Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 14, 2003 - Art Bell

02:50:50

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Shadow Government - Harry Helms

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	From the high desert in the great American southwest.
	I bid you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon, wherever you may be across the cosmos.
	All time zones covered.
	All areas.
	This, of course, is Coast to Coast AM.
	Weekend version.
	I'm Art Bell.
	It's great to be here.
	The big news!
	Who won Survivor?
	Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
	You know, I, uh, I don't care who won Survivor, I think Rupert should have won.
	He should win retroactively or something.
	Is that the big news?
	I have a computer problem.
	That's pretty big.
	I'm ready to shoot this computer.
	And I would too, except it's Ramona's computer and so I can't.
	Any computer whizzes out there, try this one on for size.
	Windows 98 version 2, right?
	Wife's machine, right?
	Okay.
	It prints everything just fine.
	Install a new printer.
	Prints everything just fine.
	Except Netscape won't print.
	Every other function in the computer is perfect, but Netscape will not print.
	I've reinstalled Netscape, reinstalled the, you know, the software for the... for the printer.
	I've done everything under the sun that I can think of to do, and I don't care why you order something to print in Netscape, it just goes... And that's it.
	And it never prints.
	And I've been fighting with this machine now since, well, since the news of Saddam broke.
	Actually, since even slightly before that.
	And so somewhere out there, there's somebody who knows how this can possibly be.
	Some obscure person somewhere knows this.
	If that's you, email me, artbellatminespring.com.
	That's A-R-T-B-E-L-L at minespring.com.
	artbellatminespring.com.
	Well, I have no illusions with regard to what we're going to do in the first hour here, and we do have open lines.
	While you're certainly allowed to call out anything you want, I mean, obviously, unless you've had your head buried deep beneath the sand, it began, I would guess, about slightly less than an hour after I got off the air last night.
	Wham!
	A ham radio friend that I was in communication with up in British Columbia said, hey, they got Saddam.
	It's breaking.
	Well, they didn't know for sure right away, but, you know, it was all over the networks.
	Fox was saying, no, they didn't.
	CNN was saying, yes, they did.
	And then ABC and the rest of the networks began to break it.
	And sure enough, we got him.
	Caught like a rat in a hole, is the headline CNN story.
	A little hole in the ground.
	And that's where Saddam was hiding.
	And we got him.
	So, this hour, I guess, I guess I would like to ask you all, now what?
	We got him.
	Now what?
	That's the big question.
	Now what?
	In more ways than one.
	Now, now what?
	A trial?
	Jail?
	Terrorists?
	From now until the day Saddam finally kicks off in the pokey, saying, free Saddam, bringing down airliners, doing terrorism around the world to get him set loose?
	Is that in our future?
	In other words, now what?
	That's what I want to ask the audience.
	Now what?
	We got him.
	Do you believe that it's going to change what's going on in Iraq on a day-to-day basis?
	Maybe.
	So the big question is, I'm just assuming all of you are swamped with the news of Saddam.
	The obvious question is, now what?
	And then in the next hour, after we're done with Saddam, It's going to get really interesting.
	Harry Helms is going to be here.
	We'll talk about pirate radio and about the shadow government.
	It's going to be a good one.
	It's really going to be a good one.
	Harry Helms is a cool dude.
	We interviewed him on pirate radio for about an hour, and I said we'd have him back, and so he is back tonight.
	Cool dude.
	In the meantime, though, now what?
	That really is my question.
	Now what?
	Assuming you all have the news and probably are almost sick of it by now.
	Still, it's monstrous.
	It's a really big deal.
	I mean, we did finally get Saddam Hussein.
	So, what next?
	Alright, let's open the lines and see what you think.
	Uh, you're...
	I want to know what you think.
	First time caller line, you are on the air.
	Cheerio!
	Good evening, Art.
	Good evening, sir.
	Where are you?
	My name is Jeffrey.
	I'm calling from Nashville, Tennessee.
	It'll be LAKC 1510 AM.
	All right, Jeffrey.
	Way to hit one of our affiliates right on the news.
	Well, okay.
	The big news.
	What do you think?
	My thing of thinking is it's the best thing that we could have done so far is to capture Saddam.
	The U.S.
	federal government's smartest move was to pull him out of Iraq and keep him into a secured location.
	Well, they're doing that.
	The next thing they want to do is not turn him over to the U.N.
	for some tribunal.
	They want to have that trial, and they want to have it in Baghdad.
	The Iraqi folks of Iraq Well, that's an interesting thought because I would think an Iraqi court and jury is probably going to be considerably more severe than one here in the U.S.
	he needs to face everybody that he is killed
	mains hurt or terrorized last thirty years well that's an interesting thought
	because i would think uh... in iraqi
	court and jury is probably going to be is considerably more severe than one
	here in the u s what do you think
	uh... actually if he gets the trial done here
	a lot of a global uh... nations are going to say no that's foul because it's
	bush to take revenge
	The smartest move for the situation to happen now is for him to be tried against his peers.
	Alright, well thank you.
	That's pretty valid, in my opinion.
	If he's tried here, he'll be in jail for life, right?
	We all know that.
	There's no way an execution would ever take place here.
	No way, right?
	So he's certainly right about that.
	The Iraqis, on the other hand, probably would have considerable sway in terms of convincing me that they ought to be the ones, as he suggested, to try Saddam.
	Not some international tribunal.
	Where he'll be, and I don't even know where they finally sentenced him to, but, you know, of your peers, it was something about your peers, right?
	Well, wildcard line, you're on the air, hi!
	Hi, this is Michael, and I have some information that I think you folks overlooked, which relates both to Saddam, and it ties Saddam directly to the John Lear test.
	Wait a minute, was Saddam have to do the John Lear test?
	Well, he has to do everything, because Saddam, it's actually a pretty sad day for humanity today, because for all of the bad things that Saddam did, and I understand he did a lot of bad things, nonetheless, he was trying to free this planet from a particular extraterrestrial race.
	He was?
	Saddam was doing that?
	Yes.
	I think he was trying to free the planet mostly from his own citizens, you know?
	He slaughtered a lot of them.
	Well, perhaps he did.
	If he did, then he's a troll.
	So you're sad that Saddam is toast?
	In some way.
	Because I'm trying to be rational here.
	I'm not trying to... I know this is going to be a very emotional issue for everybody involved.
	But I mean, you are saying that secretly Saddam was actually interfacing with the aliens, and so... Semi-secretly.
	He was semi-public about it.
	I see.
	And my information comes from somebody whom you have interviewed a lot and whom you're very familiar with, and that is Richard Hoagland.
	Richard Hoagland?
	Yes.
	Directly?
	I mean, did you talk to Richard since the capture of Saddam?
	Not in person, but I heard one of his presentations at... Yeah, but you could not... Alright, well, that's enough of that.
	There's no way he could have heard a presentation by Richard Hoagland since Saddam's been captured.
	So therefore, that couldn't have been said.
	There's just no way.
	I know for a fact, because I talked to Richard, and he will be lucky, and will be lucky, if he gets here tomorrow night.
	He's got the flu.
	And so he wouldn't have communicated with Richard.
	Saddam, the alien negotiator.
	Hmm.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Yes, hello, Art.
	Yes, sir.
	This is White calling from Louisa, Kentucky.
	Listening to you on 1100 AM, Al Quaitlin.
	Howdy-do.
	Yeah, doing alright.
	First off, he was talking about your computer problem earlier, and I guess a side note to this, I read this weekend that Microsoft is actually going to quit next month, giving technical support for people whose computers have Windows 95 to Windows 98.
	I know!
	It's the end!
	They won't even tell you how to fix it!
	If my wife won't let me turn it into XP.
	It's her machine.
	If it was my machine, it would have one of two things already done to it about 18 hours ago.
	You know, it would have a bullet through the front of it, or it would have XP Pro in there instead of... Anyway.
	Yeah, that's what... Anyway, what do you think about Saddam?
	Well, in the short run, I'm expecting there'll probably be some type of severe retaliation against our forces.
	In fact, I guess the big report that's coming out tonight is that we've already flown Saddam out of the country to Qatar.
	Because they were actually expecting some type of an escape attempt to try to rescue him by the various resistance.
	But I'm expecting, I'm glad it happened, it was unusual how it happened.
	Do you think we would have been better off with Saddam dead or alive?
	Well, on the trying part, it might have been better, but it would have possibly made him a martyr in the Arab world, because many of the people in the Arab world were expecting Saddam to die, you know, going down with a fight.
	Absolutely.
	I mean, you've got a tremendous point there.
	Even though last night, while they were putting the tongue depressor on him, my wife said, Oops, gee, that was a tongue depressor with the poison, too bad.
	Yeah.
	But that didn't happen.
	So he's alive now, and so you think best tried and then in jail?
	Well, I think he should... well, since his boys are already gone, it probably wouldn't hurt to take care of him as well, but... You heard the caller who said he should be tried in Iraq instead of by some international tribunal, right?
	Yeah, I would actually rather have the Iraqis try him than the international tribunal.
	I agree.
	I agree.
	Right off the bat, I agree with the caller and you apparently do too.
	Alright, thank you very much.
	That the Iraqis should try him, I really, I think I like that a lot.
	Rather than some international tribunal or something here in the United States, forget it.
	Let it happen in Baghdad.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, this is Sam in Bellingham, Washington on KDMI 790.
	Yeah, I think it's better off that we found him alive.
	That way the Iraqi people can judge him for what he's done and go from there.
	Is that what you think is going to happen?
	Do you really think the Iraqis are going to get a chance to try him?
	I think so.
	I think Bush is going to let them do it because if he goes to try to do it here or elsewhere, he's going to say, He's their bad guy.
	Let them take care of it.
	Well, wouldn't our president be in opposition to probably the international will to do that because there's going to be a lot of international pressure to have him in front of some war crimes tribunal, I'm sure.
	We didn't listen to the world when we went to Iraq, so why are we going to listen to him now?
	Why start listening now?
	Right on.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	He's got a very good point there as well.
	We certainly did not listen to the rest of the world, did we?
	Uh, when we invaded Iraq in the first place.
	And so why begin listening now?
	First time caller line, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hello.
	How you doing?
	I'm doing all right, and you're on the air.
	Oh, thank you.
	I think it's great they caught him, and they ought to try him right there.
	Right there in Iraq?
	Yeah.
	Do you think that'll happen?
	Probably not.
	Probably not.
	What do you think is most likely in reality?
	Some kind of international war crimes, tribunal I suppose?
	No, actually I see probably France and a couple of them other guys trying to ride in and probably try and scoop them up and probably try and put them away somewhere where they're going to just like separate them from everywhere and put them in some little soft little cushy place so that you wrap them up in my all the other way if they
	ever want to bring it back out the camp
	secret corporate thank you well that might be france alright but do you know
	how far down the list france is in terms of who's going to get possession of saddam
	i would say dead last
	actually a lot of her liner on the air high
	uh...
	art as far as uh... where to try to down by just think that uh...
	tribunal probably the best uh...
	Why?
	wanted a bowl well because it you know i agree that iraqi people probably should but i
	think it is going to be too
	are down the road uh...
	before their control of mouth little still look like where manipulating them
	on but it couldn't we keep him uh... sequestered until the right moment arrives in the rock
	stabilizes enough that he could be tried there
	yeah we could but i do think that's going to be a long way down the road i
	think it'll cause a lot of trouble in the meantime And also, I don't think his capture is going to change anything, because based on the limited look we got at him, via the news media, what have you, it does not appear that he's been running anything.
	Pretty pathetic, huh?
	Pretty pathetic.
	Yeah.
	In other words, the way he looked, the way he was... Yeah, he hasn't been running anything.
	Yeah, I think there's so many terrorists streaming into Iraq right now that you're absolutely right, and most of them are motivated not for Saddam one way or the other, but against us.
	I think it's al-Qaeda, you know.
	Yeah, right on.
	I absolutely agree.
	While they weren't there, perhaps al-Qaeda was not... 9-1-1 was not all sprung from Iraq, but they're sure they're there now because they've been streaming in.
	I agree.
	All right, sir.
	Thank you very, very much for the call, and take care.
	It's become a magnet for terrorists worldwide now to get to Iraq and to kill U.S.
	servicemen and women.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Yeah, hi.
	Hi.
	This is Douglas.
	Douglas, extinguish your radio for me, if you would, please.
	All right, sure.
	This is what happens with open lines, unscreened.
	Yes sir.
	Yeah, I have a comment.
	Fire away.
	Anyway, when they found him in the hole, they should have put a New York City manhole cover over it and just forgot about him.
	And only we would have known where he was.
	Well, yes, but of course it was very, you know, if nothing else, his capture was very important to show the Iraqi people that, hey baby, it's really over.
	The terror, or the king of the terror, is gone.
	So, but I appreciate your suggestion, but that won't cover, I suppose, in a way, that might have been a wiser suggestion than you might imagine, than just later certifying the body.
	I don't know about getting him alive.
	I don't know how good it is that we have actually captured him alive.
	I'm rather surprised, to be honest, with you.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hi, how's it going, Art?
	I finally got through to you.
	Glad you made it.
	What is your name?
	My name's Jake, and I'm calling from Eugene, Oregon.
	Hey, hey, hey.
	I'd just like to ask you real quick about you.
	Are you still a big South Park fan?
	Oh, totally.
	You still watch the show?
	Um, well, you know, not as much as I used to.
	I never missed an episode of South Park.
	I remember you used to talk about it all the time.
	That's right.
	But, uh, I'm highly suspect about this whole Saddam thing.
	He had four or five body doubles all the time.
	So, and I'm just also highly suspect because this is so close.
	Oh, you mean you think we might have gotten one of the doubles?
	Well, it could be, you know, it could be like the moon landing or something like that.
	It's just so close to Bush's re-election.
	Would the real Saddam be in a hole like that?
	I don't think so.
	Or would you offer up a double in a hole like that?
	Or would you say it, Saddam, just to give yourself some more clout?
	You know, just to say, like, hey, look, we got Saddam.
	You know, you're not suggesting that we intentionally have Look at how close it is to Bush's re-election campaign.
	This is only going to help Bush's poll results.
	Well, it probably will, yes.
	And he has been struggling a little of late.
