The discussion opens with Art greeting his audience from various time zones. He introduces his guest, David Aikman, a senior foreign correspondent for Time Magazine and the author of “When the Almond Tree Blossoms,” a novel about America’s next civil war. Art finds the book’s theme particularly relevant given the current events, including a situation involving Red Beckman, a founder of F.P.G.A, who was forcibly removed from his property by local sheriff’s SWAT teams.
Art also mentions Linda Thompson’s controversial actions. She produced the videotape “Waco: The Big Lie” and has called for armed citizens to gather in Washington on September 19th. Her extreme stance includes issuing a second declaration of independence, demanding action from lawmakers, and threatening to arrest and hang those who don’t comply. This radical approach by Thompson and the incident with Beckman provide a real-world backdrop to Aikman’s fictional civil war scenario.
The conversation then shifts to technical difficulties in contacting David Aikman, leading to a brief interruption in the show. Once reconnected, Art asks Aikman about his experience with Time Magazine, covering significant events worldwide, including the war in Lebanon, the end of the Vietnam War, the Tiananmen Massacre, and the situation in Eastern Europe.
They discuss China’s human rights issues, with Art questioning the U.S. President’s impending decision on renewing China’s Most Favored Nation (MFN) status. Aikman predicts that the President will likely renew the MFN but with certain qualifications, highlighting the political dilemma faced by the U.S. in balancing human rights concerns with trade interests.
Art and David Aikman delve into the situation in North Korea, where tensions are high due to potential UN sanctions, which North Korea has threatened to consider an act of war. The conversation then shifts to Haiti, where new sanctions are about to be imposed, though there is skepticism about their effectiveness.
Art expresses concern over the current U.S. foreign policy under the President, suggesting that it could inadvertently lead to a military conflict, possibly in Korea, Haiti, or Bosnia. Aikman shares this apprehension, noting the tendency of American people to rally around the President in times of war.
The discussion then turns to Aikman’s motivation for writing his book about America’s next civil war. He was initially inspired by his experiences in Eastern Europe under communism and wanted to convey the feeling of living under a dictatorial regime. However, with the fall of communism, he shifted the book’s focus to the dangers of ultra-nationalism in Russia and the cultural conflicts within the United States. Aikman acknowledges the unlikelihood of a civil war in America but doesn’t rule out the possibility under extreme circumstances, such as military defeats or economic collapse.
The conversation touches on the recent comments of Louis Farrakhan. He reportedly told Barbara Walters in an interview that he believes integration has failed in America. Farrakhan suggests that black and white people should effectively “divorce,” with black Americans receiving specific territories and compensation, an idea that Art finds extraordinary.
Aikman warns of a potential economic collapse in the U.S. if the national debt is not addressed, highlighting the vulnerability of the global economy to events like a potential crash in the Japanese banking system or stock market.
Aikman’s book, set after a civil war in the U.S., is discussed as a warning rather than a prophecy. He emphasizes that the events in his book, while fictional, could plausibly happen under certain circumstances, such as Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. The book also explores a scenario where the ultra-nationalist Vladimir Aronofsky gains power in Russia, a notion Aikman had written before Aronofsky’s real-life political ascent.
The conversation shifts to the political landscape in Russia, focusing on Boris Yeltsin’s resilience and the country’s economic recovery signs. However, concerns about Russia’s nuclear stockpile and the rising influence of organized crime are raised. Aikman mentions the potential catastrophe if nuclear weapons from Kazakhstan end up in Iran or if tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalate to nuclear conflict.
Art Bell and David Aikman explore the possibility of America under authoritarian rule, prompted by economic collapse or military defeat. Aikman suggests that in such scenarios, parts of the country might accept strong authoritarian rule if it promises security and a basic standard of living, comparing it to a benign dictatorship like Singapore. He mentions this theme in his book, where New York is under such a regime, cleaned up and free of drug dealers, leading some characters to prefer the new order despite its oppressive nature.
