You see, I think the threat that we're ultimately likely to face, and as I watch what's going on around me in the world right now, Philip, honestly, I think the threat is liable to be a global threat.
It could come from elsewhere or it could be right here on Earth.
In other words, we're fighting for our own survival, not so much against the prospect of Russian or Chinese ICBMs or even rogue nation ICBMs, but with what we're doing here on the planet right now.
And with the weather changes that we've got going on and other changes rapidly taking place in the world, that's the fight.
That's the war that we're going to have, and we're all going to have it.
Well, and that may be the good war, too, because if you look at disaster, when you look at hurricanes, you look at floods and earthquakes, and you look at the response that it triggers in people, people pull together.
You know, I have no way of knowing if this is true or not, but I hope not.
Mark in Austin, Texas, claims there is an article at Yahoo.com saying that Russian cargo planes are going to pick up the U.S. spy plane in pieces and bring it back to the U.S. Now, wait a minute.
Let me get this straight.
It can't be true.
It just can't.
Our spy plane goes down in Chinese territory.
No matter how you calculate it happened, whether we hit them, they hit us, whatever.
We went down in Chinese territory.
They took that sucker apart piece by piece.
You know they did.
And they're probably done with it now and just want it to piece junk, get it off their territory.
And so are we honestly going to have, could it be true that we're going to have Russian cargo planes pick up our spy plane and bring it back to the U.S. after the Chinese have been done with it?
Somehow I find that a little hard to believe.
But just in case there really is a story on Yahoo, I couldn't get to the link.
The plane that went down in China that's been sitting on the runway, beleaguered, taken apart, photographed, printed, copied, whatever, that airplane is due to be picked up by Russian cargo planes who will deliver it back to us in pieces, I guess.
I mean, there was a day when our ego never, our national ego, never would have allowed our former and still possible one-day enemy to go pick up our spy plane down in another communist country.
Well, again, I say, and I really mean this, with emerging diseases, you know, these little things that can really get you, and the weather changes, and the earth changes.
It looks to me as though our enemy, ultimately, if we continue the mad thing long enough, our enemy is going to come from within.
And it's going to be something we're all battling for survival.
I think that we have a planet full of humanity that is running around in a sort of synthetic identity, and they're not finding what they're looking for in life, and they're running into dead ends.
And I don't know, in my own life, you know, I ran into dead ends at a certain point, and I had to stop and think, you know, am I going the wrong way?
Even now, Philip, in a way, you have to stop and think, are you going in the wrong way?
In other words, I can clearly see what your concerns are.
Have you considered the possibility that the threats that you're concerned about are perhaps now secondary to what's most likely to get us?
I mean, if you consider in this world what's most likely to get us, there are physicists Working on things that, if they push the button, that could get us.
Somebody's going to create a damn black hole in a lab one of these days.
Or these horrible diseases like mad cow.
Eventually, we'll fix it so nobody can have a hamburger on the planet anymore.
I mean, it's just things are going in a pretty strange direction right now.
Things they think they can figure out, they don't have figured out at all.
I think, you know, we could talk a whole show about the biological threat and the implications of that, whether it's AIDS and the question of where did AIDS really come from or mad cow disease.
Well, you know, I don't know per se, and MadCow, I've read some real interesting material over the last couple of months, but I think if we look at the history of some of the biological events that have occurred, some of them by accident and some of them by absolute intent, and we just look at the pattern, like take the polio vaccine.
Well, I think the biological threat is just as big, if not bigger, than the nuclear threat.
So do I. And I don't argue, and I'm really concerned that there is a population control agenda.
There's definite evidence that it's potentially there.
You know, the World Health Organization has gotten caught on a couple of stings.
And one is in the Philippines, they spiked the tetanus vaccine.
They had this special program, and it was only for women of childbearing age.
Now, typically, who do you typically want to give tetanus shots to?
It would be the men, the guys out there working, working with the manure and doing things like that.
They had a program that they focused strictly on children, women of childbearing age, and they did it not only in the Philippines, but they did it down in Latin America.
They didn't do this in Sweden and the United States.
Now, you must believe that something on this scale would be on a virtual world scale, that something like the World Health Organization or the UN or some international population control concerned group would do it.
Well, nonetheless, what they did is they piggybacked this thing.
I think it's called HHG.
And what it did was it caused women to abort spontaneously.
And the Filipinos are the ones that figured it out.
They got a batch.