	If it would have happened six months ago, I don't think it would have had the same impact that it does now.
	What do you think about the guy who called up and said Saddam was negotiating with the aliens and so now the world's in big trouble?
	Well, uh, yeah, I don't know about that one, Art.
	Yeah, I don't either.
	Well, I think he's in big trouble for things on his own, but as far as, I'm not even sure that it's really him.
	I think it might be a whole staged operation just to, you know, just propaganda.
	Gotcha, gotcha.
	You know what I'm saying, Art?
	I do, I do.
	No, I do.
	Thank you very much.
	I know exactly what you're saying, that you don't think it's him, that we, We're lying.
	We lied.
	First time caller lying, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hey, hi.
	This is Lou from Long Beach.
	Yo, Lou.
	Yeah, I saw that thing on TV, and man, I tripped out.
	I'm an ex-Marine, and I was in the first Gulf War.
	And man, when I seen this guy on TV, I was like, man, that's him.
	I felt like a weight off my shoulders was lifted, you know, because we didn't get him last time.
	No, we didn't, but we've really got him now.
	Do you think it's better we have him alive than dead?
	Uh, you know, I think it was good that we got him alive, so, you know, it was like proof that we got this fool, you know?
	And there he is, right there.
	So take a look.
	We got him and, uh... Well, you're right about that.
	You know, no matter how he had died, uh, if he had died, We would have been blamed for killing him.
	So he has a very good point there.
	Because everybody thought, you know, he wouldn't be coming back.
	The dead or alive part of it would just be dead.
	So, maybe in a way we've proven something about ourselves.
	Which I think is good.
	I hope it's good.
	Anyway, more open lines.
	Unscreened, riff-em, tear-em, open lines coming up.
	This is Coast to Coast AM in the nighttime.
	The official website of Coast to Coast AM is www.coasttocoastam.com.
	Log on now.
	...over the world and the seven seas.
	Everybody's looking for something.
	Some of them want to use you.
	Some of them want to get used by you.
	Some of them want to abuse you.
	Some of them want to be... You don't count me too.
	It don't come easy, you know it don't come easy Underneath you's if you wanna see the blues And you know it
	don't come easy You don't have to shout or leap or bow You can even play
	them easy Get up out of the past and hold your sorrow
	Cause the future won't last, it will soon be your tomorrow Do Talk With Art Bell. Call the wildcard line at every...
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	line is area code 775-727-1222. To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll-free
	at 800-825-5033. From west of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255.
	International callers You may reach Art Bell by calling your in-country...
	sprint access number pressing option 5 and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast and worldwide on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	I love breaking news. I really, I love breaking news and I have a not very important observation
	about breaking news that I always find very entertaining and that is the news began breaking
	shortly after 3 a.m.
	I think.
	Right after I got done, about an hour after the show last night.
	And then the official press conference didn't come until 4 a.m.
	And so for a long time, all of the news networks had nothing better to do, in fact nothing at all, other than to wake up all the news anchors they could, have them come down, and then they got to question each other And sort of make news before the news.
	And that's one of the more entertaining things you can ever watch during a major piece of breaking news.
	And that is the anchors all having nothing to do but not answer each other's questions and talk to each other.
	The American media is an incredible machine, isn't it?
	In my opinion, the American news media has devolved to the point in this country where,
	frankly, it's an interesting thing.
	It's absolutely fascinating.
	Try it the next time there's really serious breaking news.
	The most serious, of course, is when they don't actually have the news, and just sit back and watch them Do infotainment.
	In essence, interviewing each other and talking about what might be, sometimes for hours on end, without one scrap of real information.
	In other words, just a subject.
	No real hard news, in the old style of news, but just a concept.
	And they can go with that endlessly.
	It's really An American cultural wonder.
	First time caller line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	Hello.
	I'm glad to be on your show.
	I'm calling from way over here in western Pahrump.
	Well, hi, you're here in Pahrump.
	Yeah.
	Listening to... Art Bell.
	No, no, no, no, sir.
	Come on, you're in Pahrump.
	What radio station?
	Oh, uh, KN... Uh... N?
	KNYE.
	KNYE.
	Yeah.
	95.1 here in Pahrump.
	Thank you very much.
	Okay.
	Even if I had to drag it from you.
	Alright.
	Well, I'm kind of nervous.
	I understand.
	Alright, so what's up?
	What do you think about the capture?
	Well, more on your topic of the news and how funny it is.
	Really?
	Yeah, isn't it a coincidence that... First time callers, area code 775-727-1222.
	A fiasco.
	Saddam is caught.
	So now all of that goes bye-bye.
	People will forget.
	It's just like after the WMD papers were revealed as a spun fraud, a CIA agent's name is leaked.
	Is this a coincidence?
	Are there no coincidences?
	Or is this just a manipulative agenda?
	Well, I'll tell you what.
	Tonight, we're going to talk about all of that with Harry Helms.
	I have always sort of lived on the outskirts of the topic of the shadow government in this country.
	But tonight we're going to leap into it with both feet.
	We're going to talk a little bit about pirate radio, because you know my love for that subject.
	But beyond that, we're going to get into the shadow government, which is the second main topic that Harry Helms can talk on.
	And I guess one very close to his heart.
	So we're really going to jump into that with both feet tonight.
	I look forward to it.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	Hello.
	Where are you?
	Are?
	Yes.
	Am I on?
	Yes, you are.
	Where are you?
	I'm calling from Canada.
	Canada.
	OK.
	And I want to congratulate President Bush and those troops for their capture.
	And I heard the news right after I listened to you last night on the radio.
	That's right.
	And I think he definitely should be tried in Iraq.
	He has done so much damage to the people over there and the soul of that country that I think it could be a start of the healing for their minds and their hearts if they do see him just as being served to them.
	Do you think, and by the way I certainly agree with you, do you think that the Bush administration will conclude how important it is that he be tried by his own people in Iraq rather than some international court?
	Yes, I do definitely.
	Actually, you know, I said to my father, we were talking about a week and a half ago, I said, you know, he's probably somewhere in the basement, lined with lead, hiding, so they can't see him.
	I said, I wouldn't be surprised if it was under his own house.
	And I said, he's underground somewhere.
	And it was so, in fact, my dad called me so early this morning and said, they got him.
	I goes, I know, I've been listening all early in the morning.
	Did he look pathetic or what?
	You know what?
	He looked like a humbled, we both said he looked like a bum.
	This high, I can never get out of my mind.
	He stood on that balcony of his and shot that rifle and everybody cheered.
	Then he shot it again.
	I said, he looks so stupid.
	And this man was so humbled.
	And he looked like a hobo that came off the alleys.
	And I said, there is, right in front of the people, they've got to see him like that.
	No more is he that feared tyrant that, you know, is like the, that reigns over their minds and thoughts, you know, everywhere.
	Well, it's okay.
	Thank you very much.
	It's almost unanimous so far that he ought to be tried in Iraq.
	I wonder if that's what they'll really do, but obviously it's certainly your point of view so far.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hi, Art.
	Hello.
	This is David.
	I'm calling from Bryan, Texas.
	All right, David.
	We definitely did the right thing in capturing him rather than killing him, because now we can show justice to these people.
	And I guess it, you know, I said it earlier, had he We can't let the U.N.
	try him though, because they'll try to bring up charges against the U.S.
	to take him alive.
	The other point is...
	And so we do prove something by getting him alive.
	I mean, we do about ourselves.
	I guess that's right.
	We can't let the UN try him though, because they'll try to bring up charges against the US
	for various crimes they want to try to assess to us.
	Probably, yes.
	And also, this will have a great impact on the Iranian people, who we're hoping will overthrow their own government, you know, and put a righteous government over there.
	Another good point.
	And on your guest tonight, I believe one of the biggest conspiracies, besides what's been going on in the press, calling this country a democracy instead of a constitutional republic, and banning him.
	I mean, it was William Randolph Hearst who started The conspiracy against so-called marijuana, which was a Mexican slang term no one knew, stood for the cannabis hemp plant.
	Well, I wonder if that'll really play a part in this.
	I'll ask Harry about that.
	It would add over, according to Rand, today it would add over a trillion dollars to our economy if we grew it.
	We could be off of Middle Eastern oil in six months if we started growing it properly.
	My goodness, been a lot of inflation.
	I heard a half trillion, but it's up to a trillion dollars now, huh?
	More than that, and back in 1938, cover story of Popular Science, February, it called hemp the world's first billion dollar crop because of the machine that had just been coming on market to harvest it, turning it from a hand harvest to a mechanical harvest.
	You think we're fighting enough wars, you figure it's time to call a stop to the drug war?
	Yo, it's a war on our civil rights!
	It denies the right to own property, the pursuit of happiness, You know, innocent unless proven guilty.
	They're saying they're committing a crime by violating the government's religion of prohibition.
	They enable organized crime to make money.
	The terrorists get their money.
	It's really one of the only things when you are suspected of it, you can have your property seized.
	If you're later proven innocent, you get it back.
	But I mean, they can just take your property, boom, like that.
	That doesn't seem really constitutional to me.
	How about you?
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello, Art.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Good to hear you back on the air again.
	Thank you.
	Great to be here.
	Where are you?
	I'm on I-5 heading north, and I listen to 640 in L.A.
	All right.
	That's KFI, of course, the mighty one.
	KFI, the big one, yeah.
	Yes, sir.
	On the Saddam Hussein thing, I think you ought to be tried In Iraq, but I think each one of the tribes, the Shiite tribes, the Kurdish tribes ought to send a representative, and he ought to be able to face each one of those tribes that he attacked and did these dastardly attacks to, and have them judge him.
	I think that's a superb idea.
	Do you think this administration, as I asked the last caller, We'll have the sense to recognize that that is the way to do this, or some form of it, as opposed to some great international war crimes.
	I think the international ought to stay out of it.
	I think it's Iraqi people, I think it's something that's just due, and they ought to be the ones that have to say what to do with it.
	Alright, alright, thank you.
	Listen, I hope that some people of Substance are listening this morning and listening to this random sample of opinion because it's very strong.
	It's obvious to me the American people would like to see him tried in his own land by his own people for the crimes he committed against them.
	So, are you listening out there?
	You're on the air, Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	Where are you calling from?
	Hello, Art.
	Hi.
	I'm calling from Austin, Texas, 590 AM, KLBJ.
	Way to do it.
	Thanks.
	I kind of agree with you what you said about the media earlier.
	We've got so many activists out there now that I think the government sometimes goes on what the media says.
	Well, you know what?
	In this case, maybe I'm hoping that's true and they're listening this morning and they're going, hmm, well look at that, the American people would like him tried in his own country.
	Right, but in a way it's kind of an oxymoron to have him tried in this country because The only person that's really controlled that government is him.
	So how can a country that's been under his control for so long have been brainwashed by him try to do an actual prosecution on him?
	I think it would almost be impossible to try to prosecute him over there without having any kind of international law involved.
	If you catch what I'm saying.
	Or translated, how could he get a fair trial in Iraq?
	Yeah, I mean, how can you have a trial over there I mean, their government is torn to pieces over there, and the only way you're going to be able to prosecute this guy right and to make sure that he gets what he deserves is having international law involved, having the U.S.
	involved, having the British involved, to make sure that he pays for his crimes.
	I don't think he ought to be killed.
	I'm afraid if the Iraq Government, um, prosecutes him, they'll kill him right away.
	I think the guy ought to be stripped of everything he has, and he ought to sit and simmer for a while in a cell.
	Alright, let's for a second, though, talk about the victims.
	There are Kurds, thousands of Kurds, family members of those who died in gas attacks where he killed them.
	I'm just in Moss, right?
	Genocide, virtually genocide, with chemicals.
	Don't those people have a right To have a word with regard to what should happen to this man?
	Oh, for sure.
	For sure.
	And I think he should die.
	I just don't think he should die right away.
	I think he ought to sit and simmer for a while and should be tortured for a while and feel what it's like to have everything stripped from you and to live in poverty.
	Oh.
	I think he ought to have a taste of that.
	Oh.
	Oh, my.
	All right.
	Well, so a little torture that inevitably comes up.
	Well, You know, that's what he did to them.
	Now, I think that it is sufficient for the very worst of murderers to take their life as punishment.
	In other words, I believe in the death penalty.
	I always have, and I don't believe in torture.
	But I do believe in the death penalty, so I'm afraid I can't get behind that one.
	But it always comes up in a situation like this.
	First time caller line, you are on the air.
	Hello.
	Yes, Mr. Bell.
	My name is Larry.
	I'm in Phoenix, Arizona.
	Yo, Larry.
	Yes.
	And I think when they captured Saddam and showed his photograph, I think somebody should have put a reward for food sign in his hand.
	He looked like that, didn't he?
	He certainly did.
	I mean, if that really was, if that was the real Saddam, he came out of there looking haggard, tired, beat, ready to be caught, ready to Whatever, just sort of like, I've had enough of this, now I'm finally down in this hole and that's all I got.
	Take me out of here.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	That was pathetic.
	No other word for it.
	I agree completely.
	Pathetic is the word.
	But don't let that affect what else you know about Saddam.
	He was not a good guy.
	He did kill Maybe hundreds of thousands of people.
	Hundreds of thousands of people.
	Perhaps that many.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hey, how you doing, Art?
	Okay, sir.
	Louie from New Jersey?
	Yes, Louie.
	Now listen, everybody's taking this twist about the haggard, old, bomb theory looking man.
	As a Roman Catholic Christian, I'd like to maybe... When I saw that face, I saw forgiveness.
	I saw his eyes.
	I saw a man, a human being.
	Isn't this what it's all about?
	you know to pick it up it comes out of a big incident
	human being the fact that it's just like me
	like you are are but forget but turn the other cheek at the like that and a
	lot of people are gonna
	the best and i think that's just the twist well let's explore this a little bit showing
	Okay, so forgive and forget.
	Today is a new day, and we are Christians after all, so then how do we dispose of, well maybe that's the wrong word How do we handle Saddam from here, from your point of view?
	I mean, if you were in charge, what would you do?
	That is a $64,000 question.
	But at the beginning, I would probably, you know, I don't know if this is hard to say, but Bush can somehow take a page from maybe Tony Blair, and I really don't know how to express myself.
	Well, wait!
	He could pardon him.