They then shift to discussing the urban-rural divide in America, particularly regarding gun control. Art highlights the significant difference in attitudes towards guns between city dwellers and those in rural areas, especially in the West. Rural residents see gun ownership as a fundamental right and fear that gun control measures are a precursor to more ominous government actions.
The conversation then opens to callers. The first caller from San Diego inquires about the situation in North Korea, where the North Koreans have allowed IAEA inspectors to check their nuclear history. Aikman explains the importance of these inspections in determining whether North Korea has been producing plutonium, a key component for nuclear weapons.
The next caller from Saint Louis brings up Linda Thompson and the Patriot Movement, expressing frustration with the government’s perceived encroachment on individual rights, particularly the Second Amendment. The caller warns of the potential for civil unrest if the government continues to infringe upon these rights.
A caller from Saint Louis expresses serious concerns about the Patriot Movement and their preparations for potential conflict with the government. He cites Linda Thompson’s call for a march on Washington D.C. and believes that the government is either underestimating the situation or preparing to suppress it forcefully.
David Aikman agrees with the caller’s assessment, noting Washington’s lack of understanding of the sentiment in rural areas, particularly regarding gun control. He acknowledges that while people in urban areas view guns differently, those in rural regions see them as a part of their lifestyle and necessary for protection. This difference in perception is a source of considerable tension and misunderstanding.
The conversation shifts to the concept of the New World Order. Aikman discusses the origins of this term and its negative connotations, tracing back to historical figures like Hitler and its use in secret societies. He suggests that President George Bush’s use of the term was meant to describe a period of balance and cooperation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, but it quickly lost its relevance.
Art and Aikman then discuss concerns about a potential move towards a one-world government, which many fear would undermine the principles upon which the U.S. was founded. They express concerns about losing national identity and values in such a scenario.
They also discuss President Bill Clinton’s focus on domestic policy over foreign affairs, with Aikman characterizing Clinton as embodying the ideals of the 1960s, focused on empathy and domestic issues. However, he criticizes this approach for lacking effectiveness in dealing with international leaders like Kim Il-sung and Saddam Hussein.
Finally, Aikman doubts President Clinton’s chances of re-election under the current circumstances, citing his low approval rating and the lack of a strong third-party candidate as factors that would work against him.
A caller from Douglas County, Oregon, brings up the topic of illegal immigration and its impact on local environments, like forest destruction. He also raises concerns about North Korea’s military buildup and nuclear activities, and the U.S.’s response to these international challenges, especially in the context of domestic military base closures.
David Aikman responds by mentioning a special issue of Time Magazine that covered immigration extensively, including the topic of illegal immigration. This leads to a discussion about the mainstream media’s treatment of President Bill Clinton. Aikman acknowledges that the mainstream press, which tends to lean politically liberal, initially gave Clinton a favorable coverage. However, he notes that this has changed, with the press not shying away from criticizing the Clintons.
The conversation shifts to the extreme and unsubstantiated accusations being leveled against President Clinton, including allegations of drug smuggling and murder. Aikman expresses concern that such extreme allegations, lacking in substantive evidence, could obscure legitimate criticisms and issues. He stresses the importance of maintaining fairness and decorum in political discourse, warning that extreme attacks could weaken the prestige of the presidency.
The topic then moves to President Clinton’s legal challenges, specifically the Paula Jones lawsuit and the implications of the President seeking immunity. Aikman discusses the constitutional aspects of presidential immunity, referencing a past case involving President Bush and the legal precedent for suing a sitting president for offenses committed before taking office.
Art continues his conversation with David Aikman, focusing on Aikman’s book “When the Almond Tree Blossoms,” about America’s next civil war. They discuss the availability of the book, with Aikman mentioning that it is stocked in most Christian bookstores and some regular stores. Bell inquires why the book isn’t topping bestseller lists, despite its qualities. Aikman suggests various reasons, including the whimsical nature of the book market, possible unfavorable reviews, and the book’s political unpopularity due to its critique of political correctness.
The discussion then returns to the callers, with one expressing his desire to find the TV miniseries “America,” which deals with themes similar to Aikman’s book. Aikman advises trying specialized video clubs to find the series, as it was a made-for-TV miniseries and might not be readily available.
