Art Bell

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 14, 2004 - Art Bell

02:52:19

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Joel Skousen - Terrorism Iraq & 9-11

Participants

Main voices

01:00:28

joel skousen

57:07

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And late word has it, by the way, that airstrikes are again underway and a fierce pounding underway.
		In April of the year, 2,000 Marines fought for about three weeks and failed to take Fluja from its insurgent defenders.
		This time, however, war planners sent six times the number of troops, and they fought their way across the rebel city in six days.
		Far faster than anybody thought.
		The Marine general who designed the ground attack said Sunday, a military statement Sunday said actually 38 U.S. troops have been killed, so it's not without price.
		275 wounded so far in the operation as we continue to press war in Iraq.
		Mohammed, I guess that would be, Mohammed Abbas, the temporary successor to Arafat, escaped unharmed, but it was close Sunday when militants firing assault rifles burst into a morning tent, the deceased Palestinian leader, killing two security guards, wounding six other people.
		Iran, believe it or not, notified the UN Nuclear Watchdog Committee in writing Sunday that it says it will suspend uranium enrichment and related activities to dispel any suspicions that it might be trying to build a nuclear bomb.
		With its move, Iran appeared to have dropped demands to modify a tentative deal worked out on November 7th with European negotiators, green then to make either nuclear fuel or the core for nuclear weapons.
		No, no, no, they will not do that.
		And they will suspend, they say, related activities.
		So we'll see if they really, really do it.
		In a moment, we'll move on and look at some of the other news.
		And, you know, it doesn't change much week to week, month to month.
		But over the years, we've got a big change coming.
unidentified		Pshhhhhh!
art bell ▲ ● ▼		you Last night, I suggested you ought to watch 60 Minutes.
		I hope a lot of you did that.
		I read you the story from Drudge, you'll recall, I hope, with regard to the CIA guy who was in charge of going after Osama bin Laden, right?
		And I guess the big shock or thrust of the story was that Osama bin Laden has now been given religious permission to use an atomic weapon against the U.S., against us.
		And that was underscored with the 60 Minutes program tonight.
		So I hope some of you got to see that.
		I wonder how you feel about that.
		I really do wonder how you feel about that.
		And tonight's guest is going to fit right in, Joel Skousen, who's going to be talking about exactly this sort of thing.
		In other words, how big the threat is, what you can do about it, if anything, and so forth.
		So he'll fit right in.
		But I do wonder how many of you saw 60 Minutes and how the man impressed you.
		Did he impress you as a, oh, I don't know, what, a reckless enhancer of facts?
		Or do you think that our government may be perhaps a little lax on the job of going after bin Laden?
		So why?
		At any rate, I was talking about change, weeks, months, years.
		Well, our climate is changing, and it's changing very quickly.
		It may only be a few of our Earth years, but look out.
		The top and the bottom of the world are virtually melting, two stories right down that alley, one to the north.
		Scientists say changes in the Earth's climate from human influences are occurring particularly intensely in the Arctic region, evidenced now by widespread melting of glaciers, thinning sea ice, rising permafrost temperatures.
		A study released Monday said the annual average amount of sea ice in the Arctic has now decreased to about 8%.
		That's 8% in the last 30 years.
		Doesn't sound like much?
		Well, actually, it resulted in the loss of 386,100 square miles of sea ice.
		That would be an area, so you can relate to it, an area roughly bigger than Texas and Arizona combined.
		The polar regions are essentially the Earth's air conditioner, according to Michael McCracken, president of the International Association of Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences.
		And he says, quote, imagine Earth having a less efficient air conditioner.
		What do you think that might mean?
		Susan Joy Soy, the reporter's lead author, said the Arctic probably would warm about twice as much as the rest of the Earth, a region of extreme light and temperature changes.
		The Arctic's surfaces of ice you see, ocean water, vegetation, and soil are important in reflecting the sun's heat.
		And so if they're not there, it's something that cascades upon itself.
		Less reflected, less heat.
		It's all strange stuff.
		Then you go down to the bottom of the world, the Antarctic.
		And the headline is: Antarctic catastrophe threatening.
		A catastrophe threatens because of the rapid warming of the Antarctic.
		Melting ice and a rapid increase in temperatures in the southern ocean have caused a horrendous drop in the number of Antarctic krill.
		Now, why would that be important?
		Well, it's the key food source at the bottom of the Antarctic food chain, the very bottom of the food chain.
		Now, where are we?
		We're at the top.
		So we don't have to worry, huh?
		Well, in the past, every time the base of the oceanic food chain has been destroyed in some way, mass extinction has always followed on both land and sea.
		This is because of the complex biosphere of our planet.
		In fact, it's based in the oceans, and life cannot be sustained anywhere else on the planet should the oceans die.
		Well, we're about to go to open lines because I want to fit as many calls as I can in.
		But I want to note this.
		NASA's Mars rover is doing incredibly well.
		In fact, it seems as though, mysteriously, somewhat mysteriously anyway, the Mars rover has actually increased the amount of power, the solar output, it's getting from its equipment.
		Now, why would the output go up anywhere between two and five additional percent, in fact, in the upward direction as it crawls across Mars doing what it's doing already ahead of, I believe, its predicted lifespan?
		Well, the answer might be a Martian whirly came whisking along, hit the rover, and cleaned off the solar panels.
		That's the best they can come up with.
		Otherwise, it is a complete mystery.
		If it wasn't something like that, then they have no idea what it might be.
		Wild Cardoline, you are on the air.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Art.
unidentified		How are you?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Quite well, sir.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where are you?
unidentified		My name is Chris, and I'm calling from Minnesota.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Chris, what's up?
unidentified		Well, I wanted to call you because when you had open lines last night, there was a lot of discussion of the war on terror and the war on Iraq.
		And the tenor of the calls last night seemed to suggest that the war in Iraq is a bad thing in that it takes away resources from the war on terrorism.
		And I just wanted to call because I really think that that is not correct thinking.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You don't think so, huh?
		Let me ask you a question.
		If you have that point of view, did you happen to catch 60 Minutes tonight?
unidentified		unfortunately i was watching the uh...
		minnesota vikings ok and i had that that and i had haha I haven't watched that yet.
		Oh, sorry, Art.
		Sorry.
		It was a good game.
		You'll enjoy it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I know.
unidentified		I know you're a fan.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm trying to, sir.
		Yes, I am a fan.
		And I was about at the end of the second quarter when I had to come do the show.
unidentified		Oh, God.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well.
unidentified		Rotten spoiler!
		All right, anyway.
		My point is that, you know, I think a couple of the callers last night suggested that our policies created al-Qaeda, and that if we'd only leave the Middle East or do something different, that they'd leave us alone.
		And I think our history shows that that's not the case.
		We were attacked in 93.
		We were attacked, you know, the World Trade Center was bombed in 93.
		We had the bombings of our U.S. embassies in East Africa.
		We had the bombings of the Kobar Towers in Saudi Arabia and the USS Cole in 2000.
		And then finally on 9-11, our world as we once knew it ended.
		And I think that we have to clean up the Middle East, change the governments in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, and eventually perhaps Iran and Saudi Arabia and Syria.
		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you think we eventually will have to overturn all of those governments and install democracies?
unidentified		Look, we had to do it during World War II.
		We had to beat fascism.
		After that, we had to defeat communism.
		And now we have to defeat the radical Islamists.
		And if we don't do that, you know, I think our world will be a much, much dangerous place.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I appreciate your call.
		Thank you.
		It's one point of view, that despite what our president and our leaders tell us, we're actually in a war with Islam.
		Now, our president has gone out of his way, really, to say that just ain't so.
		Every time he's, even in the harshest terms, even standing on the rubble of what was left of 9-11, our president went out of his way to make sure he was saying we're not at war with Islam.
		But I wonder, and I'm sure many of you wonder, and that caller obviously believes we are at war with all of Islam.
		That would be a pretty rough truth to face if it turns out to be true.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hi.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Turn your radio off, please.
unidentified		Excellent.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's good.
unidentified		Yes, sir.
unidentified		About last night?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Oh, talking about the time travel and all?
		Yes.
		I heard no one bring up, I've heard it on coast to coast, the speed of thought.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The speed of thought.
		Yes.
		Well, we don't know what that is.
		It may be instantaneous, or it may turn out to be measurable, or it may be nothing at all.
		There may not be a speed of thought because thought may not Actually, move at all.
		It may stay all inside your head.
		I mean, you have to admit that's one possibility.
unidentified		Yeah, yes, sir.
unidentified		That would kind of eliminate a time machine if there was an instantaneous speed of thought across the universe, though, Correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm not sure what that might do to a device, to the sort of the yoga manner of travel.
		It might do that in.
		I think, though, that there's quite a bit of evidence, a great deal of evidence, that thought, or if you wish, call it consciousness, the product of thought, right?
		Consciousness would be the product of thought, I think, something that we may eventually attain with AI when we get fast enough or get enough storage or whatever.
		I think there are early indications scientifically that there is, will be, a speed of thought, as it were.
		In other words, thought is internal and external to your brain.
		I think they will determine that finally.
		It may be sometime, but they will.
		West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		I was calling to discuss the war with Islam aspect.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think we are at war with Islam?
unidentified		Well, I don't think that we're at war with Islam.
unidentified		I think that Islam is at war with the rest of the world because the Quran says that a good Muslim will kill the infidels, and anybody who is not in the Islam religion is an infidel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's something about giving them an opportunity to convert.
		But short of that, then, yes, you're right.
		You're supposed to dispose of the infidels, the incorporable.
unidentified		And Christianity preaches tolerance and like total tolerance.
unidentified		And I think that's one of the reasons why the Islamic world really hates Christians, because it goes against everything that the Quran says.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let's face it, it is a religious war, right?
unidentified		I would have to agree.
		It's nothing unusual, though.
		There have been holy wars and religious wars since the dawn of time.
		Yes.
		Now it's a little more interesting with the nuclear war aspect of it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Interesting is a fascinating choice of words.
		Yes, they all rush forward into battle, our side and theirs, right, with a rifle in one hand and the Quran or the Bible in the other and a plea to their God to live through about what's about to happen, right?
		I cannot recall the source of the quote, but it certainly would apply here.
		God, you would think, would be ever so weary.
		Ever so weary.
		God would be so weary of constantly being petitioned on two sides of a cause.
		Right?
		First time calling a line here on the air.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hey, Art.
unidentified		How are you doing?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing all right, sir.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where are you?
unidentified		This is Dave.
unidentified		I'm calling from Alaska, and the air conditioner is working up here just fine.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How cold is it up there?
unidentified		It's about, I don't know, 10, I guess.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		About 10.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		Hey, anyway, a couple comments I wanted to make, I guess, on this illegal alien problem in Arizona.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Illegal alien problem?
unidentified		Well, there was something in Arizona having something to vote on to kick them all out or something.
unidentified		There's like 300 strong illegal aliens in Arizona are talking about.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You keep breaking up on me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I'm not familiar with what you're talking about precisely.
unidentified		Well, it relates to the terrorist aspect.
unidentified		they would offer a high enough reward for all the illegal mexicans down there in arizona i'm sure there isn't one chechen rebel that would make it across that border do you think our borders uh...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He's quite optimistic that nothing really bad is going to happen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You feel that way?
unidentified		Well, I hope so, but, you know, by hook or by crook, you know, contrived or conceived, something's going to happen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I'm afraid the caller's right.
		Something's going to happen.
		It's not a matter of if, but when.
		Do you feel that?
		You can almost feel it creeping up on you, right?
		Wildcard line, you're on the air.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi.
		I just wanted to say something in reference to the guy who called earlier who had an opinion on the war on Islam.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, no, it was his opinion that we are at war with Islam, sir.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That was the opinion, and we were going to have to go in and virtually occupy or whatever the other countries he listed.
unidentified		quote the guy that mentioned he was talking about looking back into history and he was only looking back into history until about 1992 or 93 and the whole thing
		And the United States overthrew a democratic government to install the Shah.
		And, you know, it's this type of thing that makes them angry with us, I believe.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well said.
		Look, there is a pretty good case to be made.
		We are a warlike people.
		We go to war, if necessary, to protect the interests of the United States.
		And if we think that having some leader replaced is going to help things along, we do it.
		Now, in the eyes of the, you've got to think, in the eyes of a lot of the rest of the world, the U.S. meddling in that manner really stinks.
		And if you were over there and we had done that to your country and your government, maybe you would be really upset.
		And besides, it didn't turn out all that well anyway, did it?
		East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hello?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello?
unidentified		Yes, Tom from the Bronx here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, the Bronx.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		I have this to say.
unidentified		I made an attempt to write to the western states, in other words, from California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, where you have a severe drought out there, don't you?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		And I had made a proposal that they put pipelines to the Pacific Ocean, pull in ocean water, and have the salinization plants inland.
unidentified		Last year I wrote that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I doubt that we're economically there.
		I mean, it's like talking about I don't know energy right now.
		We're not quite there.
		Wind generators, solar power, it's just not quite there.
		But if the price of oil keeps going up, we're in a little dip right now, right?
		But if the price of oil keeps going up, then at some point very quickly, we are going to be there, and it's going to be worth doing.
		Now, when the price of water gets to the point where it would be worth dragging it in from the ocean, yanking out the salt, and dispensing it to the poor, hungry people here, thirsty people here in the West, when it gets to be that price, well, by then we'll all be pretty thirsty.
		Open live, anything you want to talk about all night long.
		I'm Mark Bell.
unidentified		To access the audio archives of Coast to Coast AM, log on to coasttocoastam.com.
		To realize just what I am saying, I have to be no less care of what I am.
		It's all clear to me now, my heart is on fire.
		To access the audio archives of Coast AM, log on to coast.
		It's my private pleasure, midnight fantasy.
		Someone to share my wildest dreams with me.
		Imaginary love.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, I want you all to listen very carefully.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The phone numbers on the weekend.
unidentified		Well, they're a little bit different, and here they are.
		To talk with Art Bell.
		Call Mo 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.
		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.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Moving right through the darkness.
		Good morning, everybody.
		Hope you're having a fine Monday morning, or is it still Sunday night with some small vestiges of the weekend left for you?
		Either way, we'll be right back.
		The End of the Day In a moment, I'm going to endeavor to take a photograph of that cute little time machine.