	That's a good idea, Art.
	Very good.
	You like a pardon?
	I like that.
	Okay, so you just sort of... Well, I don't know.
	I mean, do you set them loose there back in Iraq?
	Oh, not really.
	Maybe some community service.
	A little community service?
	A lot of community service.
	Taking care of maybe al-Qaeda writings on the wall or something.
	Well, you get it all.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello!
	Yeah, Art!
	Yes, sir!
	Yeah, I wanted to talk about Saddam Hussein.
	This is Dan, I'm over the road in Nebraska.
	Alright, my friend, you're on the air.
	Okay.
	Talk.
	Uh... Yeah, I think what they ought to do with Saddam Hussein is I think they need to turn him over to the Israeli intelligence, to Mossad.
	Oh, really?
	They're going to squeeze this guy where we drop information they can get from him.
	They'll let the Iraqis try him and let them execute his ass.
	I've got you all right.
	So to the Mossad first for a little massage for information and then give him to the Iraqis for disposal.
	What's to the Iraqis?
	You're on the air.
	Hello.
	I am?
	You are.
	Okay.
	I'm worried about Saddam Hussein.
	I think it was a waste of 25 million dollars.
	Because it's obvious to me he hasn't been running anything in that country for a long time.
	You don't think so?
	If that was him.
	You don't think so?
	Whatever problems that they had before they captured him, they're going to have for a long time.
	Are you saying you think there was a shadow government there doing the real work?
	I don't know if it was a shadow government.
	I'm going to tell you that the man I saw today looks like he's been in custody evidently for a long time.
	You know, I don't know who he was.
	If he was Saddam Hussein, it doesn't look like they captured him this morning.
	But that's kind of beside the point.
	I don't think he's been running anything.
	All right.
	Goodbye.
	Goodbye and thank you.
	Not running a thing.
	You're on the air on the International Line.
	Where are you?
	I am in Manitoba, Canada.
	Manitoba.
	All right.
	Welcome to the program.
	Hello.
	Turn your radio off.
	That's always number one.
	And proceed.
	Hello.
	Yes.
	I'm just wondering.
	I'm kind of still baffled.
	Why did they even go after Saddam Hussein?
	Why?
	Why did they go after him?
	It wasn't the first thing they thought, because of 9-11, they thought he was behind that.
	Well, no, I don't think they ever really, really thought that, to be honest with you.
	But then there was the weapons of mass destruction.
	Well, yes.
	And nothing happened with that.
	Well, we don't have those yet.
	And then, finally, it's what?
	Liberating the Iraq people now?
	Ah, it did come down to that, yes.
	Can't believe they're still... Nevertheless, sir, nevertheless, we do appear to have Saddam.
	So now what?
	That's the question of the hour.
	Now what?
	So, now what?
	I don't know.
	I say they should try him in Iraq, but I still don't know even why they bothered going after him, wasting all the money and lives.
	You know what I'm saying?
	Well, I do, yes.
	I don't know that I agree with it, but I know what you're saying, sure.
	Actually, I was against the war, to be honest with you.
	I was pretty much against the whole concept in the first place, as you well know.
	I am nevertheless very pleased that the United States has this mass murderer in custody.
	And I think if you can draw any conclusions from what we've heard tonight in this first hour, it would be the majority of you calling, given a random sample, of course, think that he ought to be tried in his own country.
	That we should turn them over to the Iraqis, perhaps wait until the government's a little more stabilized than it is presently, and then let them be tried there.
	there we will be right back
	Stay right where you are.
	Find out more about tonight's guest.
	Log on to coasttocoastam.com I said no one can take your place
	And if you get hurt, if you get hurt By the little things I say
	I can put that smile back on your face ["Book of Rottenfellows"]
	["Yo, this baby♡ Can dance♡"]
	Go and do the speedy-back dance Watch that city dig its dancing feet
	Friday night and the lights are low Looking out for a place to go
	Looking up for a place to go.
	Where they play the right music Daring in the swing, you come to love the game
	Anybody could speed that car Got as young as music's car
	Wanna take a ride?
	To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 775-727-1295.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country Sprint Access number, pressing
	option 5, and dialing toll free 800-618-8253.
	Will the world ever get that again?
	Probably, but not necessarily while we're here.
	From coast to coast and worldwide on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	I wonder if the world will ever get a group like ABBA that could harmonize like ABBA again.
	Will the world ever get that again? Probably, but not necessarily while we're here.
	It's been too long since I have been signed.
	Alright, coming up, we're going to have some fun.
	Harry Helms is the author of over a dozen books, mostly scientific books, technical topics, that kind of thing.
	His books include Computer Language Reference Guide.
	Ooh, maybe I can ask him about my big problem.
	Electronic Circuits Cookbook, All About Ham Radio, Shortwave Listening Guidebook, and his latest, Inside the Shadow Government.
	That's quite a leap for Harry or anybody else.
	He is a former editor for such publications as McGraw-Hill and Academic Press, co-founder of LLH Technology Publishing.
	Now, he's a full-time writer and publishing consultant.
	He has written about Ham, Shortwave, and Pirate Radio for magazines like Popular Communications and Monitoring Times.
	in a moment, Harry Helms.
	We had so much fun with Harry Helms the first time he was on.
	I mean, after all, you know me and radio, right?
	Every single aspect of radio, I am in love with it, always have been.
	Monitoring, listening to different things, as many as you can hear, amateur radio, ham radio, just a blast, folks.
	And so Harry was a natural for me.
	We're going to go down some different avenues with Harry tonight.
	But first, let's catch up.
	Harry, welcome back to the program.
	Good morning, Art.
	Good morning.
	I'd like to catch up, Harry, if I could, with sort of the radio side of things before we get in a jump leap into the shadow government topic.
	So, what's new since the last time you were on with regard to radio, any part of radio, and what's good monitoring?
	What's hot?
	Well, one of the things that we discussed last time, Art, was the Cuban numbers stations.
	Stations that broadcast groups of numbers in Spanish in blocks of five.
	That's right.
	These are known to be communications to agents in the field using what's known as the one-time pad method of decoding numbers, where the groups of numbers will be transmitted, the agent copies them down, subtracts them from another list of numbers, and then decodes the message.
	Now, this is a system where if you try to decode the message yourself, It's an exercise in frustration.
	The people of the National Security Agencies have supercomputers busy at it, and really there's no evidence they're any better than the rest of us, but certainly these transmissions are easy to hear throughout North America, and it's a bit exciting to say, hey, I'm listening to a message sent to an actual spy.
	Well, that's right.
	I mean, you'll come across a shortwave frequency and you'll just hear some young lady, perhaps with a Spanish accent or not, going 51.
	17, 14, 34, 6.
	Just like that.
	And in groups and groups and groups.
	And that's spy stuff, huh?
	Yes, indeed.
	The Spanish numbers sound very much like the system used by the telephone company when you reach a discontinued number to spell out the new number.
	So you'll hear something like 8, 2, 4, 7, 7, 1, 1, 2, 5, 7.
	That's the pacing.
	Those are the five-digit blocks.
	You can hear these in North America from about sundown on the East Coast until about sunrise on the East Coast throughout the night.
	Now these are some frequencies that have been very active over the past couple of months and so I'll give them for your listeners.
	Oh yes, please do.
	First one is 8010 kHz.
	Got it.
	8097 kHz.
	Got it.
	Got it. 8097 kilohertz. Got it. 9063 kilohertz.
	This is fun to listen to, folks.
	Go ahead.
	9323 kilohertz.
	9323.
	And 9908 kilohertz.
	9908.
	These are all in the AM mode of your shortwave receiver.
	Really?
	And you can, one distinguishing characteristic of these stations, and one that indicates they are probably from Cuba, is that there's a very loud hum on these signals.
	And if you've listened to the shortwave transmissions from like Radio Havana, Cuba, you also hear that same distinct hum from older transmitters that have not been well maintained over the years.
	And I suppose the local... Let me try and get rid of this echo.
	I've got a little bit of echo here.
	I suppose also the fact that the local Cuban power supplies, kind of like the Russians in the old days, probably aren't that good.
	True, and also since the collapse of the Soviet bloc in the Soviet Union, those spare parts are hard to come by in Cuba.
	Indeed.
	In fact, I guess the Cubans are still driving around a lot of old American vehicles, cars, you know, from the 50s and the 40s and the 30s.
	I mean, you see really old vehicles in Cuba.
	True.
	But these spy transmissions have long fascinated me, because how often do those of us who sit at home in front of our shortwave radios actually Get to match wits with the CIA and the National Security Agency.
	Well, you get to do that with this.
	Well, make your best case.
	I mean, the world has changed.
	To some degree, ham radio is threatened by the arrival of the Internet and the computer.
	If you were to try to make your best case, Harry, about why people should still listen to shortwave and why it's still fun to listen to shortwave, what would you say?
	Two things.
	One is that shortwave radio is Simplicity is a virtue because when everything else fails, when the internet is down through denial of service attacks or too many users trying to access a certain dial-up number, shortwave still gets through.
	Well said.
	It's the safety net for people who want to have access to the world.
	And it does give you that, doesn't it?
	Access to the world.
	And at a remarkably low price compared to, say, a computer and internet high-speed dial-up connection.
	Well, that's right.
	The second thing is that for those of us who like a sense of adventure, trying to find these new stations, or these unusual stations, like these numbers stations, or pirate radio stations, it's a bit like fishing.
	Some nights you turn on the radio, you turn around, you hear nothing new or unusual.
	Some nights you hear something that's quite surprising.
	It's that element of unpredictability that I think makes Shortwave radio monitoring is so compelling.
	Harry, how do you really feel about the pirates?
	I mean, these are people after all that are breaking the law, right?
	That cannot be denied, and I certainly would not advocate that someone go out and operate a pirate station, because there are some substantial penalties if you do get caught.
	Like $10,000 a day, and they'll take your equipment, and all kinds of bad stuff can happen to you.
	Multiple bad things.
	Multiple bad things, yeah.
	But people, I guess, do it anyway, and that puts it up there to be listened to, right?
	There's no restrictions whatsoever on listening to these communications, or even attempting to contact the operators.
	If I were to listen to pirate radio, what kind of stuff would I likely hear?
	Many pirate stations are operated by young people, so you'll hear the things that are dear to young people's hearts, such as rock, hip-hop music.
	Much of the programming is frankly rather amateurish from production value, even though it can be surprisingly funny.
	It's often scatological in part.
	But it's certainly, I think, considerably different from anything you'll hear on the AM or FM bands.
	Well, I got a hot button question for you.
	If you had a station like the one you were just talking about playing hip hop, I mean, obviously, from the FCC's point of view, it's a kid out there messing around.
	So you take that pirate station, then let's consider a second pirate station.
	One in which somebody's a political activist and they don't like, let's say, the Bush administration.
	And so they're actively on the air every night transmitting their hate toward the Bush administration.
	Which one of those pirate stations do you suppose the FCC would pursue?
	Frankly, the FCC has shown a greater tendency in the past to go after overtly political stations.
	There have been stations in the past operated by the Ku Klux Klan, by white supremacists.
	These have been busted over the ordinary run-of-the-mill pirate stations.
	Do you think internally they've got a policy that perhaps is a little lenient when they know it's a kid playing around out there?
	I think it's a policy of allocating their resources on how much attention the station is attracting.
	An overtly political or quasi clandestine station, if you will, will attract more attention and perhaps make more of an impact in news media.
	Maybe we'll have more people complaining about Well, as a station just playing music and other programming aimed at young people, well, that's no big deal.
	So I think it's just simply a matter of the squeakiest wheel getting the most grease.
	All right.
	Then let's try this one, Harry.
	The reason that the majority of these kids put a pirate station on the air is because they love radio.
	And they're looking for any way at all to get into radio, to experience what it's like to broadcast.
	There are gazillions of people like this, Harry, because of what I do.
	They come to me all the time, and I was there myself.
	I was almost born on a radio.
	I just plain love every aspect of it, and so that's what makes these pirates do what they do.
	Do you think, Harry, that we should have some avenue, some way, and I guess you could say CB or ham radios a way, and certainly they are, but I mean something else.
	Some way that young people could legally do some small-scale operation.
	Should there be something?
	We are critically overdue for that, Art, in my opinion.
	Critically overdue.
	Well, what would you set up, Harry?
	There are several regions.
	For example, let's say just above the expanded AM broadcast span from about 1700 to 1750.
	Yes.
	That's an area, and you tune across at night, and it's essentially dead.
	Yes.
	I could see, for example, authorizing low power stations, say no more than 50 watts or so, into a limited antenna, maybe a quarter wave, in that range for a non-commercial broadcasting.
	There's also a little bit of leeway above and below the FM band that could be used, like say down from 87 to 88 perhaps.
	There are also a possibility with television going through all digital and new channel allocations for some frequency space to be freed up there.
	So, something that would be basically the broadcasting equivalent of CB radio.
	Low power, short range, but with few restrictions and low cost equipment.
	I think that is something Not just for kids, but for every person who wants to go on the air and express an opinion.
	There's certainly... I've been... Harry, I've been an advocate of this for I don't know how long.
	Some low-powered... Now, low-power radio and low-power television... Actually, low-power radio and low-power television were both proposed and to some degree were passed, but large lobbyists kind of squashed The low-power radio business, so it's groups, you know, churches and that sort of thing, which is fine, but nothing for individuals really, right?
	That's true.
	The low-power FM initiative a few years ago was indeed adopted by FCC, but the technical standards the FCC imposed on these stations basically put just the administrative overhead of complying with the technical standards beyond the reach of the average person.
	It takes, as you said, some sort of A church-based or community-based broadcaster to be able to afford a low-power FM station.
	Do you think that the... Now, of course, go back, Harry, to when the Federal Communications Commission took the 11 meter band away from the hams and they gave it to the Seabeers.
	A gigantic, incredible, monstrous mistake.
	In every way you can imagine.
	I mean, 27 megahertz is not a local communications frequency most of the time.
	It's skip.
	It's a mess.
	It's become just a sort of a bad land of people who are now encroaching on the 10 meter ham band.
	I mean, it's a disaster up there.
	And I've got CB because it'll save your butt on the road.
	But it was a disaster.
	It could have been put up in VHF or somewhere else.