The conversation takes a deeper dive into the themes of Aikman’s book. Aikman shares that he became more engaged with the topic of a potential civil war in America while writing the book. He recounts a caller on another show discussing a suburb in Boston where residents wanted to list known criminals to prevent them from getting credit or housing in the area, illustrating people’s willingness to embrace authoritarian measures for safety and order.
They also discuss the situation in Chicago, where residents of public housing are prepared to waive their Fourth Amendment rights to allow police to address criminality. Aikman sees this as indicative of a conflict between individual rights and societal protection. He speculates that Americans might, out of desperation, call for their rights to be removed to ensure safety.
Aikman expresses his belief that a spiritual revival is needed in the country, similar to those before major crises in American history, like the War of Independence and the Civil War. He sees this as a crucial step towards addressing the nation’s deep-seated issues.
Art Bell and David Aikman touch upon the rising movement of state sovereignty, with states like Colorado and Hawaii asserting their rights against federal government mandates. Aikman mentions a character in his book, inspired by a real-life Russian nationalist, who predicts the breakup of the United States into separate entities based on linguistic and cultural lines.
They speculate on how current President Bill Clinton might handle a hypothetical situation where a state decides to secede. Aikman jokingly suggests Clinton might establish a commission or appear on MTV to address the issue, highlighting the unpredictability of such a scenario.
The conversation then shifts to a caller who discusses the difficulty of obtaining the TV miniseries “America,” which shares themes with Aikman’s book. The caller had to offer a reward locally to get a copy. Aikman acknowledges the challenge, as the series was a TV miniseries and not generally released.
Another caller from Washington expresses surprise that Aikman, a senior correspondent for Time Magazine, is unaware of Linda Thompson and the Patriot Movement. Aikman admits his ignorance and agrees that it indicates a disconnect between Washington and the rest of the country.
The segment concludes with a discussion on the title of Aikman’s book, “When the Almond Tree Blossoms.” Aikman explains that the title is a reference to the Book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible, symbolizing a country suddenly becoming old, which is pertinent to the theme of civil war in his book.
Art Bell and David Aikman delve into various emotional and political aspects of writing Aikman’s book, “When the Almond Tree Blossoms.” Aikman describes the ease with which he could portray dictatorship and the negative behaviors it fosters in people under political duress. He notes that his writing felt more natural and improved when focusing on the Western United States, where the characters in his book, representing constitutionalists, oppose a communist-like dictatorship sweeping across America.
The conversation then shifts to a caller’s question about recent significant resignations at the State Department, particularly those related to former Yugoslavia and Bosnia. Aikman explains these resignations are due to frustration with American policy’s vacillation and inability to confront the realities on the ground.
Another topic discussed is the international response to the Rwandan Genocide. Aikman criticizes the United Nations for refusing to use the word “genocide” due to political implications, highlighting the organization’s weaknesses and the reluctance of many member countries to apply democratic principles and justice.
A caller then brings up the Waco Siege, expressing disbelief over the media’s portrayal of David Koresh and the lack of national media attention on the story. The caller accuses the Attorney General of being involved in a cover-up and expresses concerns about similar incidents occurring in the future.
The segment concludes with Art Bell emphasizing Aikman’s role as a senior foreign correspondent for Time Magazine and inviting listeners to ask questions about a range of topics, indicating that the conversation will continue after a break.
A caller from Albuquerque inquires about allegations concerning members of the Clinton administration, specifically focusing on Janet Reno. Aikman clarifies that he cannot comment on the personal lives of administration members without firsthand knowledge. He acknowledges the Clinton administration’s support for gay rights but doesn’t subscribe to the idea of a conspiracy within the administration.
The discussion then turns to the ideological positioning of President Bill Clinton. Aikman characterizes Clinton as a “new Democrat,” which suggests a moderate stance, but also notes that at his core, Clinton is driven by the ideals of the 1960s, with a focus on empathy and helping the underprivileged. He criticizes some of Clinton’s policies as potentially leading to unintended negative consequences.