		First time calling online, though, you are on the air.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hello, there, Art.
unidentified		How are you doing?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing very well.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How are you?
unidentified		Good, good.
		I happen to work for a private weather forecasting company, and not to be confused with the National Weather Service.
		They're the government, and we're private.
		And I just thought you might want a little update on what our meteorologists are seeing into their crystal ball, so to speak.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I would be extremely interested.
		So that I might understand, though, you're private.
		You're a private meteorological observation group.
		I mean, are you sort of an amateur at this or you have a company that does this?
		And who do you do it for?
unidentified		It's the actual company names, Freeze Network.
unidentified		No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Don't give me the actual company name, but I mean, who do you do these forecasts for?
unidentified		Oh, power companies, agricultural companies, things like that, farmers.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		And they trust you guys above and beyond the National Weather Service.
		Why?
unidentified		Well, because we just happen to get things right more often, pretty much.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's a good reason.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're claiming that more frequently than the National Weather Service, you get it right.
unidentified		Well, yeah, I mean, these guys are, you know, if you're doing natural gas or something like that and you've got, you know, $5, $10, $50 million of the natural gas contract sitting out there, you're looking at something that's really getting pretty dang close to where it's going to really be.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All that said, what is it you have to say?
unidentified		Well, this is kind of interesting.
		We're starting to see this pattern.
		It kind of reminds me of the inverse we had a few years back where it was in April it was snowing in Arizona more than it was in Iowa.
		We got the same kind of pattern, but it's shifted all to the east with West Texas.
		They've had multiple snow events already, and up here in Iowa, we're not getting that yet.
		So I'm wondering if we're getting a little hint of El Nino.
		And there's a low-level El Niño already started.
		And I don't mean to also kind of hinting at a little bit like El Nino may be kicking back in if it does.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I can only speak for where I live and what I Observe, but I can tell you this: here in the high desert, we have an annual rainfall, I don't know, about five inches or something.
		It has been normally, it has been raining and raining and raining and raining here.
		We've had a lot of water, a very wet year, whatever that means.
unidentified		Well, that usually is an indication of an El Niño kicking in.
		I mean, you have that water is coming from the evaporation from the warmer temperatures in the Pacific.
		So you're going to have that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		There's a lot of people sitting in front of their TVs right now watching Day of Destruction.
		Do you think Day of Destruction is coming in the weather?
		Is anything that severe going to happen?
unidentified		Well, it's certainly an interesting discussion in our office, that's for sure.
		The idea of two polar, you know, the polar jet and the tropical jet stream merging over North America would be a bit of a push.
		I haven't heard what their comments on that part yet.
		The day after tomorrow, which was its own little fascinating treatise, I kind of brought up, by the way, I'm not a meteorologist.
		I only play one on TV, it's my joke in the office.
		I'm the CIO there.
		But the idea of getting extremes like that is, you know, we don't have the history to go by.
		So when somebody trumpets that, oh, well, that's just Hollywood.
		And just that thing, well, real frank with you, nobody really knows because we don't have a detailed record of what real weather conditions have been like.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it is a fair criticism to some degree.
		It is Hollywood.
		It was a two-hour movie, whether it's that or Day of Destruction or whatever.
		It's a movie, and you have to pack the information and story into a movie.
		So they did collapse it from that point of view.
		However, the weather changes that really are going on in the world right now, both at the top and bottom of the world and in between, are startling in my mind.
unidentified		Oh, yeah, they certainly are disconcerting.
unidentified		I mean, I have a pretty clear memory of what it was like in the 70s with the standard extremes you'd have, and it's nothing like that at all.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		Listen, the only things that human beings are supposed to notice are seasonal changes.
		In other words, the weather, per se, isn't really supposed to shift in our lifetimes.
		We should always be able to look forward to the same general kind of spring, summer, fall, winter.
		Right?
		But all of that may be changing in our lifetimes, and that's not supposed to happen.
		That's supposed to happen only after generations and generations.
		Nothing for you to worry about.
		But if you look carefully, the weather right now is changing in front of our mortal, short, short, mortal lives.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi, Art.
		Glad to talk with you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you, sir.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where are you?
unidentified		I'm David from Dover, New Jersey.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Welcome.
unidentified		I have a question for you.
unidentified		It's on a little bit of a different topic.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's fine.
unidentified		Over the years, you've done many shows on UFOs.
		You've had experts.
		In your opinion, your personal opinion, what is your favorite UFO story and what is your most believable UFO story that you've ever heard?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Travis Walton.
unidentified		Okay.
unidentified		Fire in the Sky?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Travis Walton, you know, I saw Fire in the Sky, sir, but I sat here and several times had the opportunity to interview Travis and his boss, his foreman.
		I know the entire story intimately.
		I know about the lie detector tests.
		It is by far, I think, the best documented, witnessed, verified story out there, period.
unidentified		Excellent.
		Well, that answers my question.
		It's been wonderful talking with you.
		A longtime fan, seven or eight years.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Have a good night, sir.
		You too.
		East of the Rockies.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Hello.
		Okay.
		Hello.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Turn your radio off, please.
unidentified		It's off.
		Excellent.
		Hi, all right.
		This is Kim from Pittsburgh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Kim.
unidentified		Yeah, and, well, two things.
		First of all, this threat by Al-Qaeda about the nuclear something or other in this country, I think it's legit.
		I saw the guy on 60 Minutes Tonight, and then later on I was on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How did he strike you?
		That's what I want to know most.
		You know, apparently the government is trying to portray him as like a loose cannon kind of.
		But on the other hand, he's retiring from the CIA.
unidentified		Well, I think his truthfulness may be evaluated by how long he lasts.
unidentified		He may come to an unfortunate accident, I'm afraid.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, my.
unidentified		If he's telling the truth and if he opens his mouth too much too specifically, I think they will find a way to silence him.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why wouldn't we be going after bin Laden with all available resources?
unidentified		That is the $64,000 question.
		I don't know.
		You know, this guy that called one of your first callers tonight talked about the war on Islam.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		And I think that the problems we're having with the radical Muslim world, in many ways, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
		I happen to be a Lutheran pastor, and so I have studied scripture, I have studied church history, I've studied the history of Christianity's relationship with other religions.
		And there were times at the height of Islamic civilization where Jews and Christians were treated tolerably well by Muslim rulers.
		However, when the situation was reversed and the Christians were in charge of the scene, that is when we had problems.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, listen, the big question, and the one that I'll pose to you, since you seem to know a lot about this, is flatly, simply, are we or are we not at war with Islam?
unidentified		I think that we are getting deeper and deeper into a war with Islam.
unidentified		The more and more we do, the more and more Muslims who may have been kind of borderline about the United States, the average person, I think, is seeing what goes on in Fallujah, has been watching historically things like with the Shah and whatnot.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're saying they're being increasingly radicalized?
unidentified		They are being increasingly radicalized, and I think that in many ways we have nobody to blame but our own foreign policy.
		But that is not to say that these questions, that these problems are not deeper than U.S. foreign policy.
		The whole recent history of colonialism, and we see almost virtually every country, whether it's in Africa or the Middle East, that was a colony and then the colonialists abandoned it.
		There were not the structures put in place to really foster true democracy and freedom.
		Most of those countries were left in chaos, and that's the legacy that we're living with today.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So, yes, we are just about at war with Islam, and from your point of view, it's our fault.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Which might be another way of saying we started it.
unidentified		Well, I would hate to say that we started it or that we started it deliberately, but I think by small steps, by, quote, innocent spread of American culture over the globe.
		And lots of people eat up the American culture.
		They want it, but it is also threatening enough to a large enough percentage of people in other parts of the world that they then react very strongly against it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I really do appreciate your call.
		Thank you.
unidentified		Okay, take care.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's really something to listen to.
		And it may be true.
		We may be in a religious war.
		Oh, but those things don't happen anymore?
		Oh, yes, they do.
		Sure, they do.
		They may be happening today.
		That's what it may be.
		Now, that would be hard to phase up to, wouldn't it?
		And perhaps even harder to phase up to the possibility that through small but collective actions, we started the war.
		It's just one way to think about it.
		West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
		Hello.
unidentified		Oh, hi, Art.
unidentified		This is Anthony calling in from Fairbanks.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Anthony.
unidentified		I've been a long time listener of your show.
unidentified		I think one of the last times I talked to you was when I asked you to hold up a spoon to your webcam and have everybody in the country try and bend it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I remember that.
unidentified		Yes.
		Anyway, I've heard a lot of the shows you've done on Bigfoot, and I had a theory on Bigfoot.
		You just came to me out of the blue the other day, and I've never heard anybody else mention it, and I just wanted to get your opinion on it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And your theory is?
unidentified		Okay, one of the big arguments is we never find the bodies.
unidentified		You know, you never see a dead Bigfoot on the side of the road or in the woods somewhere.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
unidentified		What if the phenomenon of Bigfoot is similar to werewolves?
unidentified		What if they're people that are shape-shifting and they change back later, which is why we never find them?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that would be the easy answer.
		And maybe the only answer.
		Because by now, we really ought to have a body.
		If they're real, I would think we should have a body by now.
		Now, I once interviewed a man who was really credible, and he said he shot a couple of bigfoot.
unidentified		I remember that show.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you?
		It was incredible.
		Yeah, Bugs was his name.
		And to this day, I still kind of buy that story, but you're right.
		No body, no conviction in court, that's for sure.
		So in this case, we could say a lot of years have passed, and we don't have a body yet.
unidentified		So I don't know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's a good thought, sir.
		Thank you.
		Take care.
		What do the rest of you think?
		We've had a lot of Bigfoot stories.
		To me, Bugs being about one of the best I ever heard, though we didn't get the bodies.
unidentified		We got that close.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And then, of course, something happened, actually.
		Bug's wife intervened with veto power.
		You're on the Air Coast Coast AM with Art Bell.
		Top of the day to you.
unidentified		Hi, Art.
		I'm thrilled to talk to you.
		This is Patty from Florida.
		And I first want to talk about the war we're fighting in Iraq.
		And I think it was last year, Dick Cheney said if the U.S. became an Islamic nation, all threats of terrorism would end in our country.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Probably.
unidentified		But that's not true, because radical Islamic extremists moving into this country would destroy all our heritage.
unidentified		Anything that represented free thinking and anything, anything that's not going to happen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's not going to happen.
unidentified		Exactly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		America is not going to convert to Islam.
		Forget it.
		It's not going to happen.
		So the alternative is, and the question I think, the big $64 billion question, and probably even more, is, are we at war with Islam?
		Is it more than just extremism we're at war with?
		We've got to face up to it.
		Is more and more of the Islamic world beginning to regard themselves at war with us?
unidentified		Well, you know, bottom line, as a Christian, I feel that we're fighting a war with poverty.
		War rises out of poverty.
		And you have got so many.
		And I think the Palestinian people are being used, that in many ways, they're victims.
		They're being used by the politicians of that region to keep everything stirred up against the nation of Israel.
		Because if we could come in and end the war or start a war against poverty in the Palestinian nations and in Iraq, which is what we did in many ways, we could stop what's happening there.
		But you've got angry youth.
		Yeah, it's wrong.
		They're now being taught to hate from an early age.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They are.
		I appreciate the call.
		And here's another thing that has been bothering me.
		Okay, forget the arguments about whether we should or should not have gone into Iraq.
		We did go, right?
		We're there now.
		We're in the mop-up phase of this Fallujah mess, hopefully.
		Although I hear the action tonight is re-engaged with airplanes and troops and a lot of artillery and so forth, so they're into some sort of fight.
		But, you know, the news is fairly good out of Fallujah, right?
		Fairly good.
		But we just haven't had the welcome that I would expect.
		I mean, here we freed the Iraqi people from the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.
		Found him Hiding in a hole.
		He's gone.
		Long gone.
		There'll be a trial, but he's long gone.
		Now, you would expect freeing people from a brutal dictatorship, they would throw their arms around you and throw wreaths on you and thank you and all the rest of it.
		But that clearly is not what's happening right now, and that's worth a little bit of thought.
		East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hello, I'm waiting to talk to Art Bill.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, the wait is over.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're on the air, so you need to turn your radio off.
unidentified		The radio's off.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And tell me, what is your first name?
unidentified		My name is Christine, and I'm from Lincoln, Nebraska.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Fire away, Christine.
unidentified		Oh, I'm so happy to talk to you, Art.
unidentified		Last time I talked to you was around OJ's trial.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Long time ago, yes.
unidentified		I do believe we are in a religious war.
		I think that's been happening since 1993 when they've been attacking our ships, the World Trade Center the first time.
		It's a world war.
		It's a religious war.
		And I totally disagree with that Lutheran pastor.
		I don't think we brought it on ourselves at all.
		But I think freedom comes with a very high price.
		And my father paid the price.
		My husband paid the price.
		And I just support our men and women over there 100%.
		I don't really think we're getting the truth of what the troops are really going through.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why do you think there is so much spreading hatred against America in the Islamic world?
unidentified		I'm not sure there's as much as what our so-called reporters want us to think.
		I think we're soon said what a lot of the left really want us to believe, the emails.
		And I work with an agency that we send boxes of clothes, food, etc.
		And we get excellent emails from the men and from some of the citizens there.
		They're grateful that we're there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you don't sure don't see it reflected in any of the video that comes back from Iraq.
unidentified		No, you don't.
unidentified		In the news media on TV, I don't hear it at all, and it's very distressing to me because I think that we've got to we aren't hearing the truth art and the closest we're going to come to it is on a show like yours.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My dear, I hope you're right because I am telling you and all the rest of the audience right now that the most god-awful thing that any of you can think about would be to be at war with Islam, to have a full-fledged Christianity versus Islam war.
		I mean, it would be absolutely ultimately, it's going to go, or it could well go, to a state of Armageddon.
		That's where it could go.
		You have two major religious forces in the world clashing, and that's where it's going to go to the end of it all.
		so we need to hope getting so
		However, if you'll just hang on through the news and a thing or two, we're going to talk to Joel Skousen, and he'll probably scare the pants right off you on the heels of the 60 Minutes report and the permission now given to Osama bin Laden to explode an atomic bomb in the United States.
unidentified		Oh And the warnings on them beer can't be buried in them landfills.
		No deposit, no sad songs, and no return.