They started seeing this pattern of these women aborting.
And they found that the vaccine had been contaminated with it.
Now, you can say, well, this is an accident.
This was just an accident, all right?
But then we look at the smallpox vaccine in Central Africa.
And it's obvious that from a strategic economic standpoint, and you look at the growth rates in the North American continent, in Africa, and in Asia, there's definitely a strategic shift of power that occurs when you've got population booms there and you've got a declining birth rate here.
And we're seeing very effective population control with AIDS.
I mean, Africa is experiencing a significant and effective population control program.
Well, I have been thinking that for a long time, and I can't today tell you that I believe that I know there was congressional testimony, Philip, about development of something that would compromise the human immune system, and that occurred before the emergence of AIDS.
But I think if we look at the big picture, like we come back, there are a lot of threats out there.
And one thing I believe personally, whether it's earth changes, whether it's a nuclear threat, whether it's a biological threat, is I really believe that life gives us everything we need to ultimately deal with the crisis that could put on our doorstep.
You know, we may need to get banged over the head to come to our senses and realize that maybe our egos don't have what it takes, that it's got to come from maybe a higher source or a spiritual source.
But ultimately, I really believe that it's a spiritual crisis overall that we're facing and that we really need to look within to find the solutions.
Well, I think the key there is it's a well-known fact that biological weapons give you the best bang for the buck.
And it's the poor man's nukes.
It's low-tech, it's cheap to make, and that's one reason that the U.S. government is very concerned and gearing up for bioterrorism.
I think if we look at the situation in the Middle East, which is kind of the planetary no-win zone, a lot of that potential may pivot around what happens here in the next couple years.
You've got to ask yourself if Hezbollah or any of the really nasty organizations over there or somebody in the Baka Valley got hold of a little vial of something that would kill most people in Israel, would they use it?
Well, sure they would.
I mean, these are the same people sending in people with bombs on their backs strapped to their bellies and blowing up anything they can find and as many people as they can find.
Well, the kind of political situation over there is fairly complex, and I don't want to really pick sides in the conflict, but nonetheless, it's a can of worms.
It's more than that, because the Israelis are smart.
And they realize that their nuclear capabilities were stored in limestone caverns, and they weren't hardened facilities, and they were vulnerable to a first strike.
And so they acquired three German diesel-electric submarines, extremely high-tech and quiet.
And if Iraq crosses Jordan to get involved, they're going to let the stuff fly.
And then where is that going to put the United States?
Where is that going to put Russia?
And, you know, and obviously we're not the only ones who have gone through this scenario and had this discussion.
Now, if you were on the bin Laden side, you know, I don't even know if bin Laden exists.
Sometimes I think he's a universal scapegoat, you know, that replaces right-wing extremists in the United States, or maybe they're partners now, or I don't know.
You know, you've got to have a scapegoat there for the public.
But nonetheless, there are terrorist groups who do have biological capabilities.
And obviously, if the U.S. comes in and backs up Israel in the event of a major conflict between the Arabs, this is going to polarize the Arab bloc against the United States.
And at the least, we're going to feel the revenge at the gas pumps.
I frankly don't think, and I'm just speaking On a guess, but I don't think the Israelis would need us, frankly, if push came to shove and they used, if they had two, nuclear weapons, as you pointed out, they now have at sea as well.
They wouldn't need us.
I don't think that any Arab country right now is capable of even coming close to a mad-type scenario with the Israelis.
Well, yes and no, but you've got a situation now where Russia is forming alliances in the Middle East, alliances with Iran, and they've transferred the same sunburned missiles to Iran that they transferred to China.
It covers everything from purifying water to long-term food storage to EMP protection to radiation shielding and, you know, and it's got a very extensive chapter on independent power systems and disaster communications.
Tonight featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from June 14, 2001.
It's like magic.
Oh, rolling and riding and slipping and sliding.
It's magic.
And you and your wings are like, you should be.
Oh, oh.
I'm a bad baby.
It's a living thing to do.
It's a terrible thing to do.
It's a given thing to do.
What a terrible...
*BOOM*
Be it sight, sand, smell, or touch.
There's something inside that we need so much.
The sight of the touch or the scent of the sand.
Or the strength of an oak when you're deep in the ground.
The wonder of flowers to be covered and then to burst up through tarmac to the sun again.
Or to fly to the sun without burning a wing.
To lie in the meadow and hear the grass sing.
All these things in our memory sore.