A caller from Portland brings up the Federalist Papers, particularly Papers 28 and 29, discussing the right to bear arms and the role of the militia in American society. Aikman agrees, highlighting the historical context in which the right to bear arms was established as essential for the defense of political rights shortly after the War of Independence. He contrasts the concerns of gun control advocates in urban areas with the perspectives of people in rural areas, emphasizing the cultural divide on the issue of gun control.
Aikman expresses concern that there may not be a clear limit to gun control advocacy, with potential future restrictions targeting handguns. He acknowledges the constitutional foundations of the Second Amendment, highlighting the cultural divide between urban and rural areas regarding gun ownership.
The conversation shifts to the topic of a potential civil war. Aikman notes the historical success of the United States in bringing together diverse cultural and ethnic groups under a set of shared principles. He emphasizes the importance of a cultural and spiritual underpinning, specifically Judeo-Christian values, as the ethical and moral basis of American society. He warns that the erosion of these core values could lead to significant societal conflict.
Aikman and Bell also discuss a proposed regulation treating religious solicitation in the workplace similarly to sexual harassment, which Aikman views as a dangerous trend that could drive religious expression underground and potentially lead to civil unrest.
A caller from Kentucky shares his concerns about the current state of the nation, mentioning that many people, including professionals and religious leaders, are preparing for possible upheaval. The caller indicates that even if a violent event may not be imminent, the perception that it might happen is driving people to prepare defensively.
In response to these concerns, Aikman advises caution, suggesting that while the country is not on the brink of violent activity, it’s essential to be aware of the underlying tensions and the need for preparedness in case of societal changes. He underscores the importance of understanding the potential consequences of the current political and social climate.
Aikman discusses the importance of political expression within constitutional limits, emphasizing the need for civility and urging people to convey their concerns to Washington. He acknowledges the palpable tension and concern among the public about the direction of the country.
One caller questions the potential for a presidential pardon for Dan Rostenkowski, who is facing possible indictment. Aikman opines that while a presidential pardon is unlikely, efforts might be made to keep penalties light enough for Rostenkowski to continue his congressional duties, particularly due to his central role in key legislative efforts like healthcare reform.
The conversation then shifts to the political future of Vice President Al Gore and potential Republican candidates in the event that President Bill Clinton is not re-elected. Aikman speculates that Gore’s chances would diminish significantly if Clinton were defeated. He also touches on Clinton’s occasionally self-destructive rhetoric and high-risk policy approach.
Regarding Republican candidates, Aikman mentions Dick Cheney as a strong potential candidate, especially given his foreign policy credentials. He also brings up Colin Powell, who has not declared a party affiliation but has criticized the current administration, suggesting he might lean Republican.
Art Bell continues his conversation with David Aikman, senior foreign correspondent for Time Magazine. They discuss Aikman’s book, “When the Almond Tree Blossoms,” and its portrayal of a potential civil war in America.
Aikman addresses a caller’s question about the concept of the New World Order and who stands to benefit from it. He suggests that if a tightly controlled multinational economic system were to emerge, major corporations could indeed gain significantly. However, Aikman is skeptical of the viability of such a world order, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Regarding the U.S. national debt, Aikman believes that the situation is precarious and could deteriorate unless there is sustained global economic expansion. He warns that a serious recession or depression could lead to a global economic collapse.
Discussing the resilience of the American people, Aikman expresses confidence in their ability to overcome severe economic challenges. He prefers living in the country over the city in such scenarios, citing the increasing dependency on government support in urban areas.
A caller from Eugene, Oregon, inquires about the spelling of Aikman’s last name and asks about possible scenarios that could lead to events similar to those depicted in his book.
David Aikman discusses several potential scenarios for a civil war in America, emphasizing that his book is more of a warning than a prophecy. He believes that an economic collapse or a failed military conflict could be triggers for such a situation. He also notes the current limitations of the U.S. military and the risks posed by international players like North Korea and Saddam Hussein.