		Yeah, it's only gonna take about a minute or so until the factory's blocked the sun out, and you're gonna have to turn your lights on just to see.
		And then the lights are gonna be neon, saying fly our jets to paradise, and the whole damn world's gonna be made of styrene.
		So listen to my brothers, when you hear the nightly sky, and you see the wild ones flying through the great polluted sky.
		There won't be no country music, there won't be no rock and roll, cause when they take away our country, they'll take away our soul.
		Oh, oh, oh, oh.
		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 to the Rockies, call toll-free at 800-825-5033.
		From West to the Rockies, call ARC at 800-618-8255.
		International callers may reach ArtVell by calling your in-country spread 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 ArtVell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Joel Scouten is coming up in a moment.
		Joel Scouton is the publisher and principal author of the World Affairs Brief, a weekly news analysis service on the web.
		He is a political scientist by training, specialist in projecting future threats relative to war and terrorism, exactly what we've been talking about.
		The author of several books concerning security measures individuals can take, like all of you out there.
		You know, like getting under your desk and putting your hands over the back of your neck.
		I'm just kidding.
		To protect themselves against the threat of terrorism and other security issues.
		I guess I'll never forget that.
		I'll never forget it.
		They are Strategic Relocation, North American Guide to Safe Places, the secure home and how to implement a high security shelter in the home.
		He has traveled extensively throughout the world, speaks several foreign languages, very talented, an advisor to emerging political parties in Central America and has a great deal of understanding about how the world actually works politically and behind the scenes.
		in a moment, Joel Skousen.
unidentified		Pshh Pshh means it you
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Just like they do in football games, I'd like to welcome the audience here on the West Coast who has now seen The Day of Destruction.
		Actually, you've only seen a half of The Day of Destruction, right?
		Welcome in.
		Joel would have no idea what I'm talking about.
		He doesn't watch TV or doesn't have one.
		Doesn't even have a radio, he said, when I talked to him just a moment before the program.
		So he didn't get an opportunity to hear the first hour.
		Here is Joel Scowson.
		Joel, welcome to the program.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Thanks, Art.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Nice to be with you again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good, good, good.
		Glad to have you.
		Anyway, Joel, let's start off with something that sort of dominated the weekend, and I think you have some differences with it, if I heard you correctly, and that is this man who went on 60 Minutes earlier tonight.
		He just left the CIA on Friday.
		He's a guy who had been in charge of the CIA's office to get and kill bin Laden and keep track of bin Laden and all that kind of thing.
		And he went on 60 Minutes and said some pretty scary stuff.
		Now, perhaps some would say he's a bit of a loose cannon.
		Probably the CIA is saying that, actually.
		And some would say he's wrong.
		Well, anyway, what do you say?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, first of all, from my understanding and knowledge of the inside workings of the CIA, no one is allowed to go public from a CIA position that he's been in even after he's left the CIA.
		They have a permanent contractual agreement of silence of any classified information.
		This would be considered highly classified.
		And so, as is the case in many instances where we have what appears to be a whistleblower within the CIA, this is a potential purposeful leak done under circumstances that make it appear as if it's going against CIA wishes, but I'm not convinced we can do that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You have a very good point.
		I hadn't considered that.
		Not in a million years would this normally happen unless the CIA intended it to happen.
		And hmm, let's see, if they didn't want him to talk, he probably wouldn't have been talking, would he?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's precisely correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's an awfully good point.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They have stopped numerous people from publishing, speaking in public with veritable threats on their lives.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure, one way or the other.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		So there's no way he's going out and publishing, getting on 60 minutes unless he's a permitted leaker.
unidentified		Huh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's think about that a little bit.
		A permitted leaker.
		What would be the motive, just sticking with this line of thought, what would be the motive for allowing him to say what he said?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, this has to do with the overall picture of whether or not al-Qaeda is a credible threat in Osama bin Laden.
		You know, we don't know anything about al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden except from one source, and this makes it very suspicious.
		That source is the United States government.
		Virtually everything that comes out, every attribution that someone arrested has links to al-Qaeda comes from a U.S. government spokesman.
		We have no independent information whatsoever.
		And there are many anomalies.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's true.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		There's many anomalies about al-Qaeda which cannot be explained by normal terrorism.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, what kind of anomalies?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, for example, the government claims that al-Qaeda is the biggest and most powerful terrorist organization in the world, and yet we have not seen any small, numerous, normal acts of terrorism in the U.S. since 9-11, despite nearly open borders.
		We have had no bombings of electrical pylons in the hinterland, which are totally undefended.
		We have no car bombings, no suicide bombings.
		We have nothing.
		And how difficult is it for someone to get across the border?
		It's virtually you walk across in any number of places in the United States.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So are you saying the lack of any attack since 9-11 indicates that they cannot do it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, I'm saying either they are completely impotent, in which case they can't be the largest, most well-funded terrorist organization in the world.
		I mean, even illegal aliens from Mexico without a dime to their name can walk across the border.
		So it's not a matter of relative impotence.
		What this tends to indicate is that we are dealing here with something that perhaps is being blown out of proportion by government in order to induce people to continue to believe in a war on terrorism, which may not be exactly to the degree of danger that people are being used to, shall I say, support some of the government legislative and legal proposals to restrict constitutional liberties.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Joel, why do you think we invaded Iraq?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, it certainly wasn't because of weapons of mass destruction.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Apparently not.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And there's a lot of other anomalies there about the reasons.
		For example, I happen to know because I've had several military people describe to me what they knew, that the United States government had satellite photos of large convoys of weapons leaving Iraq for Syria.
		They knew that there were Russian officers directing that operation.
		They used a lot of Russian trucks, and yet Russia is being considered our ally in the war on terrorism.
		The U.S. knew that the weapons were leaving beforehand.
		In fact, it was on the briefing page of Secretary of State Colin Powell when he went before the U.N., and they pulled it at the last moment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're saying the weapons were there?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		There were weapons there, but they were gone before we invaded.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, the U.S. knew that they were.
		I need to try and understand this.
		If you were Saddam Hussein and you were about to face off with the U.S., stupid as that might be, why would you take your ace of spades and toss it out of the deck?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Joel?
		I think it might have to do with knowing that your time is up and deferring the ability to strike at Israel or the United States or anyone who might be a threat to defer that by giving it to another ally, which Syria is.
		And the U.S. is still holding back on its revelations about Syria.
		Some of this has leaked out in the press, but the U.S. isn't making an issue of it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That just doesn't make sense to me, Joel.
		I mean, if you know the big, bad U.S. is coming at you and you've got a nasty, nasty weapon, chemical or atomic or biologic or whatever, you just don't throw that card away.
		I mean, it's suicide anyway to go up against the U.S., but if you've got some terrible weapon, then you use it.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, he apparently chose not to.
		I mean, I can't second guess, but I'll tell you, those weapons still exist, and they'll still probably be used.
		But the bigger question is that the United States knew this and withheld it from the American public.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why withhold the fact that the weapons are being transferred out of Iraq into Syria?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why withhold it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It's very obvious from other information coming out of this administration that it had already decided to go to war in Iraq long before this preparations were being made.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or, Joel, let's look at it another way.
		The administration went through a terrible, terrible embarrassment, virtually having to say, well, there were no weapons of mass destruction, if I recall correctly.
		They said it was faulty intelligence.
		The British Prime Minister had to apologize for it, for God's sake.
		So you would think the U.S. would now be screaming.
		Well, we couldn't tell you before, but we can tell you now they did have them, but they were sent to Iraq.
		I mean, why wouldn't they sent to Syria?
		Assyria, I'm sorry.
		They were sent to Syria.
		Why wouldn't they be screaming that in that moment rather than go through that giant embarrassment?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's hard to second-guess a government that isn't telling the truth to us.
		But what I can assume is that there would be a public expectation then that if the weapons went to Syria, that you'd go after Syria, and I don't think they're ready to do that.
		I think they went into Iraq for ulterior motives, and they obviously wanted to have, I think, strategically an aircraft carrier on the sand, so to speak, in the middle of the Middle Eastern cauldron of affairs, which is much more economical in terms of managing what they know is coming up as the next Middle East war.
		It's going to be a big war against Israel with a lot of missiles that Syria and Egypt and Iran are planning to launch at Israel in Salvo so that the Arrow anti-missile system cannot intercept that many missiles.
		I think the U.S. wants to be there and in position, and I think that's the reason they went into Iraq.
		Iraq, Saddam Hussein, I think, may have had knowledge of that, tried to defuse the situation by getting his weapons out, possibly to embarrass the United States.
		But I think because the United States is not ready to go in and attack and cleanse Syria, that they're keeping this thing under their hat.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Boy, I don't know if I can buy that, Joel.
		It just doesn't make common sense.
		Again, if you've got the weapons, you use them.
		If the U.S. had knowledge that they were transferred out secretly, certainly it wouldn't suffer through that embarrassment of our intelligence was no good.
		And there are no weapons of mass destruction.
		I mean, the whole thing, it doesn't make common sense.
		Maybe it makes sense in some way you can explain.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, I don't feel an obligation to have to come up with an explanation when neither Saddam Hussein nor the U.S. government is telling why they did what they did.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		All I know is I'm reporting to you the facts on the ground that have been confirmed by military experts.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I'm just saying those are the facts.
		I don't have a perfect explanation.
		I've given you what I think may be a possible one, but I just can't say for sure because they aren't talking.
		They're the ones who did it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		For example, with regard to the intelligence of the weapons being moved into Syria, where do those reports come from?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, they come from actual U.S. intelligence people who, first of all, the government itself circulated those reports fairly openly within the Pentagon.
		So there were plenty of rooms for leaks, but there were sufficient satellite photos.
		I had Marine Corps contacts who saw the photos.
		There were also Army contacts that saw the photos.
		And there's just been a new MI6 report come out of Britain that the British knew, and they knew of the Russian connection as well.
		And that's just been reported this last week, that the Russians were involved in the loading of those weapons because the Russians are very much into Syria.
		They were in Iraq just prior to the war, and some of their advisors were there during the war, and they got out quickly so that they weren't found by U.S. personnel.
		But just like in the original Gulf War, you know, the Russians were flying in daily resupply to Iraq at the same time that the United States was crowing to the world that the Russians were on borders or allies.
		The U.S. has a very nasty habit of covering for the Russians that I don't quite understand.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't either.
		I certainly don't either.
		The Cold War is over.
		The Russians are supposedly, well, I don't know.
		Supposedly, they're our friends, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's the problem is that my information indicates that the Russians are still the worst proliferators of weapons of mass destruction.
		They are the most voluminous builders of weapons of mass destruction as we speak.
		And yet we make mountains out of molehills about Iraq.
		Russia and China, in my estimation, are the real axis of evil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Iran, Russia, and China?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, Iran is a surrogate of both Russia and China.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		By the way, then, how do you react to the news that Iran notified the UN nuclear watchdog people in writing Sunday that it's going to suspend all of its uranium enrichment and related stuff?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I don't believe it for a moment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You don't?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Any more than North Korea saying that they've given up their nuclear program, which they said they did, and they carried it on in caves.
		And the U.S. apparently knew about it, didn't blow the whistle on them.
		And there's a lot of surrogates that are preparing.
		And I mean, China itself is acting as a surrogate for Russia to take the heat off of Russia so that Russia can play this role of feigning weakness.
		And we're an ally of the United States.
		China's moved into Latin America as the main supplier of arms.
		It's taken over some of the main bases in Cuba.
		It's into the Bahamas.
		It's into, of course, Pakistan and it's into Iran.
		It's got connections with Israel and those connections are linked to U.S. shipments of military technology using Israel as a surrogate.
		So there's an awful lot that goes on in the world that isn't according to the mainstream news media.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The way we're told.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you think that our government is lying to us about the size and the danger and the threat of al-Qaeda?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's right, as well as Russia and their ultimate threat to us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why are they lying to us about that?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		These are really tough questions, Arta.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, if you're going to make a statement like that, then it seems to me that the tough questions need to be answered.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I agree.
		I'm just saying that it's one thing to be able to determine that someone's lying to you.
		To determine why they're lying is another thing.
		I can only theorize.
		One of the primary theories that I think has some validity is that there is a movement among certain sectors within the power structure of the United States to get us into a global government.
		And war has often been used.
		Conflict, managing both sides of the conflict in a Hegelian-type dialectic has been used to get Americans, to get British, to get people to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do.
		I mean, we look at the provocations of the Germans in burning down their own parliament building, blaming it on the communists in order to pass a law outlawing communism and giving near-absolute power to the Chancellor Adolf Hitler.
		That was a definite agent provocateur event.
		It's not new in history.
		There's much indication from the book Day of Defeat by Robert Stinnett that Roosevelt did the same thing with Pearl Harbor, knew it was coming, fomented conflict with the Japanese in order to draw us into war.
		So these are not new.
		There may be some of that going on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I never bought the Roosevelt thing either.
		So I suppose I'm consistent, at least.
		And you and I have different views, but that's quite all right.
		Sure, it is.
		So you think then al-Qaeda is what?
		I mean, after all, the way I've seen it covered in the Islamic world, it seems like Osama bin Laden is a hero.
		You don't have to do that.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, that can be whether or not he's real Or alive or dead, he can be a hero.
		This is a man that's living on legends right now.
		And unfortunately, there's a history of disinformation in this field.
		It's just like in the battle going on in Iraq against the insurgents, the constant charge that Zarqawi, a lieutenant of Osama bin Laden apparently, is running the war there.
		And yet, whether it's in Fallujah or Najaf, inside has vindicated, they never have seen Zarqawi.
		The recordings of supposed tape recordings of his voice don't have a Jordanian accent, it can't be Zarqawi, so somebody's imitating this guy, and the U.S. is the one who's been promulgating most of those charges.
		So it gives me pause and suspicion that we've got this information floating around for political purposes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you hardly then believe anything you hear from our government.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Relative to the war on terrorism, I treat everything that they say with skepticism.
		I mean, look at the we've been in yellow alerts since 9-11.
		We've gone to orange alert three or four times.
		There's been almost two dozen major terrorist alerts, and virtually none of them have come true.
		Virtually none are.
		I mean, that's a very, very bad track record.
		The American people are getting skeptical.
		I'm afraid that something is going to have to happen in the world of terrorism to make the U.S. government credible, otherwise they're going to continue to lose credibility.