And the useful to come to me.
And you fly, but let's go, make it face.
on this trip, take a look at me.
Take a three-ride, take a breath.
I'm a sleep.
It's hard to create I've been a long way to save the years But so hard just to end my fears And to end my life in all my life But by now, by now, you're listening to Arkbell somewhere in time on Premiere Radio Networks.
Tonight, an oncore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from June 14th, 2001.
Listen, I have yet another answer from the not-so-amazing Randy.
So I guess he's getting a few emails from you all out there, and I will read you at least a portion of the latest in a moment.
As you know, for a little while now, I've been back on Randy's case again because Randy has offered a million dollars to anybody who can prove the existence of PSI, prove the existence of the paranormal in any way.
He's got a million dollars up there.
He says that he's ready to give to anybody who can prove it.
And yet, invited on my program, he responds, for example, this way.
I mean, all I did was say, Randy's chicken.
And he responds.
Somebody wrote to him, Art Bell last Friday claimed that he has asked you numerous times to appear on his radio show, and you have declined.
Randy writes back, occasionally, Bell gets something right.
Yes.
He's begged me three or four times to appear, and I told him plainly that I would not participate in his circus.
He has no regard for the truth, pandering to the needs of the gullible instead.
And he knows full well the truth behind the ridiculous claims made by his guests, dames in particular.
He chooses to perpetuate those claims.
My going on his show would accomplish nothing for me and everything for him.
He has control over what's said when I'm not there and can simply repeat his lies again and again.
One does not play another man's game when the other man makes up the rules and controls the gate and he goes on.
Hey, that's the swill they live by, says Randy.
Every week I get email from people who tell me, hey, just listen in to see how silly the show is.
I don't know, because I don't get it here.
That's not something I'm going to help by participating in.
Bell is playing a juvenile game.
And I got over those things he said many years ago.
I'm Playing a juvenile game, you're the one putting up the million dollars.
What's that?
That's not juvenile.
And then you can't stand a challenge.
Now, my listeners know, Randy, they know whatever it is I do when I have guests on the air, I'm fair to my guests.
Always.
I'm always fair, Randy.
I don't do setups, and I don't go get people, and I don't do sweat interviews.
Randy, this is your chance to come on in a fair forum with somebody who claims to be able to do what you have put up your juvenile million dollars to challenge.
And so here we are, Randy.
Open airways.
I'd let you say what you want to say.
Ask any guest I've had on.
I don't shut up guests.
I let them go.
Sometimes a little farther than they probably ought to go.
And that would be the same for you, Randy.
I wouldn't do that.
So it seems to me it's a little juvenile to put up a million dollars and say, well, somebody who can, and I've got somebody, or several somebodies.
I've got lots of really good remote viewers, not just dad names, lots of good remote viewers.
Randy.
And I haven't lied about you, Randy.
All I've said is, walk, walk, walk, walk, walk.
And I say again, chicken.
Chicken, Randy.
Chicken, chicken, chicken, chicken.
West of the Rockies?
Well, you would have been on the air.
East of the Rockies, you're not a dial tone, so you're on the air.
Hello.
Going once, going twice, gone.
Wild card line, you're on the air.
unidentified
Hello, Art.
Hello.
Didn't a few years ago you have a program about the aliens messing around with the North Dakota and the silos, missile silos?
I mean, the Chinese have a very limited capability, and we'd blow them off the face of the earth.
However, that doesn't rule out the possibility that after that the Russians might get involved and all kinds of nasty things could occur.
So eventually, though, he's going to be right.
China is moving economically and politically, but mostly economically, in a direction that will run right over us if we don't watch it.
unidentified
But Art, I've done a little research on this, and from what I've been reading, we've got stuff that people haven't even heard of called the X-22 and all sorts of, you know, these flying triangles everybody is seeing.
I think militarily right now we'd squash them like a bunch of ants.
No question about that.
But that's not what I'm worried about, sir.
I'm worried about what China is becoming economically.
And if there's not a war, they eventually will romp over us because the ability they have over there and the industrial revolution that's going on right now over there, you can't minimize it.
If there's no war, they'll run over us economically.
Well, the way to really, yeah, but corporate greed.
But, you know, we are, our whole economy is based on, you know, I'm not ashamed to say it, large corporations and business.
That's what it's based on.
And if there's not a war, they will ultimately beat us at our own game.
unidentified
I agree.
I got one last thing.