Aikman then addresses questions from callers on various topics. One caller asks about the threat posed by Rafsanjani of Iran and Saddam Hussein’s rebuilding of the ancient city of Babylon. Aikman does not see Iran as an immediate military threat but acknowledges the danger if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. Regarding Babylon, he confirms that Saddam Hussein has indeed been rebuilding the ancient city, reflecting his megalomaniacal tendencies.
Another caller inquires about the book “Tragedy and Hope” by Carol Quigley and its influence on Bill Clinton. Aikman is aware of Quigley’s work, noting that Clinton cited him as a major influence. Quigley’s writings suggest the establishment of a supranational entity to coordinate global activity, aligning with Clinton’s globalist approach.
Aikman speculates on whether Clinton will complete his term, mentioning possible legal issues beyond the Whitewater scandal that could be politically and legally damaging. He hints at the presence of rumors in Washington, D.C., that suggest potential challenges for the Clinton administration.
Aikman talks about the potential for civil unrest in the United States, suggesting that it could arise from an economic collapse or a failed military conflict. He emphasizes the importance of political expression and engagement to prevent such scenarios.
Responding to a caller’s question, Aikman clarifies the birthplace of Colin Powell, stating that he believes Powell was born in the United States, which would make him eligible to run for President.
Another caller asks for an overview of Aikman’s book, “When the Almond Tree Blossoms.” Aikman explains that the book is set in the 1990s and portrays a civil war in the U.S., triggered by a global depression, the rise of ultra-nationalism in Russia, the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran, and the collapse of constitutional rule in the U.S. due to economic and cultural factors. The story revolves around the conflict between collectivist and traditional constitutionalist forces.
Aikman also discusses his research for the book, including visiting the Pentagon to learn about submarine operations, which he incorporated into the story to add authenticity.
The conversation then shifts to media bias, with a caller inquiring about the perception of left-wing bias in American news organizations. Aikman acknowledges a liberal slant in mainstream media but notes that the coverage of Middle Eastern issues is somewhat balanced due to strong pro-Israeli sentiment in much of the media, particularly on the East Coast.
Aikman responds to a caller’s scenario about increasing constraints on freedoms, such as stricter gun control laws, and the possibility of states like Colorado taking drastic steps like secession or asserting more independence. He acknowledges that under certain circumstances, a state’s decision to secede on a popular issue could trigger a snowball effect among neighboring states or attract people to move to that state.
The conversation also touches on Larry Nichols, a person known for making serious allegations against President Bill Clinton, including accusations of murder. Aikman expresses caution about commenting on such allegations, noting the difficulty in separating fantasy from reality and the less formal political environment in smaller states like Arkansas, where Clinton comes from. He emphasizes the importance of being personally familiar with the specifics of such charges before making any authoritative comments.
Aikman responds to a caller’s question about the writings of Dennis Prager, agreeing that the U.S. is facing significant spiritual and moral challenges. He discusses the importance of Judeo-Christian values as the foundation of American morality and ethics. Aikman suggests that the erosion of these values has led to moral relativism and a victim mentality, which are detrimental to the health of society.
A caller then brings up the United Nations treaty on the rights of the child, expressing concern that it could undermine parental rights and lead to nationalized education. Aikman is not familiar with the specific treaty but acknowledges Hillary Clinton’s involvement in advocating for children’s rights, often at the expense of parental influence. He expresses concern about the trends in education and the promotion of contraceptive programs in schools, which he believes correlate with higher rates of illegitimacy.
Discussing his political leanings, Aikman admits to being conservative but notes that his focus on foreign affairs often aligns him with broader consensus views, making it easier to interact with colleagues who may hold different political opinions. He values the intelligent and respectful discourse among his colleagues, despite any differences in viewpoints.
A caller from Spring Valley, California, inquires whether the current administration in Washington believes that the majority of Americans don’t know what’s best for themselves. Aikman suggests that all administrations can sometimes be arrogant in thinking they know what’s best for the country, with the current administration possibly having many members who believe that wise government knows better than ordinary people.
Another caller from Salem, Oregon, asks about the mainstream media’s coverage of tax protester Red Beckmann and similar figures. Aikman reassures that the mainstream media generally wants to report news and will likely cover major events thoroughly.