		That's a very bad track record for supposed improved intelligence agencies.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, the track record of assessing the communist threat in the old Soviet Union during the Cold War was also blown up a little bit, wasn't it, Joel?
		Listen, hold on to your answer to that one.
		We'll be back in a moment.
		From the high desert in the middle of the night, my guest is Joel Scals and we're talking about terrorism.
		I'm Mark Bell.
unidentified		Sweet Jesus later deserved me.
		I traveled the world in the seventies.
		Everybody is looking for something.
		Some of them want to use you.
		Some of them want to be used by you.
		Some of them want to abuse you.
		Some of them want to abuse you.
		The heart of me sweet is beating.
		And when the mediums turn the dark to me, what you have to think is weeping.
		We had to get out before the magic got away In the morning with the night, laying in the shadows I'm coming to the night, till the morning light To talk with Art Bell, call Ma 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 80825-5033.
		From west of the Rockies, call 800618-8255.
		International callers may recharge by calling your in-country sprint access number, pressing option 5, and dialing toll-free, 800893-0903.
		From coast to coast, and worldwide on the internet.
		This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is indeed my guest is George Dowson.
		And I have a feeling that Thomas, from Vancouver, Canada, who passed last the following, agrees with him.
		I think the government is lying about Obama.
		Terrorist threats, nukes, 9-11, the whole thing.
		Because they need something that people will fear.
		And fear is a powerful tool to control citizens.
		Before it was Russia.
unidentified		Now, it's terror.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I would think that Joel probably agrees with that assessment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We'll be right back.
unidentified		We'll be right back.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's actually perfect.
		Joel, welcome back to the program.
		Thanks, sir.
		Listen, I was saying, I think, or asking you, it was fairly widely thought after the end, substantially after the end of the Cold War, that the original assessment of the communist capability was, over the years, far overblown, causing us to spend a whole lot of money on national defense that perhaps we didn't have to spend, that was really well overdone.
		The intel was overcooked, as it were.
		Do you think that's true or false?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Some true, some false, Art.
		I've covered some of this in the World Affairs brief.
		In short, what the answer is, quantitatively, in terms of conventional weapons, the Russians were every bit as strong as our assessment indicated they were.
		Qualitative-wise, in terms of technology, they were far deficient.
		For example, when the MiG-25 Foxbat was finally flown over by a defector, we found out that it had some very rudimentary electronics in it far beyond 10 years, at least behind the U.S. factor.
		Even considering that some of that was put in there for, because they didn't have EMP-hardened chips, they used vacuum tubes and other things.
		Nevertheless, it still was pretty backwards.
		However, what's happened since the apparent demise of the Soviet Union, and that's still the best evidence is that they actually cooked up their own demise in order to continue to get or to increase or facilitate the technological transfers to Russia from the United States, which has happened.
		We've had so many joint projects.
		A lot of Americans don't know that the joint strike fighter is being developed jointly with Vezd Estrella, the Russians' weapons lab, which means they're getting all of Boeing's and Lockheed's technology, and that's found their way into their latest fighters as well.
		They feigned not having enough money to do their space station portion and got all of our technology transfer.
		And we decided to build it for them in their lab facilities at our expense.
		So there's been a lot of...
		That's right.
		And that's one of the problematic things.
		The Clinton administration, of course, was very easy on China in allowing them to get a lot of technological transfers that allowed them to have greater accuracy in their missiles.
		But going back to the Cold War, it's very important to understand that even though the technology of some of their mid-range weaponry was mediocre, nevertheless, their missiles were not.
		Thanks to Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon selling to Russia the ball-bearing, miniature ball-bearing technology, allowing them to accuratize and MERV their warheads.
		They really did provide every bit as much punch in terms of their missiles that we were afraid of.
		So that part is the most important part of the equation.
		The rest is relatively a matter of how they fight the war after they've nuked us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did you hear the little thing I read from Thomas in Canada?
		Government is lying about Osama, terrorist threats, nukes, 9-11.
		Yes, I did.
		Because they need to put fear into the people.
		Are you in general agreement with that?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I am.
		I think that there is a use of fear in the entire war on terror.
		There's nothing greater than the anomalies and the way that they scrutinize people at the airports.
		It's not an effective way, and we still have the huge holes.
		And, of course, we have massive holes in our border, which pales in comparison to the airline problem, pales in comparison to how many terrorists can walk across the border with loads of explosives.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You mentioned Roosevelt and the attack on Pearl Harbor.
		You have mentioned that you think our government's lying to us about Al-Qaeda and the whole business.
		Let's test it a little further.
		Do you think the government lied to us about 9-11?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I certainly think that they're withholding some crucial pieces of information, and we have to ask why.
		For example, that ad that ran before this latest session talked about the 9-11 anomalies.
		There are some huge ones that the U.S. could easily cover up, I mean, uncover and explain to the public.
		For example, on the Pentagon crash, which has tremendous anomalies, they confiscated two videos which showed the crash, and they've refused to make them public.
		You know, if it really is according to the government's version, I mean, why not just let us see the videos?
		There was extra.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A lot of people contend that a plane did not hit the Pentagon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you one of those?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No.
		Something obviously went in and crashed into the Pentagon.
		I think it's very problematic that the Boeing did that kind of damage.
		The Boeing was clearly there.
		There's too many witnesses that saw it, but there was also a C-130 chasing it.
		There was also a four-engine airliner that the BBC had video footage on the next day, and they showed it.
		I saw it of an aircraft doing vertical dives in the same vicinity, and it wasn't the Boeing 757.
		It had four engines.
		You can clearly see it on the video.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		It seems to me it's hard to be a little bit pregnant on this issue.
		I mean, you either think the U.S. orchestrated this, if not ordered it, which a lot of people think.
		I'm not one of them.
		But a lot of people think that.
		So you kind of either lean in that direction or you have to recognize that it was a perfectly executed terrorist act that came off virtually flawlessly.
		And that's quite a bit, you know, for an organization that you say ain't much.
		So it's like one or the other.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that's exactly the anomaly I'm working with, Art.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I mean, if they could pull off that kind of precision with people who couldn't even fly a Cessna aircraft and who can't penetrate the borders and do the most minimal normal terrorist act, that's a contradiction that I can't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, what road does it lead you down, Joel?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, it leads me down the road that there seems to be, at best, as I talked to George Norrie on Coast to Coast last year, I said it seems to be, at best, that there was some facilitation, some looking the other way.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		For example, one of the biggest anomalies of the...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that what you're saying?
unidentified		That's a possibility.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Now, let me tell you, I mean, one of the biggest pieces of evidence that simply cannot be explained by the events is the large pools of molten metal in the bottom of the ruins of the World Trade Center.
		I mean, there's only one way you get those huge pools of metal, and that is you use thermite burning charges inside the huge 42-inch or square pillars that are in the bottom of the Trade Center.
		That didn't happen with airplanes.
		Somebody had to pack those with charges.
		The building was shut down the week before for major maintenance.
		Whole sections of the buildings were cleared out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, then there's only two possibilities, Joel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		One is that Al-Qaeda was even smarter and more adept and more infiltrated by a giant margin than we even imagine when we're talking about 9-11 as we understand it, right?
unidentified		It has to be to achieve what you're talking about.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or, Joel, it was an inside job.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
		It has to be one or the other.
		And I'm just saying that I can't believe Al-Qaeda can do that kind of sophistication and they can't do anything more with open borders.
		I mean, it's just too big of a contradiction.
		So I'm leaning in the other direction.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Leaning.
		But this is one where I don't know how you can be a little bit pregnant.
		Either you think that we were in on this, that it was some sort of inside job, that we knew about it and let it happen, something that awful.
		I refuse to believe something that awful.
		But, you know, I know that opinion is out there, and it sounds to me like you're leaning toward that.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, I try to be an objective researcher on these things, Art.
		Let me tell you, it's almost like the JFK assassination.
		The longer time goes by, the more people come out of the woodwork and say, look, I was carrying the photographs of JFK's autopsy when the wife in the casket came in front of Bethesda Naval Hospital.
		He was already in our hospital when that casket came in.
		Now, those are the kinds of evidences that say, wow, the government's just plain lying to us.
		And the longer we go through this, the more evidence comes out that the government's lying.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I have no illusions, Joel, that our government does lie to us.
		And I have no illusions.
		I know we are propagandized.
		However, I haven't taken that leap, that Roosevelt leap or that 9-11 leap that a lot of people have taken.
		I just think that what happened on 9-11 is what seemed like it happened.
		They crashed airplanes into these buildings.
		I mean, clearly the airplanes did crash into buildings.
		We have lots of video of that.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But you're saying there's so much more.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, we know that there were hijackers.
		For example, you know, even though the FAA has got a gag order on it, it did not release the tape recordings of the pilots talking to the ATC centers.
		We have a private airliner who was recording their own airliner's conversation with Cleveland Center as they were discussing the hijacking of Flight 93 that crashed in Pennsylvania.
		So we have the recording of the pilot of Flight 93 pressing the wrong button and telling the passengers, he was actually talking to the whole world at Cleveland Center, that there's a bomb on board for the passengers to prepare for it.
		And we have also a lot of expletives and shouting and yelling coming out over the microphone.
		We also have one of the aircraft that saw the plane explode in the air.
		Now that's right there.
		Cleveland Center knew that.
		That was never told to the 9-11 Commission.
		That means the government had told them not to tell.
		Why would the government do that?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe the 9-11 Commission report in its finality was a complete whitewash of what happened?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I think it was about a 50 to 60 percent whitewash.
		It did tell many correct things, but it carefully omitted the weightier evidence that would point to the things the government needs to tell us about that they aren't, like vectoring the F-16s to Flight 93 and shooting it down.
		I mean, New Hampshire Air Traffic Controller testified that he vectored them to.
		We knew there were F-16s there.
		The engine Was found six miles from the crash site?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, there were two stories.
		One story was the heroics of the passengers of Flight 93, and the other story, told more quietly behind the scenes, is that it was shot down.
		You're saying it was shot down?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And, you know, the eyewitnesses of airliners seeing with their naked eye Flight 93 explode in the air indicate that it did not end in a crash in the field in Pennsylvania.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you shot down Flight 93, why not say so?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's what I don't know.
		I mean, as I say, I'm telling the facts on the ground.
		I can't speak for a government that's lying to you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm just speculating.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Don't you think the American people would understand that an airliner headed toward the White House, in all probability, would be shot down if they could do it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And so therefore the American people would understand if the American government said, we shot down Flight 93?
unidentified		Sure.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I agree with that.
		But look at TW-800.
		The evidence points to a missile chute gone awry, and yet the government covered it up, denied that the Navy was even there, and spent $2 million manufacturing a phony video about a fuel tank explosion.
		But I'm a Navy pilot.
		I know what a trail of a drone looks like, and two witnesses saw a drone go horizontally over Long Island that had the telltale white smoke trail.
		And it's very easy for a drone that's passing underneath an airblinder if you've got a missile going up tracking the drone that it can switch lock-on to the airliner.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Joel, let me try this.
		If the goal of our government is to lie to us and to put fear into us so that they may pass Patriot Act II, III, and IV, in other words, tighten down the screws on the citizens, right?
		Am I right?
		Yes.
		If that's the case, then why go to the trouble to say it was a fuel tank explosion with Flight 800?
		Why not say it was a God-forsaken, awful act of terrorism?
		And that would fit right into your agenda of lying and scaring the people, wouldn't it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It would have.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		In fact, they would have had an excuse because there were lots of Stinger missiles that are floating around, at least 2,000 of them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		See, Joel, I'm trying to look at motives here.
		And on the one hand, you're telling me that that's kind of what they want us to feel is fear.
		It would have been so easy to say, well, yes, those were photographs of a missile.
		Some bastard shot down Flight 800, and that would have put the fear of God in people, would have served the agenda you say that they have.
		But instead, they do the exact opposite thing and go out of their way to say, no, it was a fuel tank explosion, totally innocent from a terrorism point of view.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Now, you have to remember that this was several years before agendas do change.
		They may have simply been trying to protect the Clinton administration from embarrassment of having a Navy missile shoot go awry.
		I mean, that's a tremendously...
		Yes, yes.
		I'm not one of those that thinks it was a terrorist act.
		I think the Navy was having a missile chute.
		I mean, that's been admitted now.
		There were large Navy vessels there.
		There were submarines that were shooting Tomahawk missiles.
		And at any rate, there was a drone flying over Long Island out to the warning area, and there was a missile shoot going on.
		So I think it was the missile shoot that went awry, not an act of terrorism.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, gee, so in other words, you've got to end up lying about it anyway.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So why not blame it on a terrorist?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, certainly in hindsight we can say that.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		But you know, in the heat of a crisis, when these people make decisions and they start down a certain direction, sometimes the inertia continues to carry them in that direction.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe that the people that we think are in charge of the American government, namely President Bush and those who serve for President Bush, that they're actually working against our best interests and instead they're in league with some greater world, eventual world-dominating body or government, some secret society?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or do you think they're dupes of a secret society or what?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, it depends on who we're talking about.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How about the president?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, the president, I think, is a script reader, frankly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A script reader.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I think he has basic conservative values in terms of his gut feelings.
		But some of my subscribers were working in the same building before he became governor.
		He never read a newspaper.
		He was never interested in world affairs.
		This is a person who was thrust by the establishment into the limelight because he could read a script.
		And because he had the Bush name, he had a winnable name.
		You know, the same thing to a certain extent, although there's a difference, I think, in levels of quotient of intelligence and sharpness.
		Bill Clinton came out of nowhere and suddenly became the frontrunner for the presidential candidacy in 1990 because the media simply said so.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Bill Clinton actually was a much better script reader than George Bush.
		I wouldn't think he'd be hired on his script reading ability.
		He kind of stumbles through a lot of stuff.
		He's not that good at it.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, but he's better than Bush.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I mean, Bush, once he gets off his script, can only repeat the same memorized phrases.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's who I was talking about, was Bush.
		He's not that good at it, at script reading or improvising either way.
		It's not one of his strong points.
		It's why he lost the debates.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		He clearly did.
		In fact, I think they had to do a lot of damage control to try to recover from that.
		They tried to minimize his contacts on an ad-lib basis, and they really had to work hard to recover from that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's just that, you know, in culmination, Joel, what I hear you saying is that our government is not just sort of a fairly benign, stumbling affair at all.