	So what do you think about that?
	I mean, you know, when you're proposing a little space above the broadcast band, is that going to turn into another CB band?
	Freedom always carries with it some risk, including that people will be misbehaving to a degree.
	But then that's part of price tag for freedom.
	It's interesting that free speech applies to, say, if you want to do something in writing, you don't have to get government permission.
	If you want to publish a book, you don't need government permission.
	If you want to put up a website, you don't need government permission.
	But if you want to send something out on the airways, which theoretically belong to all the people of the United States, then you have to get the government's permission.
	And I think that we've been a bit too restrictive over the average citizen's access to the airways if they're on transmitted equipment over the years.
	Yes, we need some standards, but the way it is now, we have restrictions and no standards whatsoever.
	So, you're sort of admitting then, there would be, with space at the top of the broadcast band, maybe either side of the FM band, whatever, there would be trouble as a result of it, but you're saying that's part of the price of freedom?
	Freedom is not always orderly nor neat.
	There's going to be always a certain messiness with any sort of freedom.
	The thing is, the benefits of freedom outweigh, I think, the downsides of people abusing those privileges.
	Yeah, that's a good answer.
	Do you think any such proposal has a chance of really making it through, Harry?
	In all honesty, I would be extremely dubious.
	I think perhaps something that would be, maybe we could get the power limit for FM raised from 100 milliwatts to maybe 1 watt, or something of that nature, but I think At this stage, being realistic, I think the odds are quite long that the FCC would do such a thing.
	There are mysterious sounds on the shortwave bands.
	Harry, lately on the 40 meter hand band, there has been a 100 kilohertz wide sound.
	I don't know if you... Did you ever hear me play that on the air?
	Yes, I did.
	You did!
	Do you have any thoughts at all about that signal?
	It was so interesting, because after I brought it up, it had been there for months and months, I brought it up, and it disappeared!
	That tends to happen when you hear the NBC about it, and you have some sort of media connection that could publicize it or write about it.
	I've had similar experiences.
	I think what you heard, Art, was probably a variation of the over-the-horizon radar system.
	Which uses the ionosphere.
	Sends a radio signal up there, refracts off the ionosphere, hits the ocean surface, it echoes back up to the ionosphere, and is received at a location near the transmitting site.
	And this can be used to track such things as small ocean vessels, submarines that have briefly surfaced, things like that which cannot be readily tracked by satellites or ground-based radar.
	Right.
	Exactly correct, Harry.
	I think that's what it was myself, and the majority of opinion, after I played it on the air, was that it was that.
	So you're with the strong majority on that, Harry.
	And we also have people up in Alaska, HAARP, doing all sorts of interesting things with our ionosphere.
	Yes, we talked about HAARP last night, and I'd wager you probably heard the program.
	Yes, indeed.
	About HAARP.
	Knowing as much as you do about radio and what it can and can't do, you're very knowledgeable.
	And you got to hear the program on HAARP last night.
	What do you think?
	My pet theory is that HAARP is actually some sort of weapons-related project intended to disrupt or disturb shortwave communications, particularly the guidance or the guidance systems of missiles.
	By pumping so much energy into the ion sphere that it becomes highly absorptive of all radio signals, thereby disrupting shortwave communications, or perhaps playing tricks with the guidance systems of missiles that would be coming in over the North Pole.
	Wow.
	That's pretty heavy stuff.
	No question about it.
	So you think that... Alright, well then, I have one more radio-related question for you, and it's a doozy.
	Are you familiar with the BPL, Harry?
	Do you know what that stands for?
	Oh, yes.
	Broadband Over Power Lines.
	Broadband Over Power Lines.
	Now, there is this scheme, folks, it's really interesting, to turn all of the power lines in America, I mean all of the power lines in America, into delivery systems for the Internet, so that we could deliver broadband to every home in the United States.
	Isn't that right, Harry?
	Along with it generating a good bit of radio interference in the process.
	Yes, well, I was going to get to that part right after the break, and that's what we're going to do.
	We're at the break point.
	Harry Helms is my guest.
	He knows about radio, and we will address the BPL, Broadband Over the Power Lines, issue in a moment.
	And then, and then... A boom-bah, indeed.
	we'll talk about shadow government shadow government
	shadow government shadow government
	I know I really do
	Can you hear me?
	He came from somewhere back in a long ago The sound of every fool down sea trying hard to recreate
	shadow government shadow government
	what had yet to be created Once in her life she musters a smile for his nostalgic tale
	Never coming near what he wanted to say Only to realize it never really was
	She had a place in his life He never made her day cry
	As she rises to her apology Anybody else would surely know
	He's watching her go Boy, it would be a good day
	To talk with Art Bell, call the Wildcard line at The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	The international caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country Sprint Access number,
	pressing option 5 and dialing toll free, 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast and worldwide on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	There is this incredible thing called broadband over the power lines, or BPL, that most Americans probably weren't even aware of.
	And there's been this intense, gigantic fight going on between those of us who use the radio spectrum and people who saw dollar signs in their eyes.
	It would have been a national tragedy.
	I'll tell you all about it, so will Harry, in a moment.
	Alright, one more time.
	Broadband over the power lines.
	BPL.
	A monstrous controversy going on, and here's why.
	Because power companies and internet providers and... Oh, I tell you, they just saw dollar signs like you would not believe.
	And the idea was to transfer the internet over power lines.
	You know, the ones going out in front of your house?
	Those long lines that really are antennas.
	I mean, they're unshielded wires that carry electricity.
	And, well, they thought, well, you could carry the Internet, too.
	And there's just one little hitch in that idea.
	And that hitch, of course, is that it would produce noise.
	It would wipe out the shortwave band.
	It would wipe out ham radio.
	It would wipe out CB.
	It would wipe out international broadcasters.
	It would wipe out Well, you know who it'd wipe out?
	It'd wipe out FEMA!
	The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
	And they just filed against BPL, and so a lot of people are going, whew!
	Looks like we may have dodged a bullet, because the last I heard, FEMA said, look, our stuff won't work if you go ahead with this idea.
	Do you think BPL's going to be dead because of that?
	I certainly hope so, Art, because In addition to the shortwave bands, if anyone is out there listening to coast-to-coast AM on an AM broadcast band station, the EPL will also do a number on that.
	That's right.
	Listeners may have noticed in the past when they're out in their car listening to AM radio and they pass their power line, that loud buzz.
	And it gets real noisy as you get near the power line.
	Now imagine that buzz not being restricted to near a power line, But virtually anywhere in the United States, and you hear that noise 24-7, so unless you're within a very short radius of an AM broadcast station, if BPL were implemented, you wouldn't be able to hear it.
	It would be, for all intents and purposes, The effective end of AM radio reception outside of a few miles of the transmitter.
	That's right, and so much more, Harry, would have been interfered with, effectively dead, and it looked like the FCC was in favor of BPL.
	That is one of the more incomprehensible stances the FCC has come up with in recent years.
	Unless, here's what I thought, Harry, unless the FCC knew in the end It was going to get killed and they sort of went along with some people just to say, hey, we gave it the college try.
	I mean, that's all I can imagine.
	There's certainly that.
	And the other part is, you know, many of the people in the FCC making decisions regarding technical matters are lawyers, MBAs and other people with technical background.
	Yes.
	Now, the other thing about BPL that was puzzling to me Is that, yes, those power lines are good radiators of signal, but the Internet is two-way.
	You have to send material messages into the Internet, into those power lines.
	That is a hacker's dream!
	Yeah, that's right.
	It really is a hacker's dream, isn't it?
	It's almost as if the FCC was saying, okay, we're going to make it easier for hackers to hack into your dial-up Internet connection.
	And that's what BPL would have been.
	You would probably have widespread hijacking of email addresses, of great theft of internet service.
	So I thought, not just as dangerous for radio listeners and other users of the radio spectrum such as police, fire, and emergency services, it would have been a nightmare for users of the internet via BPL who would suddenly find that their web It almost really would have been over for, you know, monitoring and, well, it would have been over.
	I mean, it would have killed, potentially killed, shortwave.
	It's incredible.
	Well, also look at the impact on military communications.
	Well, that's of course what FEMA essentially was saying.
	The military has yet to chime in, I think, but surely they will.
	Hopefully this is deader than a doornail.
	I certainly hope so, simply because it would not just have been bad for us who are interested in radio, the radio hobby or radio listening.
	It would have been bad for average consumers, including internet users.
	All right.
	Having said all this, let's now take the giant leap, Harry.
	You have just written a book.
	First of all, I guess I'd like to know, how do you get from being interested in radio and monitoring, which is kind of a technical thing, to writing a book about the shadow government?
	It came about, Art, years ago when I first visited a site along the eastern Sierra of California called Manzanar.
	Which was the site of a relocation camp for Japanese-Americans during World War II.
	Oh, yes.
	I had an interest in ghost towns and archaeological sites, and suddenly I saw what appeared to be a couple of Japanese pagodas against the Sierra Nevada Mountains.
	Checking it out, I got into the history of the place and found about several thousand Japanese-Americans who were relocated there during World War II.
	And as I got into the history, I determined that these people Most of them were American citizens.
	None of them were charged with espionage or any other crime, nor were they ever convicted of a crime.
	They were kept there for their duration by a direct order of the President, not an act of Congress.
	And they were basically held as prisoners in their own country.
	And I started to say, how was this possible?
	And as I dug deeper into it, I discovered that The mechanisms, the tools that allowed President Roosevelt to order people on the basis of a race to be held on military camp indefinitely, those tools were still in place, still valid, could still be used by an American president, and in fact have been greatly expanded over the years.
	The term shadow government is not original with me.
	From a May 2002 article in the Washington Post.
	Let's try this.
	Define for me what you mean when you say shadow government.
	Define it.
	The shadow government is the collection of laws, court decisions, facilities, procedures, and tools by which the president, upon declaration of a state of national emergency, can basically circumvent You know, I understand the fear, Harry, attached to that.
	Honestly, I do.
	And I have some of it myself.
	so it is an executive order uh...
	you know i understand the fear uh... harry attached to that
	honestly i do and and and i have some of it uh... myself
	uh...
	we have to have something that awful as it sounds
	there has to be a contingency does they're not Particularly in the days in which, you know, people drive airplanes into buildings and things like that.
	There has to be a way to continue, to govern, to get the word out, to have civilization, no matter what might happen.
	Don't we need that?
	We need, indeed, some standby contingency plants.
	However, the point of my book is that these plants have gone far beyond Prudent, rational safeguards for the event of a sudden nuclear attack.
	They have become so expansive and so open to misuse that it's where these powers could actually be a greater threat to our long-term liberties and constitutional rights than the external threats.
	For example, I used the phrase, this happens when the President declares a state of national Well, what constitutes a State of National Emergency?
	Simply put, whatever the President feels is a State of National Emergency.
	You might remember, 1971, President Nixon declared a State of National Emergency, and he froze wages and prices for several weeks.
	Yes, he did.
	Now, where in the Constitution does it say that he has that ability?
	And it so happens that he said that the unstable U.S.
	balance of payments constitute a national emergency.
	Well, the President, when he declares the state a national emergency, that state remains in effect for six months before Congress can overturn it.
	So what would constitute a state of national emergency?
	That he might lose a re-election campaign?
	Okay, he might be impeached.
	No, that's getting down to the meat of it.
	Is it your contention, and there were rumors, for example, that President Nixon was going to do something like you're talking about right now instead of leaving office, that he was going to declare some kind of state of emergency and suspend the Constitution and we were suddenly going to not be a democracy anymore.
	Those rumors were out there.
	Actually, you know what?
	Those rumors have been out there, frankly, for every president, I think, since I've been alive.
	You know, that somebody would soon do this.
	Well, we do know that in the final days of the Nixon administration, his chief of staff, General Alexander Haig, had all communications and written directives coming out of the president's office passed by his desk first.
	And he imposed that only in the last few weeks of the Nixon administration.
	He never said why he did it, but it is widely assumed that he was worried that President Nixon would try exactly what you described here.
	You believe he was worried about that?
	There are some who think that Alexander Haig actually had plans of his own along those lines, which you obviously believe the first.
	I tend to believe the first, but certainly the second cannot be ruled out.
	Yeah, most people believe the second.
	I mean, they all remember the moment when he stood up and said, well, I'm in charge here at the White House, or whatever it was he said.
	Maybe it was a Fortean slip.
	Well, maybe.
	But you think these powers have now been put in place to the point where a president with evil intent could, in fact, turn us overnight from a democracy into a dictatorship.
	As I point out in my book, I include in a very lengthy appendix the complete text of several of these Presidential Executive Orders, the most sweeping of which were signed and introduced during the Nixon and Clinton administrations.
	When the President declares a state of national emergency now, for whatever reason, he can do, like President Roosevelt did in World War II, detain indefinitely any group of Americans for whatever reason he sees ...without filing charges, without legal proceedings, without legal representation.
	In other words, you'd be no better off than the Al-Qaeda prisoners at Guantanamo right now.
	He can seize private property, including your auto, your home, your computer, furniture, whatever.
	He can order you to work at specified jobs.
	He can seize your bank accounts.
	He can seize control of all radio and TV stations.
	He can control access to food and medical supplies.
	Boy, that's a lot to even begin to tackle here, but I'll stop you at radio and television.
	As a matter of interest, Harry, how do you imagine an administration would seize control of all broadcasting?
	I would think that first you would go to the major networks and broadcasting concerns.
	The major broadcasting media groups do that.
	Well, what I mean is, is there some great master switch that they can Throw and take control of virtually everything?
	No great master switch, but it would send out orders and say, here's where you're going to get your program via this line feed, and that's the line feed you would use if you wanted to stay on the air.
	If you refuse to comply, some soldiers could come down and they could seize it.
	Just imagining such a world is outlandish, Harry.
	I own a little radio station here in Provence.
	Right?
	KNYN.
	And to imagine that somebody would order me to take a certain feed or else is so far beyond what I know and feel as an American that I just can't even imagine it.
	That's the main reaction when people have when the subject of shadow government comes up because it sounds so inherently preposterous that you say this cannot be.
	Yes.
	If I told you on September 10th, 2001, however, that a group of young Arab males Arm would not be more than box cutter knives.