Can you get somebody, I haven't heard for a while since you've been back, but can you get somebody, a guest, that will talk about some of these new weapons?
No, I haven't heard anybody talk about them.
And I know they're out there, nano stuff like nanobots and all that type of stuff.
What you do is you get a little nano machine, teeny-weeny nano machine, and you simply set it loose, instructing it at all costs and with all material available to duplicate itself.
And what essentially will occur is all material, biological, the cell phone you're holding, the road you're driving on, everything would be slowly or not so slowly as it went on turned into gray goo, virtually nothing, converted to nothing.
Oh, yes.
And I've asked a number of other very distinguished scientists about that, and they say, oh, yes.
You know, it's something we thought of.
All you do is turn a little machine loose, instructing it with all available materials to duplicate itself.
And slowly spreading out from a center and moving in all directions equally quickly, given available materials, and there would be everywhere, we would slowly see gray goo replacing all that is.
The intriguing aspect of this whole punch cloud that I had on the website, the photographs, was the contrail that quite obviously went directly into it.
But on Mr. Hogue, I think perhaps one of the things in your discussion with him that ought to be more considered is what this means is the United States position amongst the third world countries.
I mean, the fact that we are unilaterally disarming.
And don't you feel that this makes literally a less stable world?
Yeah, if we go too far with disarmament, obviously it makes for a less stable world for us.
No question about it.
But if we go the other way too far, it also makes for an unstable world.
unidentified
Well, certainly.
But I mean, surely, you know, there should be some semblance of balance between the East and the West, or it would look to me like the third world is other, and of course, we would.
It's like the kid standing in front of the other kid saying, go ahead, punch me in the belly.
unidentified
Yeah, that's about what it is.
But, you know, I mean, I think Mr. Hogan and you both covered a lot of the shortcomings.
I mean, not only in the nuclear field, but biological field, certainly we have a responsibility to stockpile interferon and antiviral agents and also stockpile antibiotics for the biological agents at the same time.
But you see, I think, sir, that things have so changed that it's not necessary to have canisters upon canisters, warehouses of canisters anymore.
We live in a new age.
And the biological threat now could be in a single test tube.
Let me repeat that.
The global biological threat could be in a single test tube.
You don't need warehouses full of deliverable chemicals and biologicals.
Because now we have the ability to genetically modify, let's say, a flu virus, for example, and turn it into something so horrible that the world would virtually might as well turn into gray goo.
So I think times have changed, and with them the weapons have changed.
But just one little test too.
Remember 12 Monkeys?
Remember that movie?
Well, I think it's true today.
unidentified
You'll listen to Art Bell somewhere in time on Premier Radio Networks.
Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from June 14, 2001.
I'm in a spin.
I gave you love.
I thought that we had made it to the top.
I gave you all I had to give.
What did it have to stop?
You've blown it all sky high by telling me a lie without a reason why.
You've blown it all sky high by telling me a lie without a reason why.
Where would I be without my one love?
Good morning, Mr. Sunshine.
You brighten up my day.
Come sit beside me in your place.
Lonely baby, lonely baby, well I'll be without my wall.
Lonely days, lonely days, lonely nights, where I'll be without my woman.
Lonely days, lonely days, lonely nights, lonely nights, where I'll be without my woman.
It may be that a geopolitical situation of the time was such that an American president would say, we need to be in this and get it done.
I understand that.
Believe me, I understand that.
But we should never, all things said, we are certainly in a different time.
I think that's right.
And in fact, during the interview, I asked Philip to consider that situation.
We are in a very different time.
and the threat is probably the main threat is a little different than it was but that doesn't mean you let your conventional In a way, they are the convention.
It's what we would use.
You don't let your guard down to the point where you would get punched or invite the punch.
And I think in every case, it seems that you have people on who, in the guise of presenting an alternative to the establishment military industrial line, give the most extreme version of the spy mania, the 10-foot-tall enemy, the old snake oil that we've had throughout the Cold War, with even less pretext.
Now, I wonder why you won't have somebody on from Covert Action Magazine, Covert Action Org, or Space for Peace.
They've got spaceforpeace.org, a website, people on who point out.
The point is that they're pointing out that all of the things that Phil Polk was talking about, projecting these aggressive designs on the other side, such as China, which has, as you point out, 20 or 30 obsolete weapons, we've got about 7,000, not 2,000, as Philip Polk said, the most invulnerable, the most accurate and powerful in the world.