		It's our enemy.
		Our own government is our enemy.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm not going to go that broad art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why not?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that's what it adds up to.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I'm saying there are elements in the government, what we might call a dark side of government.
		I mean, we've known this has been for years, from the OSS to the CIA to the infighting between naval intelligence And OSS and CIA and FBI.
		I mean, there are dark side elements.
		I mean, look at the.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, it's not just dark, it's black.
		I mean, it's as dark as you can get to imagine that our own government would kill its own citizens.
		That's what it boils down to: our own government killing its own citizens.
		Isn't that where it goes?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, and the evidence points to the fact that our own government agents took out President Kennedy.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I mean, they were the ones who covered it up.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, hold it right there.
		We're here at the top of the hour.
		Joel Skousen is my guest.
		In the nighttime, we talk of things like this.
unidentified		Now it begins, now that you're gone, needles and pins, white lights you're done, watching black clouds,'til you return, lighting black clouds, and watching you burn.
		Now it begins, the day after the day, you return.
		This is my life.
		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.
		From West to 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, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is.
		My guest is Joel Scousin, and he said President Bush is virtually a script reader.
		Well, if that would be true, then our president is not really our president, or in name only.
		Certainly, he's not running things.
		and question as they do who is running things you My guest is Joel Scalson.
		We're talking about terrorism.
		We're talking about 9-11.
		We're talking about the Iraq war.
		We're talking about, well, kind of what's going on out there today.
		And just prior to the top of the hour, you were saying the president is basically a script reader.
		Who do you imagine, Joel, that he's reading the script for?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, I have a feeling from my study of the issue that I think Vice President Dick Cheney is his handler, so to speak.
unidentified		Really?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		In past president administrations, it's usually been the national security advisor that's been the president's handler, someone who essentially gives him, feeds him the answers, coordinates what kind of strategies and proposals come before the president, steers him in a different direction than he wants to go if there is any objections to it.
		But this is the first administration where the National Security Advisor is an amateur, Condoletsa Rice, and is not by any means the handler.
		In fact, she's become so discredited in her public interviews because she's just such an inveterate yes woman to the president that she hardly gets any interviews anymore.
		She won't even disagree when there's obvious room to disagree.
		But as to who's running the president, we don't really have any whistleblowers or defectors from the highest levels of what we may call the powers that be.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You nevertheless do believe that there is behind the scenes some secret, super secret organization, powerful people turning the cracks, ordering the orders.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Let me tell you what Woodrow Wilson said after being in politics for many years.
		He said, you know, since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately.
		Some of the biggest men in the United States in the field of commerce and manufacture are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something.
		They know that there's a power structure so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
		That was in his book, The New Freedom, 1913, by Doubleday.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or, presumably, they meet with a horrible, screeching death.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		There have been not a few people who have died deaths when they blew the whistle on Bill Clinton.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		His administration was notorious for the amount of people surrounding the Well, I recall the allegations.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, of course, if Bill Clinton had ever been actually convicted of murder, he wouldn't be wandering around today.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I have no illusions that Bill Clinton ordered any of those deaths.
		I don't think Bill Clinton was in Charge.
		As I say, I think by and large they pick presidents who will front for powerful people.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But you don't have any information specifically about who they are, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, I have some suspicions.
		I mean, for example, I have a high-level contact that was in the Reagan administration that talked about high-level dinner in the White House, and David Rockefeller was sitting next to Robert McNamara, and he was sitting with his chair back to back to these guys and heard their conversation.
		He was highly placed personnel director, and he said he overheard Rockefeller talking to McNamara about an upcoming economic meeting.
		McNamara used to be Secretary of Defense, then he was now chairman of the World Bank, and David Rockefeller turned over and said, now listen, Bob, in that meeting, don't commit to anything more or less than what I told you to.
		So here was David Rockefeller giving orders to the chairman of the World Bank to stand to certain things according to how they had met privately.
		And that indicates power structure above any elected officials.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Does it indicate sort of a piece of advice offered up?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, how could you know which?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, the tone was one of ordering him one.
		The tone was one that indicated there was prior agreement about something that Rockefeller, frankly, had no legal right to be involved in.
		No, I'm just saying these are pieces of evidence.
		They're not proofs, but there are evidence that indicate that Rockefeller has had a high position that tends to surpass normal elected officials.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So the goal of this secret group, I take it, listening to you, is to eventually end up with one world and with the U.S. people completely controlled, with their freedoms eroded and gone.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		But not recognizing that they're gone.
		I think the means of using war, for example, as World War II was used to make a major move to overcome the failure of the League of Nations, World War II was used as a major move to foment doing things under the auspices of the United Nations, and power structures were put in place through the instrumentality of war that probably wouldn't have been approved of by the American public had not Roosevelt got them into war.
		I think they knew that.
		I think that they didn't get all that they wanted.
		And when we talk about they, let me quote from Richard Gardner, CFR member, one of the promoters of this, he said, in short, the House of the World Order will have to be built from the bottom up, making an end-round run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, is likely to get us to world government faster than the old-fashioned funnel assault.
		So that's kind of a conspiratorial statement.
		It means we're going to have to snooker the American people into giving up their sovereignty.
		And Newsweek, you know, last year had this front-page magazine about national sovereignty, good riddance to it right on the front cover.
		There is a concerted effort among a variety of people to push us into global government, and clearly we won't have the same protections we have under the Constitution.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If there were a world government that parroted the United States in terms of the freedoms it has offered up until now, that might not be so bad.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		There's nothing wrong with the concept of world government, Art.
		I know you've written about that in your book.
		There's nothing wrong with the concept as long as you have the fundamental rights of man really clearly established without contradictions.
		And if you look at the proposals that, like the European Constitution, they say we guarantee the fundamental right of property.
		And then in the fine print, it says, except when it's not in the public good.
		Now, if you've got that kind of a fine print exception, you don't have any right to private property.
		You see what I'm saying?
		We guarantee the right to families, right to life, and all of that.
		Except, accept, accept.
		So you see, there's all these contradictory phrases, and they sell the Constitution to these people who are used to having fundamental rights based upon the upfront language, but the fine print takes it all away.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And so the only way to continue and enlarge the amount of fine print that finally takes it all away is to promulgate the threat of, say, terrorism.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		First, you cover it up so that most people don't notice, but I think you use war, terrorism, and crisis to make people call for some solution.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, a little while ago, you said that nothing has happened since 9-11, and something is going to have to happen pretty soon to bolster the credibility of the U.S. government.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's what you said, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and there are cries that this is a serious war on terrorism that we're in.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They're really going to have to do something because, frankly, the public's getting skeptical.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so is it your view, then, that if something darn well doesn't happen pretty soon, that they'll make it happen?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It's happened before in history.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It could happen again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So that is your view?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I'm saying that's within the possibilities of what's happened historically, and I think we have evil people in this world today that are fully capable of that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you think those same evil people promulgated 9-11 itself?
		You know, I've got someone here who says, hey, Art, the World Trade Center, come on, it collapsed from the middle on both of the buildings.
		The pools of metal at the bottom were from the melted floors, which, you know, in the middle of the buildings, those floors did melt, very high temperatures, jet fuel burning.
		They melted.
		Where else is it going to fall?
		Your reaction to that?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it can't melt from jet fuel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It can't.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, it takes temperatures in excess of 4,000 degrees to melt steel.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		You can't get that with an air-fuel mixture of fuel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		See, when you say that, you're saying the whole thing, the whole thing, is a ruse.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Now, the buildings came down, But they didn't come down because of the jetliners.
		For example, the second jetliner, where the building came down first, didn't even hit the structural core.
		There's no way that building could have come down.
		Didn't hit the structural core.
		It went into the corner of the building, of which there were no major structural members.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So the only thing that could have brought that down is what, Joel?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Someone had to melt the 42 central core pillars from the base.
		And once you melt those base, they only have to drop a foot or two, and the rest of the building is going to come disconnected.
		And that's what happened.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there any forensic evidence?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that kind of a job would leave a lot of forensic.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, the forensic evidence was the witness from the demolition, the head of the demolition company said we were shocked to find large pools of molten metal in the bottom of the trade center.
		So that's the forensic evidence.
		Now, that thing was carted away just as quickly as Oklahoma City so that no one could make a detailed photographs.
		No photographs were allowed of those molten pools of metal, but at least we have the statement of the owner of the demolition company.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, if it was impossible for the buildings to have fallen from the airplanes hitting and then the burning that went on, then you would think they would be foolish to cook up such an impossible scenario.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, look at what they did with 150 witnesses who saw missiles going up to TW-800, and they cooked up a fuel tank explosion, created a video that completely falsified the events.
		I mean, that was so cockeyed that it was very, very difficult for the public to believe.
		And frankly, very few of the public that knows about any amount of the full evidence doesn't believe the video.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I did a lot of interviews about TWA 800, and I have certainly reservations about the final explanation of it, and I have some reason to believe there might have been a missile involved.
		But again, even if there was, darting back there for a second, you would think the ideal thing to do, even if you'd blown it and it was one of your own missiles from one of your own Navy boats, would be to blame it on terrorists.
		I mean, if your main agenda is to grasp control of the freedoms of the people of the United States so you can mesh them together with the peoples of the rest of the world and have this jolly old, or maybe not so jolly old, world government.
		Gosh, I don't know, Joel.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, one of the things you have to consider, Art, is that there were public attempts made to the Clinton administration to try to get them to buy back, to reclaim the Afghan Stinger missiles, and they refused to buy them back.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I recall that.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And that would have been made public had the administration blamed it on terrorism.
		They would have got the blame in return because they would have been responsible for not having bought back the Stinger missiles.
		So maybe that's the reason they didn't decide to go with the terrorism excuse at that time.
		I'm just guessing, but that's a real possibility.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, again, the term a little bit pregnant.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You just can't be a little bit pregnant on the issues we're talking about tonight.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		You can when you don't know all the facts.
		What I'm just saying is we don't have complete facts or proofs, and that's why I'm saying this is where the evidence points.
		But I'm not willing to go and claim without a doubt that speak for people who clearly are withholding evidence from us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, straight out, Joe, I mean, there's a lot of people who are saying, not a lot, but there are people who are saying very loudly, the United States did 9-11 to itself, ordered it, or either aided it, or abetted it or made it happen.
		And you've really made a lot of suggestions tonight and said a lot of things that kind of lead in that direction.
		And that's something you just can't be a little pregnant on because if we're being lied to, if there were explosives or some sort of melting mechanism at the base of those buildings that really brought them down, then that's a monstrous lie and it leads directly to full pregnancy.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, technically, you can construct a scenario where the terrorists got access to that building.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It's a very, very problematic scenario because of the level of security.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You could, but why not say it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If that's what you got, if that's what forensics said, why hide that?
unidentified		That's right.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The government should be making a say.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Instead, the government has literally refused to address the issue of the molten pools of metal, which is the biggest evidence that the airplanes didn't bring the building down.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm sure that you've read the literature of the 9-11 conspiracy people, haven't you?
		Yes.
		So there's a whole lot more they've got than just the metal at the bottom of the buildings.
		My God, they've got a laundry list that is 100 miles.
		You know what, Joel, you can take any complex event, particularly something like a military attack, and you can almost make anything out of anything if you work hard enough about it.
		Just kind of like the Kennedy assassination, actually.
		Now all those years later.
		And that, frankly, is what the 9-11 people are saying, that we did it to ourselves, that we virtually ordered this to occur so that we could, well, head down the road that you've kind of described tonight.
		So you're sort of a little bit there.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I've looked at the evidence.
		I would say that a very large portion of what 9-11 researchers have brought out is accurate.
		I will say also that the government has deliberately evaded those very important issues, and that amounts to a cover-up.
		I've mentioned the fact that if the government wanted to completely zero out the controversy in the Pentagon, just show us the service station video.
		Just show the public the video.
		Let us see the plane crashing in it, and they refuse to do it.
		Now, why, Art?
		Now, that's facts on the ground.
		They refused to show us the video.
		Now, I want to know why.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know why, Joel.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And it looks bad from the government position, the fact that they refused to show us something that could clarify a major controversy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In your worst-case imaginings, what do you imagine might be On that video, they don't want us to see.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I think the best possibility, because there was some object that went in and penetrated three reinforced rings of the Pentagon.
		I mean, that's six complete reinforced concrete walls plus pillars.
		There's nothing in a Boeing airplane that can do that.
		I think the witnesses that saw a small jet and the one witness that saw an actual missile were accurate.
		There was a missile fired into the Pentagon to prep it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What could have fired a missile into the Pentagon?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Not the commercial airliner.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
		It would have had to be a small jet.
		In fact, here's an interesting detail I'll give you that I covered in the World Affairs brief about this issue.
		When you look at the Pentagon video of the explosion going on, there's something very obvious about it.
		One, there's no large-sized aircraft crashing into the building.
		Now, granted, it's an edited piece of work.
		It doesn't show all the frames.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you believe that no plane crashed into the building?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no, no, that's not what I'm saying.
		There is an object that comes across the bottom of the screen or the bottom of the picture, right near ground level, and it's a small fighter-type aircraft.
		Now, one of the interesting things is there is a signature in the explosion that indicates high explosives.
		A fuel airplane exploding into something gives only red and black off.
		There was a complete white light of a high-explosive warhead that is the signature on that photograph.
		So that's the first evidence that there was a missile going in, prepping this whatever happened.
		Now, if that aircraft, if a small jet fighter fired the missile, it was obviously going to follow in and cause the crash.
		It certainly could explain the 16-foot, 18-foot-wide hole going into it.
		But what's the anomaly here at Art is that there's a small smoke trail that is into the film right after the jet, which is supposed to be a missile smoke trail going off.
		Now, I've done as a fighter pilot many missile shoots, and missiles, smoke trails don't look like that.
		What I'm trying to tell you is, is that this photo, the only one of the Pentagon that was released was doctored.
		Now, we have to ask ourselves, what was doctored?
		In the first place.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you have proof that it was doctored?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, I'm just saying.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm just saying.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Because of my experience.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But that's a serious allegation.
		It is.
		I mean, do you have proof that it was doctored?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		We don't have the original film.
		There's no way to prove.