	Would, in less than 24 hours, kill over 3,000 Americans and basically destroy two major landmarks in Washington, New York.
	Would you believe that?
	No.
	Right.
	And it's the things that are most unthinkable that sometimes we have to think about in order to prevent.
	Okay.
	That makes me jump over on the other side.
	The fact of the matter is, we now know all too well that kind of thing can happen.
	So again, You know, these things that are so extreme that you're talking about, they are terribly extreme.
	How do you prepare to fight something like that, or even worse, without having this kind of stuff in place?
	And I think you agree, some of it has to be in place.
	So how do you shepherd all this?
	How do you have oversight?
	You know, to protect freedom, we don't have to trash the Constitution.
	What I do propose in my book is that we simply develop openly a system, a methodology in the Constitution by which we will handle catastrophic events.
	For example, a nuclear strike, terrorist event, or something else that, for example, would remove everyone in the presidential line of succession.
	Let's put in the Constitution how we would reconstitute and restore Our constitutional democratic government.
	So you're talking about an actual constitutional amendment here, right?
	Yes, indeed.
	And it would outline it for me?
	Yes, indeed.
	And once people knew what would be done, how it would be handled, I think you would have far greater acceptance of it than some of these sub-rows of things which are hidden under the table.
	Okay, that's scary.
	I agree.
	Go ahead and outline the kind of change constitutionally you would see.
	I mean, what roughly would it say?
	It could be something such as this.
	If everyone in the presidential line of secession were killed, the governors or surviving governors of the states would then elect a replacement president to serve out the remainder of the term or some other specified period.
	The same thing would be that, or we could say that in the event everyone in the presidential line of secession is killed, the governors of states, say maybe in order of population or admission to the union, whatever formula you would use, Would come up.
	You're just addressing secession now.
	Yes, indeed.
	But that doesn't tell me what safeguards and powers you would have to place in the hands of that ultimately elected person to deal with a potential emergency.
	There are already plenty of national emergency powers on the books which are known and open.
	Well, right, but according to you, too many.
	Too many, and also too many without the accountability of the people.
	At least here in the Constitution, we have accountability to the people, to the state legislatures, to the state governors, and to the people who elect them.
	What has happened now is that there has been a cleavage between power and the accountability at this level.
	This is the thing that disturbs me, because many of these powers are not being used to fight terrorism.
	Well, let me be devil's advocate, Harry.
	Those powers that we're talking about, extreme as they are, are put in place precisely so they can be wielded by, for example, one individual, who, the President of the United States.
	Why?
	If you had all kinds of oversight and procedural things you would have to go through, you'd never get anything done.
	And if you were, or at least not fast enough, and if you were facing an immediate emergency, somewhere along the line somebody's got to act real quickly, and bureaucracies and committees don't do that.
	You need that, but also I think you need closer definition, for example, of what would constitute a national emergency.
	Right now it's up to the whim of the President.
	Well, how about somebody planting a big dirty bomb in one of our cities and notifying us, or a big real bomb, whatever, you know, something awful about to hit us.
	That would kind of qualify as a state of national emergency, right?
	It certainly would, but as I point out in the book, since 1933, for all but nine months ...of history, the United States has been operating under one or more presidentially declared states of national emergency.
	Now that's a little bit too broad.
	Sure, we've had some legitimate national emergencies and matters of grave crisis during those times, but certainly not every single month but nine since 1933 has been a moment of national emergency.
	Hold it right there!
	Oh boy!
	Headaches?
	Indeed.
	Nothing but heartaches in fact Nothing but a heartache never ending
	Nothing but a heartache until the moment we're waiting Nothing but a heartache
	That's not what you're thinking It's hard to know why can't I get him
	Nothing but a heartache never ending Nothing but a heartache until the moment we're waiting
	Nothing but a heartache Across the sea
	Santa Catalina is a-waiting for me Santa Catalina, the island of romance
	Romance, romance, romance Water all around it, everywhere
	Tropical trees and salty air For me, nothing that's awaitin' there, no plans.
	It seems so distant, twenty-six miles away.
	Restin' in the water, they're so really gone.
	They're like work for anyone, even the name.
	Hey, who could put me to my own?
	Twenty-six miles so near, yet far.
	To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 775-727-1295.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	at area code 775-727-1295. The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222. To
	talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033. From west
	of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255. International callers may reach Art Bell by
	calling your in-country Sprint Access number, pressing option 5 and dialing toll free 800-893-0253.
	0903 From coast to coast and worldwide on the Internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	I'll tell you folks, think of it as maybe, I don't know, how about a Internment camp for wrong-thinking Americans.
	Counting even a good one.
	26 miles across the city.
	We're talking about the shadow government.
	And a lot of times when I talk about the shadow government, or I conceive of it, I think of things like that.
	You know, uh, internment camps, that sort of thing.
	We'll touch on all of that.
	Be assured of it.
	Stay right there.
	Harry Helms is my guest.
	Well, okay, how about it, Harry?
	Internment camps, is that something, you know, there's always rumors of it.
	I mean, you hear these internet rumors that pilots have been seeing these sequestered off of internment camps, waiting for wrong-thinking Americans who are going to be on the wrong side of an executive order, that kind of thing.
	You've heard about all that, right?
	Yes, indeed.
	In fact, I think many of these reports got their start back in 1984, when the news first came out of something called Rex 84, or Readiness Exercise 84.
	I remember that.
	This was an exercise conducted in the Reagan White House, headed up by Colonel Oliver North, which was to simulate what would happen if there would be a revolution in Central America, sending a great number of people north of the border, illegally north of the border, and what would we do with this?
	and rec city four uh... with a plan to help hundreds of thousands of these people
	all military camp in temporary housing
	uh... these would not be the former formal law would structure but health and uh... temporary structures
	that means all large military camp
	So you're telling me this was not originally for wrong-thinking Americans, politically disagreeable people, to be tossed into?
	Not originally, but of course you can house a right-thinking and a wrong-thinking person just as easily.
	Sure.
	To White during the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987.
	That's where it first came to light about REC-84.
	Was that, if I remember during the Iran-Contra hearings, was that sort of briefly brought up and then squashed real quick?
	Yes, indeed.
	That came up during an exchange between Oliver North and Senate Representative Jack Brooks of Texas.
	Do you remember exactly what Oli North said or something close?
	Ollie North did not even get a chance to ask the question.
	Senator Brooks first approached Colonel North, asking if he had taken part in a plan known as Readiness Exercise 84.
	And at that point, Brendan Sullivan, who was Colonel North's attorney, immediately said, Mr. Chairman, we're in, that's classified, Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii.
	That would still be the basic blueprint for housing large numbers of people in the event it was considered necessary.
	that's right i remember it's not right so uh... where do we stand with that is that still
	and would still be the basic blueprint for housing large numbers of people
	in the event it was considered necessary you might remember during the clinton administration
	many refugees were brought over from bosnia and temporarily house of military camp
	I want to play devil's advocate again.
	Let's say that Harry Helms is president, and let's say that the big news of the day is that there's about to be a bloody, bloody revolution in Mexico, and that unrest has become out of control in Mexico.
	I'm not saying all this is going to happen, I'm just saying, let's say that's the news of the day, and the possibility is that Well, no, let's make it millions of Mexicans would flee such a bloody civil war and come across the border.
	Now, Mr. President Helms, we know that's what we're facing.
	We don't have enough troops, nor can we simply mow people down on the border as they try to flee a war, Mr. President, so what do we do?
	I think we could do a much more effective job of sealing the border than your question presupposes.
	Oh, you do?
	Yes, indeed.
	Particularly when you're talking about people who would be arriving largely on foot through open territory.
	Now, we could shut down major highways and such, but there'd be ways... Well, I guess what I'm asking, Mr. President, is would you turn them back to possibly assure death in the middle of a bloody revolution, or would you accept them across the border?
	You might make some limited exception of people, but if you're going to have a nation, you need to have secure borders.
	That's the definition of a nation.
	You can defend your own borders.
	I think this sort of large-scale housing of several hundreds of thousands would not be in anyone's interest, because it would simply encourage more people to come.
	So you, as President, then, would order some sort of real seal to the border?
	Yes, indeed.
	Even if that meant the taking of life, if necessary?
	If it would be necessary to protect American life, I would have no hesitancy.
	Okay.
	So then you think this whole Rex business is ludicrous and could be used for the wrong thing?
	Well, that is the key thing.
	Again, I don't want to say that we don't need any contingency plans whatsoever, or that we can just simply get by in this world on good intentions.
	My problem with this is that the definition of what constitutes an emergency, namely, it's defined by the President for whatever reason CEC is fit, is far too elastic, and that many of the provisions of these, particularly those that affect the rights and constitutional rights and privileges of American citizens, are far too expensive. For example, the September 11th
	attacks were not caused by American citizens freely exercising their constitutional rights, and restricting
	the constitutional rights of citizens would not have prevented those attacks nor
	future attacks.
	Well, that's true.
	It is a failure, rather, for the various agencies of the United States to coordinate and share
	the information they have, such as between the various FBI offices, the Immigration and
	Naturalization Services, and these other agencies of government to properly coordinate and use
	the available information, and to enforce the available laws on the books.
	We now know, for example, that most of the September 11th hijackers were here illegally.
	So my point is that rather than this huge Secret, under-the-table collection of laws, plans, contingencies.
	What we really need is more effective and focused enforcement of the laws that we already have on the books.
	Okay, but Harry, again playing that devil I do so well, we live in a modern world where we have, gee, the internet and all of these very fast, very electronic, very effective means of communication.
	And those communication channels can be used to plan bad things as well as good.
	And so I understand, for example, the Fourth Amendment and our rights to privacy.
	But then again, I also understand our government's need, if they're even going to try and prevent another tragedy in this country, to get hold of, sift through, a lot of this information and that's going to run smack into the Fourth Amendment a thousand miles an hour.
	I'm wondering though how much of this is germane to a task.
	You are probably aware of a program that was floated briefly last year called the Total Information Awareness Program.
	Yes.
	A brainchild of Admiral John Poindexter, also of Iran-Contra fame.
	It would gather such information as Your prescription drug records.
	It would have gathered such information as which movies you rent from major movie rental outlets.
	Books you read at the library.
	Yes.
	So I'd like to know how, for example, knowing that you have a certain medicine for high blood pressure or that you prefer to watch kung fu flicks, how this ties into preventing terrorism?
	I fail to see the link, and I see the potential for abuse.
	Okay, I'm going to have to continue as the devil.
	It doesn't, Harry, is the answer, and all of that information would be completely useless and irrelevant from the point of view of trying to stop an act of terrorism.
	However, it may just be that one piece of information, one email sent, one, I don't know, communication, one telephone call, one something Could stop another bunch of airplanes from bumping into buildings real hard.
	And maybe it could, Harry.
	You can't deny that fact.
	It might.
	And so where and how do we draw that line about what our government can and can't listen to in our defense?
	They are here supposedly for our welfare, safety.
	You do what every cop does as part of their investigative procedure.
	Namely, you focus on the likely suspects.
	Even if the government wanted to, it clearly doesn't have the capacity to monitor all of our phone communications, all of our emails, all other aspects of our lives.
	So you have to focus on the people who are most likely to be perpetrators of a certain crime.
	In this case, as we've now seen September 11th, if the FBI had followed up, Incredible reports they were getting from flight schools that there were students from Middle Eastern nations who are interested in learning how to steer planes once they were aloft, jet airplanes, but not interested in learning how to take off or land them.
	That constitutes a red flag.
	And that's the sort of thing you should be following up on.
	Well, of course, that's also really good 2020 hindsight.
	But yes, it should certainly Create a red flag.
	But again, that's hindsight, and there's a lot of things in the world you could miss.
	The more data you gather from unlikely suspects, the wider the net you cast, then the more data you're going to gather that is extraneous to the thing you are trying to discover, and you just gum up the gears chasing dead ends.
	So you wouldn't allow any electronic eavesdropping?
	Well, I'd allow it in the same circumstances that we traditionally have allowed it.
	Namely, upon a warrant to conduct such surveillance issued by a court of competent authority.
	We don't have to protect ourselves by trashing the Constitution.
	We don't have to destroy democracy in order to save it.
	That's the conundrum, all right.
	And it really does come down to that, to potentially destroying that which we are trying to protect.
	You know, when I first heard about the shadow government, and there are indeed some people who feel this, Harry, I always thought what was meant by that was a government behind everything we see.
	A power behind every congressman, every senator, Even the President of the United States, a power that's really pulling the strings and orchestrating everything that's happening.
	And you don't exactly believe that, do you?
	I don't believe that.
	What I do see are people who potentially have the power to do certain things in the event of a national emergency who could abuse that power.
	FEMA is obviously one such candidate.
	The National Security Agency is another.
	I see Where national security is used and invoked, not so much to legitimately protect essential government secrets, but to cover up, perhaps, mismanagement, wasteful spending, misapplication of funds, and outright failures.
	This is what I'm saying.
	It's not really some master plan that came about when some people got in a secret room and they decided, okay, this is what we're going to do.
	It came about over years, dating from the National Security Act of 1947.
	and many seemingly innocuous minor laws that were passed that over time have allowed the enormous accumulation of
	power and the potential for abuse in one man, namely the
	President of the United States.
	Well, I guess I would ask you now, if you see this giant collection of dangerous possibilities,
	how do you turn it back?
	How do you make these things begin to disappear?
	Because once enacted, they're part of a giant global secrecy that surrounds this whole thing.
	I would begin in the Constitution by including a definition of what constitutes a national emergency.
	For example, I think we could all agree that military action against the United States, or a terrorist attack on par with, say, September 11th, would certainly constitute a national emergency.
	It would.
	Maybe a catastrophic national event, like a magnitude 8 earthquake in California.
	Something of this nature, which clearly would demand quick, sudden, and decisive action to save lives.
	Yes, that's quite clear.
	But we've had national emergencies declared for such things as the trade balance of payments being out of kilter, or to protect snail darters, or for some other very Minute, almost irrelevant reasons.
	We need to tighten up on that considerably.
	We also need to, because when the Constitution was framed, the possibility of the sudden loss of the executive and legislative branches in one day wasn't considered a possibility.