A cover story put out by the people around this military-industrial complex like anything they would say, they'd get up there that they would say is defensive probably could be used defensively or offensively.
And you and I both damn well know they know that and are planning for that.
So one of their quotes is that from the vision for 2020, which was a commission chaired by Donald Rumsfeld, he says the globalization, this commission says the globalization of the world economy will continue with aligning between haves and haves-nots, says the U.S. Space Command.
By controlling space and the Earth below, the United States will be able to keep those have-nots in line.
So I think if anything, it's the United States that has to be deterred.
The United States that has to be somehow counterbalanced if we're going to have any stability in the world.
That's exactly where we're going with people like Cheney and his wife on the board of Lockheed Martin and the head of Lockheed Martin, the biggest military contractor in the world, writing the platform committee for the Republican Party that was even bragged about by Jackson, who was the vice president of corporate strategy for Lockheed Martin.
And when you've got people like that and Rumsfeld, who was one of the lobbyists for the Star Wars boondoggle, we're moving exactly in that direction.
And I think people ought to realize that the United States, throughout its history, has Refused to renounce first strike.
It has behind back channels threatened to use nuclear weapons in times of conflict with other countries.
Well, I'm saying if it happened on the other part of other countries, I think people would be very much against that.
And I think it begins to show that people like the people you have on as guests again and again and again are appealing the same scare tactics that are actually funneling our national treasure in the pockets of these warmongers.
Well, I have you, and I don't fully disagree with you at all.
In fact, President Eisenhower rightly told us, beware the military-industrial complex.
He knew.
And it's still true.
It's a machine that rolls on and perpetuates itself with our tax dollars and could be every bit as dangerous to world peace and stability as the opposite, the old Cold War way, the old mad way.
It's a Russian plane, and it's Russians, and we ought to be able to get our own damn spy plane.
unidentified
Well, like I said, it's another way for China to rub our face in it one more time.
You know, I think to me the danger that's going on now is just the whole world, but specifically the U.S., is a question of hubris.
This is sort of like what probably happened to Atlantis if it existed.
We probably have some weapons just as powerful as they had, maybe not psychically, but that's what took them down, supposedly, and that's what will take us down, is getting out of balance.
The MAD doctrine, at least it kept the world in balance.
But Lester Brown and some of the people, they claim, I heard reports that some of the people over here in the West were warning China that if they didn't convert certain techniques of farming, they were going to fall behind and run out of food.
Well, apparently they started sending farmers into their Northwest Territories and chopping up the land over there to try and farm it.
And that's what caused all the dust to come over.
And now we've got another report.
They found dust coming over across the whole Atlantic Ocean from the Sahara Desert.
They've actually found now that they know what to look for, some actual dunes from years ago.
They know it comes over and they're beginning to figure out the little particles and microbes come over on this stuff.
Now, the report that has recently suggested that global warming is certainly real and by the hand of man does have dissenters.
Contrary to what you might read, there are dissenters.
People who signed on to the report did not sign on to only what was released to the press.
In other words, it was only a portion of it released.
Now, to be sure, the majority of scientists agree that it's real and by the hand of man, but not all agree with that, and I want you to be aware they don't.
And I'm sure you're aware they don't.
I hope you are.
If not, become aware.
Do a little Reading.
Nevertheless, the consensus clearly is that it's real.
And then I asked him, you don't plan on having any more children, do you?
And as we well know, he certainly did.
So he whipped that little sucker out of his pocket so fast.
unidentified
Oh, my God.
Anyway, what I was calling you about that it's sort of strange.
I've called, this is like two times this happened.
I've called and talked to you, and I brought up one thing, and then the same thing I brought up, Ed Dames came a week later and said the same thing I talked to you about, and then again I talked about something, and Ed Dames talked about something again.
All right, well, if you know what Ed is going to bring up next, let's have it.
unidentified
Okay.
I brought up the environment and how bad the environment's messed up, and I was talking about specific details when I talked to you, and then he brought up the exact same details.
And the next thing he's going to bring up is the environment, basically the beginning, the visual beginning of the end, when we start seeing the real noticeable difference of the environment.
And we know the weather's changing, obviously, but we'll be able to see things that are completely unusual.
One thing is that we know the ozone is getting so thin over the poles it's melting the caps, obviously.
And there will be areas in the sky where in the daytime you'll be able to see black spots like almost seen right in the space.
That will happen probably about a few years, but he'll talk about that.