		But I can tell you that a curly, puffy, swirling smoke trail is not what a missile smoke trail coming off a rail of a fighter looks like.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		All right.
		Joel, hold on.
		We're here at the bottom of the hour.
		What I'm going to do is turn you over to the audience and kind of just see where this goes.
		Joel Skousen is my guest in the nighttime, which is where we do our work.
		You're listening to Coast to Coast AM.
		I'm Art Bell.
unidentified		Coast to Coast AM
		I'm Art Bell.
		By telling me a lie Without a reason why You've blown it all sky high You've blown it all sky high 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.
		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.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is, and Joel Skousen.
		Joel and I are on rather separate universes, but that's okay.
		We're going to turn it over to the audience now.
unidentified		Traditionally, Joel has been here talking about...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, the safe places to live, how to have a shelter and how to survive whatever might happen.
		And there certainly are enough threats out there.
		That has traditionally been his role when he's been on the program.
		Tonight, however, he's certainly expressed some opinions that cast a kind of a different light.
		And so it's going to be a very interesting remainder of the program, and you are going to make it so.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Psh Psh The End
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Historically, Joel Skelson has come on the program and talked about how to protect yourself individually from threats, oh, I don't know, biological terrorism, nuclear terrorism, where to move, where there are safe zones, all that sort of thing.
		We've talked a lot about that, having stashes of food and water and the things you would have to do.
		It seems, Joel, as though you've sort of moved into you probably still need to prepare in the ways that I've been saying, but you'll be preparing for an attack from your own government.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, that's not really where I'm moving.
		I'm saying that the major threat is going to be a major war that's going to be caused as retaliation for continued intervention in the world, which is increasingly viewed by the world as unjustified intervention, especially after the war in Iraq and the problem of weapons of mass destruction not being found there.
		The antagonism of the world toward the United States is getting to be a fever pitch.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But not expressed through a strong al-Qaeda.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, I think the threat will come through the Russian and China axis, which are clearly preparing to still war against the West.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They're just taking their time to accrue the technology through feigning weakness and feigning friendship.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		We're going to go to the phones.
		First time caller line, you're on the air with Joel Scalzen.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hi, Art.
		My name is Billy Haley.
		I'm calling from Vancouver.
		Yes.
		I have to say one thing.
		On the morning of 9-11, I woke up and I was woken up by my girlfriend's relative.
		And they said, go downstairs and watch the television.
		I went down and I watched that go down live.
		And I'm sure it was Aaron Brown or somebody on CNN said one of the planes had been shot down.
		And then nothing was ever said ever again.
		And then I started hearing about it through the so-called people that believe that 911 was done by their government and stuff like that.
		And the thing is that from Canada, what we see here is the propaganda that goes on in the United States is almost identical to what goes on in the 1930s with the Nazis.
		It's incredible to see.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's how Canadians are looking at the way the U.S. media is propagandizing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They're comparing it to then?
unidentified		Well, it's completely fear-based.
		If you give the public something to fear, then you can win the public.
		And everything seems to be so fear-based.
		You guys are scared of your own shadow now.
		When we see interviews done in the States by our Canadian press, we see people that are, you know, they're voting simply because they're afraid to go to work.
		They're afraid to do things.
		And let's face it, like, the World Trade Center was, that was attacking, like, a monumental symbol.
		You know, that's a world banking.
		That represents something completely different from a local mall or a bridge.
		You know, it represents so much more.
		But I don't understand why people are like, they say, you know what?
		Well, why were we attacked?
		Well, I don't know.
		What about in Iraq?
		Every bomb that's dropped creates probably 10 new terrorists.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, yeah, you can take that point of view, sure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're not over there making a lot of friends right now, are we?
unidentified		No, I mean, I've traveled there in the late 90s, and I have to tell you, it was a fantastic place to travel in.
		Now I'm a little bit P.O.'d because of what American foreign policy is doing as a Canadian, I'm now scared to travel over there simply because I'm viewed as a Westerner.
		I traveled with three Americans over there, and we had a fantastic time.
		And it's just scary, you know, the way that, like, this fear is working on the world, and it seems to be...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In other words, you wouldn't travel any longer to go.
unidentified		Exactly.
		Well, I mean, I'm afraid simply because it's getting a little bit out of control.
		I don't understand how when Americans can be so open-minded towards so many things, how they can be so closed-minded towards so many things.
		And it's like when you have a president that doesn't have a passport until he becomes president, he doesn't even convey himself very well.
		This is a world leader that people are supposed to be looking to, and he can't speak properly when he's in front of his own people.
		He doesn't know anything about any other country.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you have anything Joel should comment on or do you think that?
unidentified		Well, Joel, I mean, I'm glad that he's brought this up because, you know, frankly, I sigh with Joel in the sense that, you know, without all the evidence, how can you make a secure judgment on things?
		And some of the things, you know, he may be a little bit off in left field.
		I don't know.
		But the thing is, without all of the evidence, how can you really make a judgment on it when there are so many anomalies?
		Like, if your government was honest with you, why would it not just be honest?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think your government is honest with you?
unidentified		Well, I think that, you know, probably nobody's government is extremely honest, but our government doesn't go and wage.
		We don't act in a violent way towards things.
		We still have diplomacy, you know, and the way your country is going is that the diplomacy is going out the window.
		It's like you're with us or against us attitude, and that's not very well thought out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I think we do have that attitude.
		You're exactly right.
		You're with us or against us.
		You're our ally or you're our enemy, and there's nothing in between.
		We almost said that, really.
unidentified		Yeah, but how fair is that?
		I mean, can't people agree and disagree on certain things?
		And live?
		I don't believe that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I was being facetious, sir.
		Anyway, your view from Canada is accepted and registered.
		Joel, you think that's typical of views about us outside the U.S.?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It really is, and it's not a matter of this person's reacting to the fear of our government.
		He's reacting to the actual accurate recognition that the world hatred of the United States has increased, And it hasn't increased because Arabs hate our freedoms or our liberties, as the President has said.
		It has increased because they hate our government and what our government is doing to them for perceived unjustified reasons.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So if that's true, then when we invaded Iraq second time around, then we really just enhanced that a millionfold, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		We did, and it wasn't the first time.
		We antagonized the entire Slavic world when we created the KLA, which drove their own Kosovar Albanians out of Kosovo.
		It wasn't the Serbs.
		It was the KLA which came in and threatened the tribal leaders.
		And then we blamed it on the Serbs so that we could justify invading.
		Now, I'm not saying the Serbs were pure.
		I'm not saying that the Serbs did not have some guilt involved, but most of that was a Western-provoked incident, which ended up turning the entire Russian and other Slavic peoples against us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You mean that genocide wasn't really happening?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The genocide was done by KLA and made to look like Serbians.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's been very well-documented, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, Cardline, you're on the air with Joel Skellton.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hey, guy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hey.
unidentified		Is this Lex?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Lex?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Who's Lex?
unidentified		Oh, sorry about that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A webmaster.
		Well, he's the guy.
		There is a Lex webmaster, but he's rarely behind the mic.
unidentified		He's the guy I talked to the last time.
unidentified		Sorry about that, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, that would be probably a screener or something.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know, screeners.
unidentified		It has been a while.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Anyway, what's up?
unidentified		Well, my name is Jim.
		I'm calling from Gastonia, North Carolina.
		I love your show.
		Joel, you are doing a service for everybody.
		Art, you are and have been doing the best service that any human can, making sure the truth gets out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
unidentified		I'm a Gulf War veteran, and I have some info for you that backs up what Joel has said.
		The document itself is on a Gulflink website.
		In other words, a Department of Defense official website.
		Joel may know of it.
		You may know it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Which document are you talking about?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you talking about the videotape?
unidentified		No, no, no, no.
		It's called Transfer of Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Material During Desert Storm.
		Essentially, what it does is describes the transfer of these materials from Iraq to Iran before and during the Gulf War.
		Now, this is dated the 29th of June, 1991.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I thought it was Syria.
unidentified		Syria receives some of them as well.
unidentified		They're on the western border of Iraq, but these were sent specifically to make sure that the Iranians could stockpile this stuff.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, wait a minute.
		Traditionally, Iran and Iraq, before we were there, were enemies.
		They had wars.
unidentified		That's correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why would we send, from the Iraqis' point of view, why would they send their most dangerous weapons to their enemy?
unidentified		Well, they weren't enemies at that point because, as Joel was pointing out, one of the biggest strictures that you run into in that part of the world is the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
		So, in essence, Saddam was sending this stuff out of the country if the United Nations people had actually been informed of this when the Department of Defense saw it and got that information through their system, sent it up to the highest people.
		Matter of fact, one of the people that's listed on this document as having received it was then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		He got a copy of this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where is this document again, please?
unidentified		It's on a website called Gulflink, G-U-L-F-L-I-N-K dot OSD.mil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Dot what?
unidentified		MIL, M-I-L for military.
unidentified		The OSD part is for office.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, so it's actually a military website, huh?
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		It's official Department of Defense website.
		It was part of the declassification process that they did back in 95 and 96 for the Gulf War.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Joel, then you didn't mention anything about Iran receiving the weapons.
		You mentioned Syria.
		So are you aware of what the scholar is talking about?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's correct, but he's talking a different timeframe.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		He's talking about the prior war and the aftermath.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I see.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		In other words, Saddam Hussein knew that he was going to have to start to get rid of certain weapons of mass destruction to avoid the confiscation through the international inspection process.
		And so he gave some of those to Syria, some of them to Iran.
		The bulk of the weapons in this latest war went to Syria.
		But there were some that went to two other countries.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Keys of the Rockies, you're on here with Joel Scalzen.
unidentified		Hello.
		Yes, sir.
		Yes, sir.
		I was just listening to the show, and you're on the show, so.
		But I was just listening to the show before, and he was saying how the buildings had melted, and that prior to that, they had people doing maintenance in there.
		Well, I work in New Jersey, and the 10th of September, I work at night, and as I was driving down by Giant Stadium, if you know anything about New Jersey, it's on Route 3.
		You can see the World Trade Center from there.
		And I've lived here my whole life, and normally there's lights on in both towers at one time, you know, one time or another someone doing maintenance in there.
		But this particular night, both towers were completely black except for the beacons on both the roofs and the antennas up there.
		And I had told people about it, and they couldn't understand why I was saying that.
		But normally, there's some type of light, someone doing maintenance in there at one particular time.
		But this particular night, both towers were actually black.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And what do you think that means?
unidentified		It's just strange that that had happened, you know, because, like I said, I lived here my whole life.
		I've seen the World Trade Center actually being built as a kid from where I live.
		And it's just strange that that particular night that both towers were black.
		And it was just strange to me.
		And when he said that, it just clicked.
		And I just had to call up and just, you know, tell him that.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So, Joel, what does that mean to you?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's actually been documented that the tower was closed off for access to everyone, supposedly for special type of maintenance.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And I think that's when the thermite charges were placed in the bottom of the shaft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there any way, Joel, that you can imagine that somebody snuck in these thermite Charges, planted them, got them all set to go, in league with the terrorists that were going to drive airplanes into them without our government being totally involved.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's just it's almost impossible to think of a scenario whereby the terrorists could have gotten the entire administration and security and otherwise of the World Trade Center to accede to a demand to shut the place down.
		It would have been in a spectacular inside job.
		It's literally unconceivable without some kind of official word authorizing that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes.
		So again, there we are.
		And on this issue, you just can't be a little bit there.
		I mean, either you're believing that the government had something to do with it, which means they had everything to do with it, or not.
		And you seem to be definitely leaning toward they did.
		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Joel Scousin.
unidentified		Good morning, Eric.
		Good morning, Joel.
		This is Chris from Zamora.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		Joel, I have to say it's very refreshing to hear kind of what you're saying, as I've been suspecting it for a while, but it's hard to hear this viewpoint on the American medium.
		My question to you is that you alluded to President Clinton and the wrongdoings in his administration, and to George Bush Jr. and the wrongdoings and possible wrongdoings in his administration.
		My question is with the voting irregularities and these internal black ops directed at the citizens of the United States, what can we as citizens do?
		I mean, do we flee the country or what do you recommend that we do in order to turn this around if it's not too late?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Actually, you know, this is the truth because I read the story, I know.
		After this last election, there was a 300% increase in traffic to the Canadian website for immigration Americans, apparently looking into just moving out and going to Canada.
		Joel?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, certainly there are some very credible pieces of evidence that the election really was thrown to President Bush in five key states.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And so what do you do about that when you have this kind of dark operations infiltrating the United States?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, what evidence are you referring to?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I'm referring to the statistical anomalies that took place between the polling sampling and the actual voter outcome.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you talking about the exit polls?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, the exit polls were within 1% generally all across the nation except in the five or so swing states, and they suddenly started to differ 3 to 4 to 5 percent in favor of Bush, and there were none that differed in the direction of Kerry.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And that's very, very suspicious.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're talking about the exit polls?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I thought the exit polls were all in favor of Kerry.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, no, I'm talking about the actual vote count.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, the actual vote count.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The vote count came 3 to 5 percent in favor of Bush, but only in those five states.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But you're saying the irregularity was what?
		That it didn't turn out the way the exit polling said it should?
		Is that the irregularity?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The media is saying that the exit polling was skewed in those five states.
		And I'm saying that because this exit polling was done by the same companies, it's very difficult to make the case.
		And exit polling is pretty accurate.
		In fact, it's got an excellent track record, much better track record than regular telephone polling.
		Because you're actually asking people not a skewed question.
		You're saying, who did you vote for?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that's right.
		That's right.
		But it depends on where you ask.
		For example, if you ask in New York City, well, you know, you're going to get a lot of carry votes.
unidentified		Absolutely.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		But what I'm saying is that there were a lot of carry voters all across the United States.
		The exit polls were in line within 1% of the actual outcome in all states except five swing votes.
		And all of a sudden, there was this wide divergence.
		And so something was skewed there very strongly.
		There's a lot of other specific evidence about D-Bold that indicates that this is a company that has violated its trust with various state governments in terms of its software.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hold on, Joel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We're at the top of the hour.
unidentified		now we're talking about the election also home strange stories but
		for so long hold on, hold on, hold on to what you got myself and sorrow while you play your cheating game To talk with Arc 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 to the Rockies, call toll-free at 800-825-5033.