	We need to include provisions for restoring a constitutional government, electing replacement How close do you think we've been to the invocation of these kind of powers?
	possible spelled out that out constitution finally we need to have some
	clear constitutional restrictions all win and how the military can be used in
	civilian law enforcement because that is perhaps the most
	odious and uh... potentially dangerous aspect of the shadow government harry
	harry how close do you think we've been to the invocation of these kind of
	powers have we come that close
	it's known that are all certain occasion such as uh...
	the los angeles riots of nineteen ninety two
	we were very close to that In fact, some military units were used in the latter stages of those riots.
	It's known that there was a partial activation of the shadow government on September 11, 2001, when Vice President Cheney was taken on that day from Washington To Mount Weather, a large underground facility in Western Virginia, which if the shadow government has a capital, that's it.
	That's it, huh?
	Do you think, Harry, that it's possible that a state of emergency could be declared, and that the problem or emergency could be handled, and then we would just simply slide back into constitutional government?
	Or do you think that there's a substantial chance all of this has grown so dire that Once we cross that bridge, we well might not come back.
	I would ask the question, how many times has government ever received an increase in its power or its ability to impact our lives and has ever voluntarily returned such power to the people?
	The answer is very seldom.
	Very rarely, yes.
	Very rarely.
	So it would be your view then that if we really went off the cliff with this and began to Invoke the really serious aspects of this, Harry, that we might not come back.
	I could see us lapsing to a state of this permanent national emergency, leading to a permanent curtailment of certain key rights, particularly those relating to freedom of expression, assembly, property ownership rights, those sorts of things.
	Those are some pretty serious rights you're talking about.
	Very fundamental rights, and the rights that make us America in the first place.
	And that's why I say we have to be careful that we're not trying to, with our efforts to protect ourselves, we wind up destroying the very fabric of this nation.
	Would Mount Weather be the capital of the new shadow government should it all come cascading down?
	Matt Weather is an underground facility, originally built to withstand a direct hit from the Soviet ICBM, that can support up to a thousand people for thirty days, totally cut off from the outside world.
	Above it, you have the FEMA Training Center, which conducts training exercises for regional FEMA personnel and exercises.
	And it is, in effect, this Well, so is that a yes?
	Yes.
	the event of a really catastrophic national emergency such as a nuclear
	strike or uh... i actual repending terrorist attack with weapons of
	mass destruction this is where the central civilian leaders would go along
	with the military support staff
	to basically run the government from with underground will so is that a yes
	yet for
	okay uh... and i presume then that the broadcast industry
	radio stations and i'm speaking on right now would be singing a new tune one that
	would be coming from mount weather Mount Weather has complete radio and TV production facilities within it.
	Does it really?
	Yes, indeed.
	Would all of this be accomplished through the use of the emergency action Emergency Broadcast System?
	Yes.
	Well, it is to be called that.
	I think it's got a new name now, actually.
	That would, in a national emergency, yes.
	That's what it would be.
	That is what all stations would be broadcasting the feed that it got from there.
	All right.
	I'll hold it right there.
	You know, for most Americans, it's impossible to almost even contemplate that such an un-American Any anti-constitutional thing could ever be done by anybody, president or otherwise.
	most of this just can't believe it can occur but look around the world
	has happened elsewhere and ask yourself
	the the
	bell, call the wildcard line at area code The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country Sprint Access number,
	pressing option 5 and dialing toll free, 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast and worldwide on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	Imagine waking up one morning and...
	And walking outside your house and seeing U.S.
	military, U.S.
	Marines lining your street on every street corner.
	New instructions for everybody.
	Times have changed overnight.
	Could it happen?
	Well, Harry Helms obviously thinks so, and I know a lot of you do too, and I'd like to give you an opportunity to talk about it, so...
	You get with your phones and I'll get you with Harry.
	Sound of thunder.
	We live in safe America, right?
	Could you wake up, oh, say, 2, 2.33 o'clock in the morning, one morning, to the sound of gunfire outside your house, and hear the military en masse beginning to take things over?
	Harry, could such a nightmare scenario really happen?
	Yes, indeed.
	As I note in my book, in the 90s, the U.S.
	military began conducting numerous exercises in major American cities, such as Miami, Chicago, Houston, where it was the injection of troops to take command and control of certain areas.
	There has been, since the 1960s, urban riots.
	called Operation Garden Plot, which calls for the use of U.S.
	military forces in urban areas.
	This has been revised numerous times since the mid-1960s.
	It's still operational.
	And as I point out in my book, surveys of troops, a group of U.S.
	Marines, done by a professor with the U.S.
	War College, show that over a quarter of active duty troops Indicated they would be willing to fire upon U.S.
	civilians, unarmed civilians, if so ordered by their superiors.
	Boy, that's a sobering statistic.
	What percentage again, please?
	The exact percentage would be that 26.34% would be willing to fire upon civilians if so ordered by their superiors.
	And this was done in 1994 study by Lieutenant Commander Ernest Cunningham for a degree, a master's degree he was working on at the Naval... I remember!
	I remember the big controversy about all of that.
	But here I go, I'm going to play devil's advocate again.
	If 20-some-odd percent would shoot fellow Americans, that means 70-some-odd percent wouldn't.
	That's the comforting thing.
	Wouldn't that, on the face of it, just even based on those outrageous numbers, wouldn't that prevent what we're talking about right now from occurring?
	Because not enough would, in fact enough might, fight back in that given situation to prevent even the thought of someone implementing something like that.
	But we might be in a situation then where you could perhaps compose special units from those 26% who answered in the affirmative for these sorts of operations.
	I hadn't thought of that.
	All right, I'd like to begin to put together some phone calls here.
	Let's see how we do.
	My phones are acting strange tonight, but let's try.
	First time caller line, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello?
	Hello, this is William.
	I'm currently going up a mountain path in Colorado in the snow.
	On the way up a mountain pass in Colorado in the snow, all right?
	Well, anyway, a couple of statements I wanted to make and then mention a book to you, which you were talking about, about the internment camp.
	Bill Cooper wrote a book that had some of that stuff in it.
	He contacted the military police in LaVagna, Michigan, and they would not deny it, but they said at least you've At least you called the right place.
	Do you know anything about that, Harry?
	I have heard of rumors of those types of camps in Michigan that he's referring to.
	Yes, indeed.
	They're just the military police in charge of it.
	But a federal lawsuit was brought into Houston federal court and it was dismissed because they were saying it violated people's civil rights to set up internment camps and the judge wouldn't hear the case because he said as long as everyone is treated the same, it doesn't violate your civil rights.
	But anyway, There's a book by Bill Cooper called The Whole Pale Horse, which covers a lot of this information, has a lot of documents in it, and if you haven't seen it, you might be interested in it.
	I'm very well aware of it, thank you.
	I'm always... I mean, this is such an incredibly sensitive subject, and the fact I'll tell you, Harry, I'm a little bit comforted by the fact that I can go on the air and talk about it, still, about what you and I are talking about right now without getting shut down.
	Don't you find that sort of comforting?
	I find it comforting, but then on the other hand, President Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066, which he used in 1942 to order the detention A Japanese American without warrants or charges for as long as he deemed fit.
	That warrant, that executive order, was twice challenged before the U.S.
	Supreme Court.
	And held.
	Both times it was upheld.
	So a future president could insert, instead of Japanese Americans, could have black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Americans who voted for the other candidate in the last election, and do the same thing.
	And it's already been pre-approved by the U.S.
	Supreme Court.
	Huh.
	Okay.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Hello, this is a friend.
	A friend.
	Hi.
	Hi, friend.
	I want to comment something towards Harry.
	Proceed.
	Something that's non-apparent and effective in the future could prevent future violence within the United States.
	Yes.
	I just like that idea of a non-apparent security system by the military.
	Wait a minute.
	A non-apparent security system by the military.
	Isn't that what we've got, Harry?
	A non-apparent... I'm trying to figure out how he could provide security without being apparent.
	Well, that means that it's within a controlled medium that is How can I say?
	It's like a control, monitoring, synchronizing, coordination station that is like an I.O.
	as you're a radio person to, I don't know, check certain security features to make sure that there's no outbreak of disorder.
	Simple as that.
	Simple as that, huh?
	Harry, is it as simple as that?
	I somewhat doubt it'd be quite that simple.
	I don't see how you could have a security system that would be non-apparent to people.
	Right.
	You'd have to recognize that you are subject to a certain sanction if you did something in order to have a security system.
	It's almost by definition.
	It seems like, yeah.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Yes, hello.
	Hello.
	Yes.
	You're going to have to yell at us so you're not too loud.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Yes, I wanted to make a comment to Harry, I believe that's your guest.
	Yes.
	On the out-of-control government.
	Our Founding Fathers set up this government to serve the people, and not for the people to serve the government, as the people is the government.
	A classic example of that, I don't know if you've ever been to Waco, Texas?
	Waco, Texas.
	Yes, I've been to Waco.
	Back in 1993, those people did nothing to anybody, but the federal government came down in here, or came down here, because I'm just outside of Dallas, Texas, and burned women, children, men too, over nothing.
	Alright, well, I don't know.
	Harry, I actually went through the whole Waco affair on the air.
	Dealt with it on the air for a very long time.
	Looking back on Waco, Harry, how do you see it?
	That is an early example of, in my book, what I termed a militarization of civilian law enforcement, where you had military advisors to the FBI, and the use of military equipment, like an armored personnel carrier, against civilians.
	Perhaps the first public demonstration of how the line between civilian law enforcement and militarized law enforcement is becoming increasingly blurred.
	Certainly, I think most people would regard it as not a really proud moment for America.
	Well, for example, what can happen when certain powers are used without good judgment and proper discretion?
	The situation, I think, got rapidly out of the FBI's hand and led to a very rapid escalation of force on their side without sufficient provocation from the other side.
	Good enough.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Good morning, Art.
	Good morning.
	And good morning to you, Harry.
	Good morning.
	Harry, I'd prefer not to give my call letters or my... Well, please don't.
	That's all right.
	Don't give us anything.
	Just go ahead.
	I'm in Army Mars, and my license on the wall is signed by the Secretary of the Army, but I'm not military, I'm not paid, and I have to use my own equipment.
	What you guys are talking about this morning kind of puts me in a rather difficult position.
	I have to serve Mars.
	Best I can, but if the government turns against me, I have to revert back to my oath that I took when I joined the Marine Corps to defend this country against all... All right, caller.
	I've got a question for you.
	Operating your Mars station, if you became aware of a situation, an emergency that had been declared in the United States by, say, the President of the United States, and you heard or were even part of Handling traffic that indicated to you that the U.S.
	government was, in fact, moving en masse against its own citizens in an obviously unconstitutional way, would you follow orders?
	Would you pass that traffic?
	Or would you throw up your hands and say, uh-uh, it's time for a change?
	Well, that's rather interesting.
	Yes, that's why I asked it.
	In a kind of a dilemma, too.
	I want to be a good citizen, but I... No, I don't think I would.
	I think I would... I think I'd refuse the traffic or at least make some sort of excuse about my equipment went down on me or something.
	Alright, alright.
	So there you go, Harry.
	That's exactly, I guess, again, the kind of thing That I was talking about a few moments ago, when you gave me the percentage, horrid and horrific as it is, of the military that would fire on civilians if they were ordered to do so.
	There's an example of a guy who's in a, you know, at least a fairly important position, who would not pass such traffic, who would make a decision on his own, making such a nightmare impossible.
	And I salute the caller for that decision, but the danger lies in that The percentage of those who would take part in this may be small, but if they have access to sufficient firepower or other means of controlling or managing a population, even that small number could be devastatingly effective.
	Okay.
	International Line, you're on the air with Harry Helms and I'm Art Bell.
	Hello.
	Is that me?
	That's you.
	Yes, I'm Carol in Aberdeen.
	Hello, Carol.
	KXIRO.
	Yes.
	Well, first off, FEMA's already been practicing down in Texas when they jumped over those old people in their homes here a while back.
	But FEMA can declare for the sake of... I'm sorry, I think we missed the last part of what you were saying.
	If FEMA can do what?
	FEMA can declare martial law.
	In the case of diseases, you know, like we're having an outbreak of all these different so-called diseases.
	Here's a good point.
	Yes?
	I'm seeing how it's affecting the behavior from last night's show, and we have a humongous amount of people that are being put in prisons, like our drug companies are just overloading us with depression pills that literally Literally drove my daughter almost to the point of suicide, those pills.
	I had to get her off of them.
	And we've got millions of people in prison, and they're all- First time callers, area code 775-727-1222.
	Stop, stop, don't be naming people for us.
	Oh, okay.
	So the thrust of your question was what?
	Alright, and what other countries own our prisons?
	What?
	Oh, really?
	You know, there has been certainly a movement in America to privatize the prison system, to actually put it in the hands of companies that would run prisons.
	Anything on that, Harry?
	I would just correct one misconception that your caller did make, and this is a common misconception.
	FEMA by itself cannot declare martial law.
	FEMA is Simply the President's toolkit, if you will, when he declares a national emergency or martial law.
	FEMA is the muscle, but it's not the actual instigator in and of itself.
	It takes orders from the President or some other competent authority to perform certain tasks.
	As far as the thing with private prisons, I have to be very honest with you and say I have no real knowledge of that area.
	All right, she asked about prisoners being housed outside the United States.
	That's not going on, is it?
	Not to the best of my knowledge, nor do I believe that there are any standby plans for housing American citizens outside the United States.
	At least with regard to American citizens, certainly.
	Al-Qaeda we've taken who knows where.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello?
	Yes, hello.
	Oh, I'm sorry, hi.
	Yes, that's you.
	Oh, cool.
	I have a question.
	After, you know, Executive Order 9066, when President Roosevelt interned more than 120,000 Americans with Japanese ancestry, and then in August 10th, 1988, 1980, excuse me, Ronald Reagan, President Reagan signed H.R.
	442, which gave the apologies And the compensation to more than 70,000 Japanese Americans.
	Isn't that, um, like a justification or like an identification to say that what we did to the Japanese American was wrong?
	They paid them back, even though it was only $20,000.
	Um, okay.
	It could be construed as such, but the fact of the matter is that did not Repeal Executive Order 9066, nor did it impact negatively its legality.
	Executive Order 9066 was twice upheld by the United States Supreme Court.