A caller from Chugiak, Alaska, recommends a book to Aikman and questions why elected officials often don’t seem to listen to their constituents despite being inundated with communications. Aikman acknowledges the frustration but encourages people to keep voicing their opinions, noting that sometimes it does influence legislators, citing the example of the congressional pay raise debate.
A caller named Doc arguing that Dan Rostenkowski deserves a pardon, similar to the pardon given to Richard Nixon. This opinion leads to a call for a debate with someone who opposes this view. However, due to a mix-up with the phone lines, the planned debate does not fully materialize.
Another caller disputes Pat Buchanan’s statement about the murder rate in the United States compared to England and other European countries, suggesting that if socioeconomic factors were accounted for, the U.S. murder rate might appear differently. This leads to a discussion about the impact of poverty and class on crime rates.
The show also touches on the topic of presidential pardons, specifically whether Dan Rostenkowski deserves one.
One caller from Palm Springs, California, expresses disbelief at the notion that Rostenkowski deserves a pardon, indicating it reflects a broader problem in the country where everyone seems to think they should get a pardon because someone else did something worse. The caller and Art Bell also humorously suggest that the breaking up of the phone company has led to conspiracy-like issues with the phone lines.
The debate finally gets underway with a caller from Bothell, Washington, who supports the idea of pardoning Rostenkowski, paralleling it with President Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon. Another caller opposes this view, leading to a discussion about the right of voters versus the actions of elected officials. The debate touches on the importance of the voters’ role in determining the fate of elected officials and the necessity of maintaining democracy.
The debate participants delve into the nature of democracy, the history of pardoning in the United States, and the contradictions in political stances.
One caller argues against the notion that every elected official who commits a wrongdoing, regardless of its severity, should be pardoned simply because others have been pardoned in the past. This caller believes that only high crimes or treason should warrant removal from office, emphasizing the importance of the voters’ judgment.
The debate touches on various political figures and incidents, such as Oliver North and the Iran-Contra affair, to illustrate contradictions in attitudes towards political misconduct. The callers discuss the difference between minor infractions and serious crimes, questioning where the line should be drawn in holding elected officials accountable.
The conversation also delves into the role of the voters in a democracy, with one caller emphasizing that elected officials should be held to high ethical standards, and voters should have the ultimate say in their tenure.
One discussion revolves around the pardon of Dan Rostenkowski. A caller expresses disbelief at the notion that Rostenkowski should be pardoned for embezzling a significant amount of funds. The caller, formerly a Democrat, shares their disillusionment with the party and their intent to vote for anyone but Clinton in the upcoming election.
Another caller from Hawaii discusses the success of their group in advocating for the 10th Amendment. The conversation shifts to Linda Thompson’s call for a militia march in Washington, D.C. While Art Bell acknowledges the legitimacy of her complaints, he disagrees with her call to action. He suggests that a more effective approach would have been to demand an investigation into the Waco incident, something he believes would have garnered more widespread support.
A caller from Arizona questions whether Americans are fighting for their country or for a government that has strayed from constitutional values. This leads to a broader discussion about the current state of governance and the role of citizens in upholding democratic principles.
Another caller shares their personal connection to Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, explaining how her composure and dignity during and after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy had a profound impact on them as a teenager. They also speculate on why Kennedy’s remarks immediately following the assassination were sealed for 50 years, suggesting she may have known sensitive information.
The show also touches on the concept of royalty in America. Bell and the callers discuss the idea that while the U.S. does not have official royalty, figures like Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis can hold a similar place in the public’s heart and imagination. This leads to a conversation about the American attitude towards royalty and how it contrasts with that of other countries.
In the concluding part of this “Coast To Coast AM” episode, Art Bell wraps up the week’s discussions and looks forward to the upcoming shows. He announces that a repeat of the “Dreamland” show will air on Sunday night, followed by a new live show premiering on KFI in Phoenix on Monday night.
Bell also mentions his plans to make an appearance on shortwave radio, indicating a transition from the regular show to a shortwave broadcast.