		From West to the Rockies, call Arc 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, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Conspiracy Central, actually.
		Now we're on to the election.
		And I think Joel was saying that because the exit polling went one way, it's just impossible that the actual vote went the other.
		And by the way, I'm in one of those swing states, Nevada.
		My state was a swing state.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		BOOM
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Joel, much as I might not agree with it, what you just heard was an example of the fact that the United States certainly is not where they.
		You used the they thing a little while ago, wished to take it because if we were there, then you couldn't hear ads like that, and guests like you couldn't be on the air and live through the experience.
		So we're not there for them yet, right?
		Hello?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Are you there?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I'm here.
		I'm here.
		So you agree with that?
		In other words, we're not there yet.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		I agree with that.
		Clearly, inroads have been made into the direction of free speech when you look at the election legacy of this past election and the curtailment of free speech zones far away from the president and barbed wire cages.
		And, you know, this is a very bad omen in terms of the direction that we're going.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you had been the president, just take up this line of thought for a moment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you had been president when 9-11 occurred, Joel, how would you have reacted to it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, in the first place, I would have not shut down the entire airline system.
		I would have simply requested that they land the airplanes, re-screen the passengers extremely carefully, put them back on board, and keep the things moving.
		You know, one of the problems that I pointed out in my book, Strategic Relocation, is that one of the biggest threats of terrorism is not so much the statistical chance that you're going to be involved in it, but it's the government's reaction to it, potentially shutting down banking systems, shutting down airlines, shutting down whole state freeway systems, and causing tremendous economic harm and otherwise to people.
		The government's overreaction is one of the biggest threats that we have to deal with.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Prior to the hour, we were talking briefly about the election.
		Surely you don't suggest the exit polling is proof that the election was some kind of fraud.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, in my latest World Affairs brief art, I did cover this extensively.
		There's tremendous other evidence.
		And the problem with the evidence of the electronic voting machines that showed problems like being preloaded with votes or having too many votes than registered county people is that none of them went in the direction of Kerry, and that's statistically impossible.
		If they're going to have airs, they should swing wildly around the map was entirely too red for you, huh?
		The map, well, you've got to remember, I come from a conservative point of view.
		I'm no Kerry fan.
		So I'm not here spouting this particular point of view.
		This was a detailed analysis I did of the best evidence we had.
		And by the way, if your listeners want a free copy of that World Affairs Brief on the election, they can get that through an 800 number that isn't listed on your website.
		It's 877-518-5888.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And that, what?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Requires them to subscribe to a newsletter?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, no, it's just to get a free copy of it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A free copy.
		That's very good.
		All right, give that number again.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It's 877.
		That's toll-free.
		877-518-5888.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		All right.
		Forward.
		First time caller line.
		You're on the air with Joel Scousin.
		Hello.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hello, gentlemen.
		I'm a retired airline captain, and I used to fly the 757 and 767.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		And Joel, I'd like to ask you if you know what happened to the radar tapes that would have shown the departure stations, the track, and the final arrival stations of each, or points of each of the aircraft involved.
unidentified		Also, do you know...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The radar tapes, Joel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you know about those?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		What is the question about?
		I mean, do I know the whereabouts?
		Do I know what happened to them?
unidentified		Yes.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I don't.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Tell me.
unidentified		Well, I don't know either.
unidentified		But they would be a matter of record for a period of time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Certainly.
unidentified		And even if the transponders had been turned off, there would be primary returns from aircraft that size.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They were requested, and the FAA refused to comp them up.
unidentified		Okay.
		How about the communication tapes with air traffic control?
		It would have revealed all the conversations of the ground and aircraft.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		That's one of the things in the World Affairs brief I brought out.
		That's one of the things that I demanded that the government show to let us know.
		Let's hear the pilots actually declaring an emergency.
		Let's hear them talking about the hijacking.
		And they refused to do that.
unidentified		Okay.
		And then one other real quickie, and I'll get off.
		There's a real problem with an aircraft that size going through a hole in the Pentagon that's 16 to 20 feet in diameter without leaving any impression of the wings, the tail, or the engines somewhere on the outside of that building.
		That's really problematic.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It really is, and I completely agree.
		that's one of the things that could be clarified if the government would give up the tape recording of what we saw there.
		I'm also concerned about...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We've all seen it probably too many times.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, there was no picture of the airline itself plowing into the building.
unidentified		I'm talking about the Pentagon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, the Pentagon.
		All right.
		You certainly concede, though, that you saw them plow into the trade centers, right?
		Both of you?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so there is no, well, there's one video, according to Joel, of that, but they won't release it, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		There's a video of the crash into the Pentagon, but they will not release.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did you know that color?
unidentified		Yes.
		Yeah, and the lawn was in great condition.
		There's just no evidence of that type of wreckage.
		The engines are pretty tough, and they're not just going to go through a 16 to 20-foot hole.
		I can guarantee you that.
		So it's just a problem.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, there really is a problem.
unidentified		There's no basic problem to the whole thing, and that's the main question I'd like to see answered.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Now, here's one of the things that pertains to that, Art, one of the anomalies.
		There is a fair amount of evidence out there now that the government was, in fact, running on that very same day and on a few days prior, simulated attacks on the White House and the Pentagon, which made people think that this particular attack was a drill because there was one scheduled.
		In fact, the photographs that the BBC showed of this airplane diving into the White House or in that White House vicinity was a four-engine airliner, which was not the 757, of course, which has two engines on it.
		And that indicates that there was, in fact, simultaneously a drill going on, which was keeping air controllers busy as well as military people focusing on that as a drill.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, again, the.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The government has said nothing or admitted nothing about that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Again, but the implication of what you're saying is that our government did this to us.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I'm saying the government certainly knew that there was something going on in terms of the drill, and yet they claimed, the president claimed, that he never had any inkling that they would use airliners, and yet the government was running through a drill on that very same day about airliners crashing into federal buildings.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, but that would be the same as being an accomplice to murder, Joel, if you aid an abet in a deed of that sort.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In a criminal world, then you are charged with murder to the same degree as a person who pulled the trigger, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		So I don't know why, if we're talking about evidence, we're in completely different universes.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		We don't have explanations for all of these art, but I don't think we're in.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we're in different universes because I cannot grasp that everything, and it would have had to have been almost everything, was preordained, pre-planned by our own government or with the cooperation of our government.
		Either way, like being not a little pregnant, Joel, it adds up to the same thing.
		The government murdered its own people is what you're saying.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		All I'm saying is as a journalist, I have to say what the facts decided.
		We don't have all of the facts.
		I'm saying the present facts is we have point to two facts.
		One, that there were actual terrorists, that there were hijackings, and number two, that the government had involvement with it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, then guilty, if that's true.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Joel Scouser.
unidentified		Good morning, Art.
unidentified		Good morning.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Turn your radio off, please.
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		I'd like to ask Joel a question again about this Pentagon paradox.
		If the 757 that the government claims crashed into the Pentagon indeed did not, what became of it and the passengers?
		And I'm going to go ahead and hang up and listen to the answer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In other words, if it didn't crash at the Pentagon, where did it go?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I have absolutely no answer for that other than the fact that I think if it didn't crash, it flew through the smoke so that people could have seen the aircraft make a pass and then not actually crash simultaneously.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, my gosh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You mean the passengers are still alive?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I don't know, Art.
		I just don't have any answers for that.
		As I say, you know, because I don't have answers to everything doesn't mean that we can't discuss the evidence that we do have answers to.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, no, of course not.
		I mean, you can discuss anything.
		But when you make giant allegations.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Remember, I've only discussed specific evidence.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I haven't made the giant allegations.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, but you have, though, really.
		I mean, even though the words may not have come directly out of your mouth, it's what it adds up to.
		You don't know what you're saying.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		We can make these kinds of deductions and conclusions, but the point is that they're deductions on your part.
		And as I say, I'm looking at the evidence, and the evidence does point in that direction.
		We just don't know exactly what happens till someone in the government confesses to a fair amount of culpability there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Fair amount?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They have not shown any inclination to do so.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Joel Scousin.
unidentified		Hi.
		I think that the real problem, everybody keeps using the word the government.
		I think you need to clarify that it's not really just the government.
		You know, there's obviously, you know, I mean, for many, many, many years, and, you know, people behind it, and I think that...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We touched on that.
unidentified		I know, that's all.
		And it just needs, you know, people, you know, the fear thing is just running rampant.
		And it's, like I say, it's obvious, you know, I think if you look all the way back to the beginning of this country, you know, there have been wealthy people with ulterior motives that, you know, have painted a picture that, you know, for the good of everybody, but it's really always been for the, you know, the good of the few, the good at the top.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You have any argument with that, Joel?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, I don't.
		I think that, you know, the way that black operations have always worked is there's just a few who knows what's going on, and there's an awful lot of yes men who take orders and don't question.
		And that's what worries me in the United States.
		That's how Nazi Germany went bad, is there were too many people trained to take orders and not question.
		And I'm afraid we have too many people.
		And what few whistleblowers there are just get raked over the coals and put in prison and don't get supported despite the law.
		This is very serious when we have a climate which does not support whistleblowers who could in fact tell the truth.
		One of your previous callers asked, what can we do about that?
		I think until we get some real honest inquiries, and I think the only way to have an honest inquiry, for example, on 9-11 is you get the critics to be in charge of impaneling a and then look at their results so that they're not afraid to Bring and ask the tough questions, I think then we might have two separate documents to compare.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But as long as we have pro-government people There is a movement, is there not, to reopen the 9-11 investigation in some other way?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm hearing screams for that, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The 9-11 families are not at all satisfied with the whitewash that came out of the 9-11 Commission and have asked for another commission, but that's no different than the multiple warrant commissions that we had.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The two congressional commissions afterwards staffed by people who came to the same conclusions that Oswald was the lone assassin.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But isn't it possible he was?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, not possible at all.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Not possible.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It just flies in the face of all of the evidence, especially the ones that have come across in the past 20 years.
		But in any case, what I'm saying is that if government can whitewash one investigation, they can whitewash two or three.
		So we need a real independent investigation, in my opinion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Joel Scousin.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello.
unidentified		Yeah, how are you doing, Art?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing fine.
unidentified		Yeah, this is Bill from California.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Bill.
unidentified		And I had a couple questions for our guest.
		Sure.
		The Pentagon, wasn't there one tape where they showed the explosion and there was a part of the tail that they caught on the delayed video from the parking lot?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
		There was, but the size of the tail corresponds more to a fighter jet than it does to...
		This was a tape that was leaked by a Pentagon employee who had access to the video.
		It was not authorized.
		In other words, the government had attempted to suppress this video as well because it didn't show the actual airliner going in.
		I think he knew that something like a missile had been shot into the Pentagon, which penetrated all three rings, and he doctored it to give people a hint that a missile had gone off, but it wasn't done correctly.
		That's what I think the doctoring was about.
		In other words, I don't think the video was falsified, but I think a portion was because the leaker was trying to tell the truth that there was a missile shot into the Pentagon.
unidentified		And you don't believe that aircraft could actually, that's a regular, what was it, a 767 they said that went in?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wait a minute.
		I'm tripping over the attempted logic.
		I thought I just heard Joel talk.
		Joel, you said that some guy, acting on his own, if I heard this correctly, doctored the photograph to sort of give the hint that it was all a lie, but what he doctored itself was a lie.
		Just so we could say, wow, a lie.
		It must be more of a lie.
unidentified		No, no.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or what?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		No, what I'm saying is that the video, undod, showed simply a tiny object moving with a small tail, but it didn't show the missile trail because the missile trail would have been too faint to show up.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're claiming it was doctored to show what?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		A missile trail.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A missile trail.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		It was the puffy, curly smoke that is not a true signature of a missile shoot-off that is present in the video that indicates that it was doctored, but only that portion is what I'm saying.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		So I think the leaker was attempting to tell the truth by adding it to the video.
unidentified		Well, I have another observation on that and on the towers.
		The planes that went into the towers, now from my observation, the building fell from where the aircraft had hit, and you could tell that by as the building went down, it was blowing out the sides of the building.
		And it didn't look like anything below those floors had disintegrated until the top floor came down on it.
		Now, that's the one observation I wanted to say.
		And I also wanted to let you think about an aircraft that they say went into the Pentagon, like a 767 or whatever it was.
		You don't think it had enough girth to penetrate the Pentagon?
		Because I was thinking that, you know, like when you take a straw and you put your thumb over the end of it, you can stick it through an orange?
		Is that kind of the same basic principle?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's the velocity, of course.
unidentified		The velocity and plus the fact that the air inside the aircraft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The mass and the inertia.
		I mean, it's all basic physics.
		Velocity, mass, inertia, all the rest of it.
		Are there any studies that show it's all wrong?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that doesn't pan out in terms of any of the studies of the law of physics of the mass of the aircraft.
		It doesn't penetrate, especially three rings of the Pentagon.
		But going back to the first question, there is several video footage which actually shows, and with my engineering experience in architecture, I can tell you that if you take out the 42 central pillars, that the outer structure, that there is minimal outer structure, will hold the building up, but it will not hold the part that's damaged up.
		So it will, in fact, bring down the top first if you remove the central supporting core, and that will pancake down on the more flimsy structure below.
		There is one video, by the way, that does show, let me repeat this, does show the antenna towers coming down before the rest of the thing initiating, and those were sitting right on the central pillar core.
		So that also buttresses the evidence that it was the central core that was damaged down low rather than the, because that happened, by the way, on the aircraft that hit the second tower, the south tower, which did not damage the central core.
		So for the central core to come down vertically before the fall indicates that it was melted from below.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, and all that implies, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Right.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		This was a pre-planned terrorist event.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Pre-planned terrorist.
		Well, I guess all terrorist events have to be pre-planned, right?
		But I mean, the building was pre-prepped inside pre-planned terrorist job, is what you're saying.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The building was prepped for the collapse.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Joel.
		Hold tight.
		We're at the bottom of the hour.
		Yes, only in America.
		Will you hear this?
unidentified		Can a guy from anywhere go to sleep for all her and wake up a million years?
		Only in America can a kid without a cent get a break and maybe grow up to be president?
		Only in America can a little opportunity, yeah, for a classy girl like you fall for a poor boy like me.
		That makes a wonderful day.
		In America, and a kid who's watching car, take a giant step and reach right up and find.