	It is still there for a future president to use as he sees fit against any group of people he sees fit.
	I think you should understand that in terms of maybe domestic political considerations.
	Rather than having any bearing upon its legality or its potential for misuse in the future.
	Did we so we didn't other than making a payment, which was like an admission of wrong.
	Other than that, and a big I'm sorry, we didn't change the thing that would allow that exact same thing to occur again.
	There was no change to the order itself or its legal standing whatsoever.
	It was simply a public relations exercise.
	Nothing more.
	Could that be, says the devil, because there has to be something that radical in place.
	Something so radical that after you do it you have to apologize for it in order to fight the dangers that we face.
	I always find it interesting that That whenever we talk in terms of national security dangers, it seems almost as if the Bill of Rights is the greatest threat to Americans rather than, say, foreign terrorists or foreign military powers.
	That does not affect, let's say, the operational capabilities of, say, Al-Qaeda or, say, China.
	It does, however, go right to the heart of the freedoms and rights that make us a unique nation.
	Well, it sure is hard to be legal and constitutional when the other side can do any damn thing they want.
	But I understand what you're saying, Harry.
	It's been a too long time, no peace of mind, and I'm ready for the times to get better.
	This is Coast to Coast AM, cruising through the nighttime with Harry Helms.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Good morning!
	I've got to tell you I've been racking my brain, hoping to find a way out.
	I've had enough of this continual rain.
	The angels have come.
	He's got this dream of buying some land.
	He's gonna give up the booze and the one night stand.
	And then he'll settle down in this quiet little town And forget about everything
	But you know he'll always keep moving You know he's never gonna stop moving
	Cause he's rolling, he's the Rolling Stones When you wake up it's a new morning
	The sun is shining, it's a new morning And you're going, you're going home
	Do talk with Art Bell, call the wild card line at 8 The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255.
	line is area code 775-727-1222. To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll-free
	at 800-825-5033. From west of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art Bell by calling your in-country Sprint Access
	number, pressing Option 5, and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903. From coast to coast and
	worldwide on the Internet, call the toll-free number 800-825-6173. This is Coast to Coast
	AM with Art Bell. Just the very fact that we can get on talk radio nationwide as we're
	doing right now and talk about a subject as sensitive as this.
	That, to me, is almost like a beacon in the night saying, It's still okay!
	It's still okay!
	But then there's another beacon in the night going, But you better keep your eyes open!
	Better keep your eyes open!
	And that's what this is all about.
	Harry Helms has written a book That has prompted this discussion tonight entitled Inside the Shadow Government.
	Inside the Shadow Government.
	The title of your book, right, Harry?
	That's correct, Art.
	How... Well, let's see, a million questions.
	How is your book doing?
	I understand it's doing rather well.
	It's available through most major outlets, bookstores, including Amazon.com and your website.
	All right.
	And if you read this book, you really do take people inside what you believe to be the real shadow government.
	Because of the nature of the subject matter, I thought it was very important that I provide as much documentation as possible.
	So in there you'll see extracts from various federal laws that give President the power, for example, to seize control of
	radio and TV stations, to declare martial law. And I reproduced the full text of
	several presidential executive orders, including Order 9066,
	the one President Roosevelt used to detain Japanese Americans
	for the duration of World War II. Did you worry at all during the
	time you were penning this book that you might not be allowed to publish it?
	No, but there was certainly a total lack of cooperation when I,
	for example, filed various Freedom of Information Act requests.
	Either I had to repeat my request to get the documents, or when I got them, they were largely blacked out.
	So there was no official encouragement, but they were certainly passive-aggressive in their approach to dealing with me.
	Nobody came to you and said, Not yet.
	Hello?
	Hello.
	Yeah, this is Morris the Cat from Delray Beach, Florida.
	Alright, just checking.
	International Line, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Yes sir, go ahead.
	Yeah, this is Morris the Cat from Delray Beach, Florida.
	There's no person named Morris the Cat.
	Yeah, I'm on WJNO West Point.
	Whatever you're on, you can't be truly named Morris the Cat.
	Well, I'm named after the cat on television, but I'm not as finicky.
	I'll eat anything you serve me.
	All right, Morris.
	Yeah, this is in reference to the FTAA beating a 75-year-old disabled American veteran, and I was at the FTAA rally in Miami Beach a few weeks ago, and there I saw an amphibious tank with a .30 caliber machine gun manned And also an amphibious personnel carrier up on the little hill there.
	And, of course, a couple of thousand full-body armored, I call them, thugs.
	And these were sent by our illustrious Governor, Jeb Bush, against a peaceable rally against the FDA so that our children and grandchildren's jobs wouldn't be exported.
	Now, where does this come into the shadow government?
	Alright, it's a good question.
	Not just there, but what about Seattle?
	There's a very large movement out there against these various meetings which are designed to promote trade, and in the view of many, in fact, eliminate American jobs in the process.
	The protests have been large, the response at times violent on both sides.
	Where does all this fit in, Harry?
	As an example of the increased militarization of civilian law enforcement that we discussed in the last hour, And some of the things that your caller is now discussing, I think, is covered by a document called Army Field Manual 19-15, dated November 1985, and it's titled Civil Disturbances.
	And that outlines the tactics and procedures and methodologies that would be used by the United States Army, if called upon, to assist in the suppression of the civil disturbance Or to be on standby in case of a civil disturbance of some sort.
	That document outlines how a regional commander can declare martial law if he feels it warranted before even a presidential or gubernatorial declaration of martial law.
	That's really interesting.
	And who could do that again, please?
	The local field commander.
	Field commander.
	A military field commander.
	Yes, indeed.
	Wow.
	In fact, on my book on pages 133 and 134, I reproduced the exact wording of federal law that allows a regional military commander on his own initiative to declare martial law.
	That's a really justified wow.
	I didn't know that, Harry.
	It's hard to imagine any provision under any conditions that would allow that sort of decision to be made by a military person.
	That's incredible.
	It is actually under, as I say in my book, the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 32, Subtitle A, Chapter 5, Subchapter A, Part 501.4.
	And I reproduced the full text of it.
	It surprised me when I found it, but it is on the books, and it is standing federal law.
	Okay, first time caller on the line, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	How you doing, Art?
	Well, I was better earlier.
	Yeah, I'm still up and at it.
	I mean, when you hear some of this stuff.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	OK.
	Let me talk to Harry.
	You are.
	Here you are.
	OK.
	Yeah.
	My name's Michael from Indio, California.
	Yeah.
	And I have a comment.
	And this is relating to the subject.
	The United States government Abides by international law.
	That you cannot take away somebody's civil rights because of their race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, whatever they'll be.
	That is, you know, politically sensitive.
	But if the U.S.
	government wants to, you know, propagate some movement to make citizens afraid of somebody's ancestry, racial origin, or religion, whatever, you mention somebody who voted for the wrong candidate, That the U.S.
	government had to tell the media, you know, the newspapers, or the radio, or the movies, or TV.
	I'm talking about to promote a hysteria atmosphere that will make American citizens, who mostly don't care or don't fear anybody because of such things... You're talking about promoting a crisis, right?
	Manufacturing a crisis.
	Yes.
	This is exactly what the Nazis did in the 1930s in Germany against Jewish people, trying to make up falsehoods that a group of people did this or that.
	Or to forward a group that you now can officially hate, and that it's officially sanctioned to hate.
	Yeah, that kind of thing, or the manufacture of any, I don't know, it could be ethnic, it could be otherwise, kind of crisis.
	You can imagine that scenario unfolding, Harry?
	Yes, indeed, and I would say to the caller, I would not place a great deal of reliance upon the United States government being deterred in taking certain actions by the fact that those actions would be in violation of international law.
	I don't think I would rely upon that for any degree of security or restraint upon US government activities.
	In the end, Harry, The only real protection we have against any of what you're talking about would be the people themselves in the end, right?
	I mean, that would be it.
	Absolutely.
	And I think what we need is really a national debate on how do we respond to these crises effectively while at the same time preserving our constitutional rights in our civilian form of government.
	Our ability to keep our freedom depends on our awareness, doesn't it?
	It does, and also I think emergency plans or things of this nature, if, for example, we were to clearly spell out, here are the circumstances under which it may well be necessary to deploy federal troops for civilian law enforcement.
	I think we all recognize there could be certain situations, such as the aftermath of a major natural disaster or terrorist event, When civilian law enforcement would break down or be overloaded, and it would be necessary to federalize it and militarize it to some extent.
	Yes, people can imagine these scenarios, but what about the possibility of one of these scenarios being cooked up?
	That's the catch, and that's why we need to be very explicit, perhaps through constitutional amendments, on the circumstances when and where this can and should be done.
	The way it is right now, the latitude for deciding what constitutes a federal emergency and what measures may be taken are concentrated basically in the President.
	And for the first six months at least, Congress can basically do nothing but watch helplessly if the President decides to take some of these actions.
	That would be for six months?
	Yes.
	After that, the Congress can vote to rescind A presidential declaration of national emergency.
	But for six months, the president has pretty much free reign.
	Well, if a president... Let's just do a what-if scenario, Harry.
	If a president were evil, I'm going to use the E word.
	If a president were suddenly an evil president and he decided that He was going to take over, he was going to become a dictator, either kill or suppress all those who opposed him, and take over the United States as its dictator.
	Would six months of that power be long enough to ensure that be done?
	It all depends on what matter he might want to try to, what measures he may wish to take.
	I just told you, extreme ones.
	If necessary.
	Such as arresting all members of Congress so they can't vote.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	I mean, whatever.
	We're just speculating out on the edge of forever here.
	The President decided he wanted to take over as dictator.
	I don't know, Congress just banded or shot or, you know, something awful.
	If a president just went berserk, does he have enough power without any checks in place for six months to get the job done?
	Quite conceivably, one of the points I make in my book is Lincoln's actions during the Civil War.
	Lincoln did such things as shut down newspapers in the North that opposed the war in the South.
	He did such things as order the spending of money absent a congressional authorization, which explicitly violated the Constitution.
	He had even one United States Congressman from Ohio who opposed the Civil War arrested just for the basis of making a public speech opposing the war.
	Now that was Lincoln since then.
	The emergency powers available to the President has increased greatly.
	So the President has far more tools and powers to choose from than Lincoln did.
	How we depend on the goodwill of others.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Hello, Art.
	Hello, Harry.
	Hello.
	Listen, from what I understand, as more United Nations occupation troops enter the United States, The White House and the two former administrations, they expect strong resistance from oil Americans, from what I understand, and to quietly suppress these patriotic fighters.
	The last administration, President Clinton was getting help from the old Soviet KGB.
	And they supplied the Clinton administration with a whole new class of weapons that was specifically targeted against American civilians.
	Now, see, I haven't heard that.
	Harry, have you?
	That's news to me.
	And I wanted to ask you about this, Harry, specifically about these Soviet psychotronic weapons, or mind control technology, and what would be the likelihood of the government using Those type of dangerous weapons against our own people.
	Alright, well that one we'll take a big bite out of.
	We did talk last night about the ability, for example, of HAARP to control human emotion, feeling, fear, produce, you know, a different state, even a confused state in a human being.
	Would you imagine a scenario, Harry, under which a government would use such a device, or even just a political party, or a member of a political party, would use such a device against its own citizens?
	I would just say as a general rule that any government entity would be interested in as many non-lethal methods of population control as they can muster.
	Persuasion.
	And there's been a very long and well-documented history of interest by various agencies in the United States government in mind control methods.
	The first use of LSD in the United States in the 50s.
	Was it experiments conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency?
	It is, of course, true.
	It's just, it's true.
	And these astounding things that you go, holy mackerel, or worse, and then sort of let drift out of your mind because they're so outrageous.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	How you doing today?
	All right, sir.
	Thank you.
	This is Robert.
	I'm calling from Richmond, Virginia.
	Hey.
	I have a couple questions here real quick for Harry.
	Yeah.
	I've done a research paper in an English class, and I happened to do it on the REX84 program, and upon my research, I came across a couple things that I thought were kind of odd and weird, so I was going to ask you to see what the legitimacy of these are.
	Okay.
	The first thing I came up with was rail cars with sprinkler systems in them.
	Have you heard anything about that?
	I've heard rumors about that which were supposedly to be used for dispensing of biological or chemical agents, but I've had no success in verifying that's anything more than a rumor.
	Okay.
	The other thing is, as far as crematories, I heard that, hmm, excuse me, I heard the government was purchasing, let me think here, old railroad stations, if I remember correctly, and installing crematories in them.
	Have you heard anything about that?
	I have heard that rumor, but again, I haven't been able to find anything to support this.
	Anything more than just an unsubstantiated rumor.
	Boy, there's a couple I have not heard.
	Okay.
	The final thing I want to ask is, the REC 84 program took place in the early 80s, so that should be done and over with, you would think.
	The Denver Airport, which is also known as the New World Airport, which we're not talking about the New World Order tonight, but I also found information as far as them putting a concentration camp.
	Did I say concentration camp?
	I meant to say a detainment camp underneath the airport.
	Have you heard anything?
	Boy, the Denver Airport is really the source of a lot of hot rumors, whether they be of this sort or even the paranormal sort.
	I'm telling you, there's something about the Denver Airport.
	And I've been all over it, Harry.
	Even down where they send the bags through the big machines.
	I've been all over the Denver Airport.
	Having connected it through a couple of flights through Denver's airport, I can understand why you might think it is a detention center at times.
	But only until your flight.
	Yes.
	Well, if it were a detention center, I think they would get their bags, your bags, to you on time if it were a real detention center.
	Well, they'd do better with the bags.
	Yes.
	Wesley the Rockies, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Yes.
	Hi, Mr. Bell.
	Hi, Mr. Helms.
	Yes.
	I got two questions.
	My first question is pretty long.
	I remember when I was a little kid, I remember seeing something called the Civil Defense, and are they still around?
	Civil defense has been folded into FEMA.
	Oh, I see.
	And my second question is, is it pretty expensive to get started as a ham radio operator, and approximately how much minimum would you need to get started?
	Ah, somebody breaks us away from the government for a moment, and that's a really good question.
	Alright, get started as a ham, Harry.
	If you're going with, say, the technician-level license, which is the entry-level license, 25 questions, no Morse code test.
	It allows you operation on the 50 megahertz and higher bands, and hopefully some lower-level bands once they modify the Morse code test requirements.
	You can get on the air with a small walkie-talkie unit for two meters or so for Between $100-$200, and for some of the other bands, antennas and such, even with new equipment, between $200-$300, and if you're a judicious shopper of the used equipment market, probably for about half that amount.
	So not that much to start into ham radio, right?
	Very cheap for what you get.
	Oh boy, is it ever for what you get.
	Ham radio is one fun hobby, and I'd like to encourage as many of you as I can toward it.
	My guest is Harry Helms.
	We're talking, yes, about... the shadow government.
	But also about radio and any other topic you'd like to bring up.
	Because you're the ones in the spotlight now on the phones I
	I I
	I I
	to I love you.
	I wish I understood.
	It used to be so nice, it used to be so good So when you near me darling, can't you hear me SOS?
	The love you gave me nothing else can save me, it's so late When you're gone, how can I even try to go on?
	When you're gone, though I try, how can I carry on?
	You seem so far away, though you are standing near You make me feel alive when something died like this
	I really tried to make it out, I wish I understood What happened to our love that used to be so good
	To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 7.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country number.
	You know, even doing a talk show like this, considering it, you gotta gulp a couple times real hard before you do it.
	But I figured, what the hell?
	I mean, anything you can imagine.
	zero nine zero three from coast to coast
	and worldwide on the internet this is coast to coast a m
	with art bell indeed you know even doing a talk show like this considering it
	got a goal for a couple times real hard before you do it but i figured
	what the hell anything you can imagine look at science fiction for
	example some of the wildest craziest scenarios that are so hard to
	imagine could ever come true
	you.
	Well, suddenly, they come true.
	And this is one of those things, that if you close your eyes and imagine a military presence and a takeover, and a government gone and freedoms evaporated, it seems impossible.
	You know, it just seems impossible!
	But on the other hand... You know, being absolutely honest, I've got to tell you that I always thought the kind of secret government that we flirted with talking about from time to time with respect to other things like aliens and the knowledge of aliens and all the rest of that, that kind of government, that kind of behind the scenes, pulling the strings of the current government, I never was able to really grasp that as a concept I considered reasonable or that I thought it was really going on.
	Unfortunately, this kind of shadow government, the one described by Harry tonight, Can be envisioned, and one can even close one's eyes and imagine how it would be implemented, and all it might take would be the will of the right person to make it all happen, because everything, according to you, Harry, everything, and I think you're pretty much in line, is in place to do it if someone wanted to?
	Yes, indeed.
	In fact, I found a quote here in my book from Senator Charles Mathias of Maryland, who was a Republican, back in 1975, reviewing Some of the executive orders issued by the Nixon administration are potential for misuse.
	And this is a direct quote from Senator Mathias.
	Under the authority delegated by these statutes, the President may seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, Regulate operation of private enterprise.
	Restrict travel.
	And in a plethora of ways, control the lives of all American citizens.
	And that pretty neatly sums up the situation as it exists today, except that the powers available to the President, should he decide to exercise them, are even greater than they were in 1975.
	You know, Harry, a lot of people are going to want to get in touch with you, and so to prevent a gigantic amount of email from going across my computer, why don't you give out your email address?
	Okay, Art, I'll let my server take the hit.
	Yeah, there you go.
	the website of uh... they can reach me at is
	uh... w w w the
	shadow government
	dot com and that should are heightened between the words
	shadow government
	dot com alright well that's a web address of a dream address yet
	you can reach me at harry at
	shadow dash government dot com haha harry
	that's easy h a r r one out the dash shadow
	dash government That's right.
	Oh, cool.
	I'm thinking you're going to get a lot of email.
	Yes.
	OK.
	You're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Good morning.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Going once, going twice.
	Hello.
	Oh, finally we get a hello.
	Yes.
	International Alliance?
	Yes!
	Art, great show.
	Thank you.
	Glad to make it in.
	Long time listener, first time caller.
	And where are you?
	I'm down in Austin, KLVJ AM.
	Okay.
	I'm just curious, something that I've been researching the governmental realms What's going on here for some time now?
	You're going to have to speak up good and loud.
	About 10 years?
	Yes.
	One of the concerns I have is a lot of these rumors about Chinese troops on the Mexican border, Russian troops, Latvian troops up on the Canadian border, and this entire takeover of the United States.
	I'm just curious as to...
	From my perspective, it makes sense that in order to bring in a one-world government, you cannot have a superpower.
	You're going to have to bring everybody down into an even keel, so to speak.
	And I wanted to find out, one, if there's any information that Harry, if you may know, that it is true that there are troops on these borders that are ready to Uh, come in and... All right, I'll tell you what.
	It's a very good question you're asking.
	I've got a story in my hand.
	I don't know where this came from, but it says, Big trouble in Mexico.
	Residents of New Mexico, it says, just north of the border with Mexico report that Chinese troops are operating out of northern Mexico and frequently make incursions into the United States.
	U.S.
	Border Patrol agents who have spoken on condition of anonymity, meaning no sources here, right?
	Fearing they will lose their jobs, said they've seen Chinese troops on the northern side of the border and that they have duly reported the situation to headquarters.
	Agents said large numbers of the troops are frequently on U.S.
	territory about 32 miles southwest of Las Cruces, New Mexico, near the town of Deming.
	Now, I have no idea if this is true.
	But this is circulating big time on the internet.
	Harry, I'm sure you've heard the rumors like the man was talking about.
	What do you have to say?
	I've heard the rumors likewise, but I've seen nothing reliable or substantive to back them up.
	However, there is increased military activity along the borders on both sides, and there have been incursions of Mexican troops that have been very well documented.
	So clearly this is a situation that bears watching.
	Yes, but surely if Chinese troops were on our border, I mean, that one would be grabbed up by the nightly news like, you know what, just like that.
	Yes, and that's why there's been nothing substantive to back up those rumors.
	But I'll tell you, the rumors are all over the Internet.
	It's everywhere.
	Why do you suppose these, assuming it's not true, we don't know for sure, but assuming that it's not true, How do you think these kinds of rumors are generated?
	Are they generated by the extreme right wing out there, Harry, who are sort of stoking paranoia?
	There's two schools of thought.
	One is that you have China has replaced the Soviet Union as the most likely potential adversary for the United States in a military sense.
	The other rumor I have often entertained is that perhaps these rumors could be generated by the government itself in order to discredit or serve as a cover story for some of the things they might be doing along the border.
	All right.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hi.
	Good evening.
	My name is John and I live in the foothills of eastern Tennessee.
	Hey, John.
	Yeah, go ahead.
	Yeah, I wanted to say I've been stopped twice by military roadblocks here in eastern Tennessee.
	On both occasions I was forcibly removed from my car.
	Military roadblocks?
	Military roadblocks.
	For what?
	No apparent reason other than to forcibly remove me from my car.
	To forcibly search my car.
	And I asked for explanations, got no answers from anybody.
	Were you on a military facility?
	No, these were public highways.
	So you're telling me that the military has public highways cordoned off and they're stopping people and yanking them out of cars and surging the cars?
	So help me God, it's my witness.
	I've got better things to do with my time than to sit here and cook up a story.
	This is an actual honest to God fact and these have been documented in eastern Tennessee newspapers.
	Okay.
	Harry, have you heard about this?
	I'm curious if your listener lives on a road in or near Oak Ridge or some other military facility.
	No.
	These were nowhere near any military installations.
	What kind of road was it?
	Caller, what kind of road was it?
	Was it like a local little street?
	Highway?
	These were both county highways.
	Both county highways.
	Both travel county highways.
	That's quite new.
	I have not heard about this happening inland in the United States, although my book does document several cases where the military have conducted roadblocks and searches on roads adjacent to the U.S.-Mexican border, but this is the first I've heard of it in an inland case.
	They were printed up in the Knoxville, Tennessee Journal.
	Okay, caller, I've got a question for you.
	You were the one pulled over in search.
	Did you have any sense of what they were hunting for?
	Absolutely no idea.
	Absolutely no idea.
	None.
	I mean, I thought somebody was making a Hollywood movie.
	Were you hurt?
	Yes, because I have muscular dystrophy and I was forcibly dragged out of my vehicle and thrown onto the ground and had a soldier kneel on top of me.
	Yikes!
	I also wrote a letter to Father Malachy Martin about 15 years ago and asked him why I could find no references to the United States in biblical prophecy, and I proffered such a I think there is, in fact, a deficit of any mention in the Bible.
	People have tried to find American.
	They never have been able to.
	But that's straying way down a whole different path.
	What he gave us there, this military roadblock, that's something else.
	You haven't even heard the rumors, huh, Harry?
	That's new.
	I mean, there have been several incidents along the border.
	Yeah, but that would be... Actually, the border, to a certain degree, is federal territory, actually, right?
	Here would be things like, along the border, not at the border, roads within a few miles of the border, which there have been military roadblocks, searches of cars, and in a couple of cases, the actual shooting of civilians.
	Well, short of the shooting, Harry, wouldn't you be in favor of this kind of thing?
	If you're talking about American citizens on public roads, and not at the border... No, no, I'm talking about troops at the border.
	Troops at the border are one thing.
	When they start taking over civilian law enforcement facilities, my first question is, why them and not civilian law enforcement authorities?
	Well, yes, but I'm backing up to what you said about having to tighten up the borders.
	I mean, how would you do it?
	You can't do it with ice cream.
	It's going to be with troops with guns, right?
	Yes, but at the border, not several miles inside the border.
	In some cases, these have been like 30, 50 miles away from the border.
	That's quite a way.
	Yes.
	All right.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Yes, hello.
	Yes, this is Raymond in Morgantown.
	Yes, Raymond.
	Back in the 60s, the Johnson administration had a special group on counterinsurgency headed by a Colonel William Corson.
	And he was commissioned to investigate American Indian Movement and the Black Panthers and so forth, and any possible linkage between them and the student protests against Vietnam.
	And he concluded that without the students, the extremists cannot mount their revolution, and with them, they may be able to.
	Have you heard anything about that?
	Yes, that was one of the conclusions that led to the creation of Operation Garden Plot, the operational plan for involvement of the U.S.
	military in civilian disturbances.
	In fact, they were monitoring the 1970 student anti-war protests, the ones that culminated in the shooting at Kent State, very carefully.
	West of the Rockies, you're on air with Harry Helms.
	Hello.
	Hello, Mr. Bell.
	This is Brian in Bakersfield, KMZR country.
	Hi, Brian.
	Hi.
	It's a pleasure to be on your show again, particularly when you're hosting this evening.
	Happy to have you.
	Thank you very much.
	And to Harry, as you probably know, Thomas Aquinas The medieval philosopher held that monarchy was the most preferable and the best form of government, and in that I believe he was following Aristotle.
	So the tradition of monarchical government... Your telephone's going away on us, Eric Haller.
	I'm sorry about that.
	Can you hear me now?
	Yeah, I hear you.
	I see you.
	Anyhow, both Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas In different areas held that monarchy was the most preferable form of government, and I'm quite sure that the president and our American government are quite aware of this tradition.
	Could it be that this plan, contingency of martial law and arrest, may be a sort of reversion, albeit a contingent reversion, to Monarchy as a last resort as it is quite necessary when the final analysis in the final analysis to have a lone body usually in the person of one ruler but often in the case of often sort of extrapolated to a body rather than having a
	various separate bodies to whom government is uh... or is one of the
	words are we could do sort of thing proceed uh... the institution of
	monarchy is what you're asking right i guess okay i'm harry i don't know if uh... the official monarchy is uh...
	politically to but certainly the impact could be
	to the institution of a uh...
	uh... dictatorship or de facto strongman form of government but uh... you quoted uh... for toms kind of swap prefer to
	quote benjamin franklin who said that
	those who would sacrifice their liberty for security deserve neither
	And I think that's the key point here.
	Indeed so and I bet a key point probably in your book isn't it?
	Yes indeed.
	And again I want to be able to promote your book for you a little bit because obviously we've gone down some Pretty rickety, crooked, hard roads to navigate this morning, and a lot of people are going to want to read more, and you've written extensively on this subject, Inside the Secret Government.
	That's the title of your book.
	They can get it?
	It's Inside the Shadow Government.
	Inside the Shadow Government, thank you.
	Yes, and it's available from bookstores or from Amazon or from our website at www.the-shadow-government.com.
	Uh-huh.
	And when somebody reads this book, Covered Cover, are they going to come away informed, frightened, ready to become an activist, a believer?
	What do you think this book does to people who are, you know, sort of neophytes at this?
	I, hopefully, they will come away all of those things.
	Somewhat frightened, Somewhat determined to make sure that some of the dire scenarios I discussed do not come to pass, and also to get more involved in their government and become less of a spectator and more of an active participant in the governmental process.
	There are many people, Harry, who feel that they can't have an effect, that our government has gotten to the point where anything they do at all, including, I should say, voting, Simply is of naught.
	Just doesn't change anything.
	There's not a dimes where the difference between the parties and it doesn't really matter who's president and they just can't affect anything.
	There's a lot of that psychology in the country.
	But such defeatism becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
	Look at it this way.
	What is the downside of participating?
	Can the situation get any worse if you do participate, if you do try to affect these changes?
	The answer is no.
	It can only get better.
	Logically, this active participation and greater involvement by citizenry is worth the effort.
	It's certainly worth the risk.
	Well, depending on whether you value your freedom or your safety, perhaps.
	Well, I wrote the book, and hopefully other people, through the anonymity of a ballot box, can bring about some of these changes.
	Way to go, Harry.
	It has been a total pleasure having you on the air with me again, and we went down a totally different road this night.
	I've greatly enjoyed it, Art.
	Well, thank you, and I hope you felt like you got to say everything you wanted to say about this.
	I think I did, and I appreciate all the callers, too.
	Way to go, buddy.
	Good night.
	Good night.
	It's almost 2 a.m.
	somewhere, huh?
	You know what?
	I'll be back tomorrow night.
	George is taking an additional night off to take care of a little bit of business, and so that's what I'll do, is take care of a little bit of business with you.
	So tomorrow night, Dr. Michio Kaku will be here, and that'll be another road from the high desert.
	Good night.

▲