		If I could turn the page, the time then I'd be your age, just a day or two.
		Close my eyes.
		Close my eyes.
		I couldn't find the way So I'll step up forward You'll need to believe in you Tell me Tell me lies Tell me sweet little lies Tell me lies Tell me lies Oh
		no, no You can't disguise You can't disguise Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies 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.
		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.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Over the years, I've disagreed with many of my guests.
		That's no secret.
		Tonight is no exception.
		But it is proof, without a doubt, that we will have those on the air that we disagree with and who have very contrary opinions, because that's what this program is.
		It's a place where things that sometimes during the day cannot be said are said.
		This question about the airplane that didn't hit the Pentagon really is an important question.
		I mean, if this big plane is not what happened to the Pentagon, if it was, as you're suggesting, Joel, a missile or something like that, and then you said, well, maybe the airplane just flew through the smoke or something, is what you said.
		That really doesn't get down easily at all for me, Joel.
		It just doesn't.
		I mean, those people are gone.
		The airplane is gone.
		So it either crashed or those people are secretly alive in some incredibly grand conspiracy that not I would think not even you could buy.
		I mean, where are they?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, that really isn't the point, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But it is.
		I mean, if you're trying to set up this scenario of proofs you're talking about, then it's like making a case, right?
		A homicide investigator has to construct a case consisting of proof that the perpetrator did the crime.
		And part of that would be to answer if it wasn't a plane, which Hockham's razor says it was, simplest explanation, the one that seemed to be true, then you've got to say what happened to the plane.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, you don't have to say if you don't know.
		That would be unwise.
		But I'll tell you, there were witnesses saw four planes in that sky during that time.
		And that's way too many planes than the government version.
		Witnesses saw four planes.
		And I'm just telling you that the government is lying to us.
		I don't know what happened to the people.
		I feel very bad about the entire event.
		But because you find that incredible, that doesn't lessen the fact that there were four planes in the air and that the government is lying to us and refusing to clarify the issue.
		And that's what I'm concerned about.
		That's the major point, is that we have a government who we cannot trust to tell us the truth.
		And they're asking us to trust them, to do all kinds of intervention around the world, to give up our constitutional liberties, to trust them that they won't misuse that.
		And I don't see that.
		I see that happening.
		I see that misuse happening.
		I see freedom of speech slowly being curtailed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't think anybody would argue that.
		It is.
		But, you know, it's in response to a threat, and anything the government would do in response to a threat after 9-11.
		Let's back up for a second.
		And for the sake of conversation, let's say 9-11 was as they said.
		Just as they said, and we really were attacked, and those buildings really were hit by airplanes driven by terrorists, and that's really the way it did happen.
		Then our government would have to respond in some way or another, tighten security at airports, certainly, immediately.
		Maybe stop flying for a few days until they figured out what was going on for the safety of everybody.
		I don't know.
		I mean, if you had been president And that had happened to you, and it wasn't an inside job, and you were in charge of how to respond to it, some of your response would absolutely entail curtailing some freedoms in favor of security.
		It couldn't end up any other way.
		Anything you would do to fight terrorism would end up in some way putting somebody out, meaning they're going to get searched at the airport or something, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Certainly, there's something you could do, but we take issue with the fact that he said, let's go to Afghanistan.
		I mean, any military expert, and I'm certainly well qualified as a military expert, would not have said and advertised the world we're going to go bomb all the training camps.
		They were all empty when they were bombed.
		I mean, that was a futile gesture to get into Afghanistan.
		They gave an ultimatum to give up the Taliban and then didn't give any conditions by which you would determine who was Taliban and who were the supporters.
		It was an ultimatum that the Taliban or give up al-Qaeda.
		The Taliban could not have fulfilled even if they had wanted to.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, back to the phones.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		First time call online, you're on the air with Joel Scousin.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Hi, I think he's Scott in Sacramento.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Scott.
unidentified		Yeah, your guest has good mannerisms and he seems to hold himself well.
unidentified		And there's a generalization, though, of the name government, and just kind of wondering who exactly might be behind this if there is a specific individual or group.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You mean pulling the strings?
unidentified		Right.
		And there does seem to be, if it's government, they seem to offer their protection to the citizens of the United States.
		And to me, in my viewpoint, they have failed to find evidence of things that have come about, like things that go about over the years.
		And then they find out later, oh, after all the evidence overwhelms them and they can't refute it, like lead in the paint, a sybestis in parts of our houses, lead in our drinking pipes, mercury in fillings, and recently the Viox, you know, that has killed people, you know, and the FDAs are to protect us.
		And who's doing this?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, who's sort of an answer, something about Rockefeller, I think it was, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I'm saying we have, I had personal evidence that Rockefeller seemed to be a person who could give orders to high-placed international officials.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That was the answer.
		Okay.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Joel Skousen.
		Hello.
unidentified		Yes.
		Good morning.
		I'm on the East Coast here, so it's a little earlier than probably where you're at.
		But I hate to bump back.
		I haven't been listening to my radio, so I'm probably not ahead with the conversation.
		But back before the 4.30 break, you were discussing the thing.
		The question I have, and this is either to Art or yourself, is when the crash happened at the Pentagon, was there not plane debris inside the Pentagon at the point of entry?
		I mean, was there not any evidence of that, or was there just a hole?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, Joel.
unidentified		And then I'm going to have another question to go along with this, but I wanted to know before I opened my mouth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, all right, all right, all right.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Joel.
		There is some plane debris, so some plane did go into the Pentagon.
		Most of the debris that came out, however, was broken and crushed desk and filing cabinet material.
		When you look at the photographs of the debris, a plane, Joel, or a missile?
		There's hardly any plane debris.
		There's only a few heavy pieces.
		The government is saying that it all burned up.
unidentified		Well, here's the other point where I was trying to come across.
		And I was kind of siding with Art how he was, you know, and I'm not at all trying to be disrespectful.
		But I can remember back after 911 and watching the news religiously for days on end.
		And there were, you know, the Pentagon is a government facility with, I mean, thousands of employees.
		And I remember people coming on the news and discussing seeing, you know, we didn't have video footage, but the people saying they saw the plane come into the building.
		So, I mean, that's where I'm a little confused on that area, you know, and how could you sneak in such a building with so many homes?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hold on.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Hold on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Joe, are there any witnesses who saw the plane?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Clearly, there are witnesses.
		No one's disputing that witnesses didn't see a big airplane with American Airlines lettering on it.
		There are also witnesses that saw a small plane.
		There's one witness that said he saw a missile.
		And there are other witnesses that saw another airplane which had four engines on it.
		And there's a C-130 that was in the area.
		So it's hard to tell what's what and what witnesses saw what.
		We actually need the video which the government is withholding, which shows the plane clearly going in.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why are they withholding it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What reason are they giving it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The only possible logical explanation is that the video shows something which is not in accordance with the official explanation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no, Joe, I meant what present explanation are they giving for not releasing it?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They have actually refused to talk about it.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		They've refused to even admit they have the video.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, so they don't admit it exists?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Uh-huh.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And then the proof that it does exist is the witness of the service station attendant who said that within six minutes the FBI was there to collect the video, which is another evidence that there was prior knowledge of government.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		How could they get there and determine there was a video camera within six minutes of the crash?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And so this was a service station attendant?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, there's a service station right across facing, and the video camera faces right at the annex.
unidentified		Yes.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And that video camera was running.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The FBI agency said, came in, looked at the video, said, we need to confiscate this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		And they took it away.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And where can we, what is there, testimony, written testimony or some kind of affidavit from this guy or what?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Oh, it's all over the Internet.
		I mean, not hard to find.
		I have a copy in my files, but I'm not at my office at this time, Mark.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, okay.
		East of the Rockies, you're on air with Joel Scowson.
		Hello.
		Good evening.
		Howard from Green, New York.
		Yes, Howard.
unidentified		Joel, you're propagating multiple conspiracy theories this evening.
		But when asked for a committed opinion, you're deflecting all over the place.
		Why is this?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		You'll have to speak up a little bit.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		I can barely hear you.
unidentified		You're propagating multiple conspiracy theories this evening.
		When asked for a committed opinion, you're deflecting.
		Can I ask why you're doing that?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did you hear him that time?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I heard him that time clearly.
		I think generally throughout the discussion, Art has tried to come to definitive conclusions.
		I'm not ready to come to definitive conclusions because I don't have all of the evidence.
		I have admitted that I believe the evidence points in the direction of government involvement, and I think that's what a responsible journalist can say at this point.
unidentified		Joe, I think it's fortunate we're living in 2004.
unidentified		If this were 1945, you'd be tried for sedition.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good evening, gentlemen.
		All right.
		Take care.
		I don't know about that.
		I really don't know about that.
		I don't think you...
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		People in 1945 had the...
unidentified		And you'd have to lock up Woodrow Wilson.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The quote that I said that he published in his book is a very conspiratorial theory.
unidentified		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it's been going on for a long time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hello.
		Yeah, Art and Joel, great show today.
		Hey, the question was asked a little bit earlier, can anyone imagine the U.S. government trying to hurt its own people?
		And just in 2002, 40 years after it was written, in 1962, the Northwinds documents were declassified.
		And this is where the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented the President Kennedy with a report that recommended the U.S. military shooting down American airliners and also cruise liners in order to instigate a war with Cuba.
		Blame it on the Cubans.
		Now, this was 40 years ago, and look at the morality difference in our country from then till now.
		I can only imagine what the Joint Chiefs might propose to do to the American people 40 years after proposing shooting down American airliners.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		That may have been gamed or war gamed or something at some point.
		Who knows?
		They do a lot of that.
		But to the best of your knowledge, Caller, they never actually did that, did they?
unidentified		No, they certainly did not.
		However, they presented it to the President, and the anecdotal story is that the President threw them out of the office.
		But even to propose such a thing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it's horrible.
		Sure enough.
		But at least you go on to say he tossed them out on their ear.
		First time, Caller Lynn, you're on the air with Joel Scalzen.
unidentified		Yes, don't worry.
		I just have really a couple of quick points I want to make.
		One is just going back to this exit polling business.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, yes.
unidentified		Yes, it's a simple yes and no.
		Who did you vote for?
		But there's also a third element that he didn't mention that a lot of people, the people that did not want to give an opinion or reveal who they voted for, they had a formula that broke it down, whereas one towards President Bush and nine towards Kerry through some formula through history.
		So that really skewed the whole thing.
		I mean, look at Pennsylvania.
		They had Kerry up by 80%, 80-20% on that first exit call.
		So that was bogus.
		Now, the other two quick points on the World Trade Center, it was going through a transition period.
		It was under the Port Authority control, and it had just been transferred to a private owner literally days before that.
		So that week before when it was blacked out at night, they were going through serious maintenance and inspection in this transfer.
		And the third point I wanted to quickly make that nobody really has talked about is when they bombed it in 93, by putting these guys on trial, when it happened with these lawyers, they paraded out the architects of the Trade Center and whatnot and literally rolled out the blueprints.
		And at that time, it was revealed certain specifications that it was built to withstand a 707 impact.
		They knew the type of steel, the quality of the steel, the strength of the steel, the temperature.
		All these things came out.
		And they had time to plan this, which is partly why they used 757s and not 707s.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're saying what they used was sufficient to produce what happened?
unidentified		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Joel?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, I would disagree with the caller on all three points.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		First, the exit polling criteria, whatever it was used, would have been consistent throughout the range of states, and that would not explain why there was a divergence only within five states on the exit polling.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But I heard even so, it was within the margin of error.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Oh, no.
		Clearly different.
		1% was the margin for all the states.
		The five other states were 3 to 5% difference.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		For example, I voted for Kerry.
		I'll tell you right up front.
		And I watched my own state.
		And when the returns first came back in Nevada, Joel, which was a swing state, by the way, Kerry was in the lead.
		And that was primarily the southern vote, you know, Clark County, Southern Eye County, the southern portion of Nevada.
		And then logically, later on, when the more Republican northern part of the vote began to come in, the president took the lead.
		I saw nothing unusual in that, in the way it happened.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, if you look for your listeners, on my World Affairs Brief, I publish all of the statistics from the exit polling as well as the voting.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		You'll see how it changes in Nevada right towards the end, and it gets skewed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But what I'm saying is it's a natural skew.
		As the votes come in from the northern part of Nevada, traditionally much more conservative, you would expect that.
		And that's what happens.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		The exit pollings come in before those votes, and the difference was between the exit polling and those votes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There's no guarantee with any poll, even an exit poll, that it's going to be like the final poll, the vote itself, right?
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		But it was within 1% in all the other states except the five, and that's what makes this suspicious.
		Now, let me move on to the other points.
		The transfer of the building is also really the point is that that's the first time the building has been completely blackened out.
		Never before has maintenance required that they stop anyone from going into the building and black the whole thing out.
		And we had witnesses that just called up and said it was totally blacked out.
		Now, that's a very suspicious change that nobody deems necessarily or sufficient for that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		On the steel portion, let's see, his point was that the airplane that plowed into it allegedly was sufficient to have done what happened.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Well, in reality, that still doesn't explain.
		I mean, the actual aircraft weight difference isn't that significant to explain that.
		The point is that no matter what airplane plowed into it, the second one that plowed into the south tower didn't hit the main structural elements.
		It only hit the clip, the side corner of it.
		And that means that the only destruction could have been by the fuel fire.
		And fuel fire doesn't get any hotter than 2,000 degrees.
		It can soften metal, make things sag, but it can't even touch those huge central pillar columns.
		And so, you know, it's really insufficient to bring it down.
		And it doesn't explain, even if it did cause the web trusses to sag, it doesn't explain the molten pools of metal, which can only come from huge, high-temperature, 4,000 to 6,000-degree temperatures, which cannot possibly have occurred by debris and fire falling into the oxygen-depleted area in the bottom of the tower.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		On that note, Joel, we're out of show.
		We're out of time.
		Thanks for being here.
unidentified		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You have a good night.
		Joel Skousen, I'm Art Bell, and Crystal Gale with the precise words for exit.
		Good night, all.
		Have a good week.
unidentified		A night in the desert, shooting stars across the sky.
		It's a magical journey.
		We'll take the sun arise.
		Filled with belonging, searching for the truth.
		But we make it to tomorrow.
		For the sun shine on you.
		Midnight in the desert.

▲