Al Bielek on Coast To Coast AM

Choose your language     

Al Bielek on Coast To Coast AM with George Noory

by Marshall Barnes

On Monday evening, July 21, Coast To Coast AM, hosted by George Noory, featured a lengthy interview with Al Bielek. To Noory's credit he mentioned that our web site here exists and that Coast To Coast had added a link to it under a link to Bielek's web site. However, it was very disappointing to hear Noory allow Bielek to ramble unfettered through hours of fantasy, culminating with the patently obsurd claims against myself and the investigators and obvious purpose of this web site, without even a "So Al, please tell us, why do you have the college picture of a man named Alex Cameron on your web site where you claim it's Edward Cameron?" from Noory. This says more about Noory, and the true nature of the Coast To Coast AM program, than it does about the veracity of Bielek's statements. Bielek's Statement against us is quoted below:

"...doing a little research on that through channels, what I found out the principal involved, I will not use his name on air, the principal involved in that was working for intelligence groups for well over 10 years and he has, in the past, done some good research and has even helped me out on one of the earlier programs that was put on by Art Bell. And, uh, I will give him credit for that. But at the same time there is, apparently now, is a very major effort on the part of the Navy, which still refuses to admit this experiment ever happened, a major effort to deny it ever happened, to debunk me and prevent it's being proven in a manner which everybody can accept...I don't fault these people. I don't blame them. They simply don't have enough background and knowledge and information. Much of it is highly classified."

This is quoted right from the live audio feed of the Coast To Coast program which is now in an attorney's hands. I recognize this as classic Al Bielek garbage and I will explain to you what I mean. There are a number of techniques and buzz words deliberately used to obtain a predetermined effect on some listeners, in particular, listeners who have followed him over these many years, and never bothered to double check a single solitary item that he spoke of. Why? Because many of them won't even bother to go to our web site and see for themselves what's here. Second, because most of the rest won't be inclined to read through the lengthy dissertation that is stored here. They'll simply think that Bielek must be telling the truth because there's an effort to debunk him.

The truth is rather obvious, however, to a person who carefully reads what Bielek said and thinks about it. There's still more to it than that:

"...doing a little research on that through channels..."

Using the word 'channels' sounds somewhat official, somewhat military, like he's connected somehow to the world of military intelligence and intrigue. Using the word 'little' implies that his research effort through these "channels" was easily accomplished. And what does his research reveal?

"I found out the principal involved, I will not use his name on the air, the principal involved in that has been working for intelligence groups for well over 10 years..."

Now that's rather surprising, isn't it? He uses wording to imply that he's got the kind of official connections that would reveal to him that I've been working for intelligence groups for well over 10 years. That's like the pot calling the kettle "black". It's also a patent lie. For one, it's not true. For the other, there were no "channels". I'll tell you why in a moment. First I'll deal with the fact that he mentions no one's name, he only says the "principal involved". He later identifies that "principal" by saying that

"...and he has, in the past, done some good research and has even helped me out on one of the earlier programs that was put on by Art Bell."

My associates here withstanding, there isn't anyone else that's known for doing "good research" on the Philadelphia Experiment beyond William Moore than I. That's just simply a fact. It's also a fact that I helped Bielek out during a previous Coast To Coast Am program which was heard by millions of people and to which I even refer to during my original statement on this site, in paragraph 10, line 2 at So not mentioning my name means nothing when he clearly identifies me in other ways that anyone, privy to the subject being discussed, could identify me.

Though he doesn't do it, I can identify his "channels" if there indeed were any. In this case it would have been one Vince Barbarick aka Peter Moon former high ranking Scientologist and publisher of Sky Books who used to sell a video documentary that I produced entitled "Quantum Conspiracies from the Philadelphia Experiment". In the beginning of that program I revealed that in 1983, during a pitch to an attorney to raise venture capital seed money for a space saga movie idea I had, I was offered the opportunity to work as a "weapons system consultant". This came about because the weapons systems in the treatment were so well thought out and sophisticated, yet within reach of an actual military R&D department, that I was given a "test". I was shown a photograph of something that I won't reveal because it's still classified, but instructed to figure out how it could be stopped with only the kinds of items available at a local hardware store.

Now, I know what some of you are thinking. "Marshall, why won't you tell us what you saw that was classified, when at the same time you're trying to prove the Philadelphia Experiment, which is also classified, if it really happened?" The reason is that the thing I saw in 1983 is still classified and has never been revealed in any open source material that I have ever seen. No one else has come forward and said "Yeah, I know that's real", there's no public debate. It's still secret, and as it is an asset of our national security structure, I'm not going to describe it. The Philadelphia Experiment is different because it was a long time ago, it's been out in the open for years and in short, it's fair game. I never took a security oath about the Philadelphia Experiment and revealing the truth about it isn't going to effect national security. The French, the Russians, and the British already know about it and what's been done with it since, something that Bielek's never talked about. Oh, I guess his "channels" have kept him out of the loop on that.

In any case, I took less than 5 minutes and had an answer. The man I was talking to, an attorney, thought it over and then said that he could offer me a job as a "weapons system consultant" where I could make enough money, in a relatively short time, to use for my seed money. My principle job would be to "McGiver proof" (my term) the weapons platforms that the company would be building. Then later they could begin to build the kinds of things that were in my movie treatment.

There was one problem. I knew that there was something else going on with this company. I was told how there were supplying field equipment and uniforms to buyers in Africa. I knew absolutely nothing about the military contractor business or how intelligence agency "cut-outs" worked back then. I was barely more than a kid and my interests were in the entertainment field not the military field. But I did have a natural talent in that area, and I knew it. The wars of the future were could very well reflect what was in my treatment but I wasn't interested in developing weapons platforms that would be sold to third party countries. I never heard the words "for our country", or "American" come out of his mouth, so I turned him down. He got very angry at me and I made sure our paths didn't cross after that. I heard rumors later that that attorney had some dealings with the CIA as he spent more and more time in Africa. I didn't think much about it though. I was still involved with entertainment.

When the movie "JFK" came out I was amazed by Donald Sutherland's character's conversation with Kevin Costner's. Suddenly, the conversation with the attorney made sense. The company he was representing was some kind of cut-out or front for CIA activities. I did some checking with a local man from the African nation that the attorney had dealt with the most. One year after my conversation with the attorney, that country experienced a coup that overthrew the government. I did more checking with a private investigator with high level connections that I knew and a Gulf War vet. To them I described what I saw and the P.I. said that it was a top secret asset used by our special forces and our closest "client" nations. The Gulf War vet freaked out and warned me about getting involved with "them".

So that's the extent of what I was doing with "intelligence agencies" well over ten years ago. I got offered a job, turned it down and mentioned it in a video documentary that was distributed by Sky Books. Like most of what comes out of Al Bielek's mouth, the rest is just gross exaggeration and "embellishment". Now let's deal with the rest of his accusations:

"But at the same time there is, apparently now, is a very major effort on the part of the Navy, which still refuses to admit this experiment ever happened, a major effort to deny it ever happened, to debunk me and prevent it's being proven in a manner which everybody can accept..."

This is not only ludicrous, it's another blatant lie. is no more a effort on the part of the Navy to debunk Al Bielek than it is run by the Martians. All three of us support the fact that the Philadelphia Experiment was real - not the way the Navy LIES about it(and I can say that being the only PX researcher that has documented evidence of Naval personnel l-y-i-n-g in their official capacity of representing the U.S. Navy in matters concerning the PX) but as an attempt at optical and radar stealth using some form of electro magnetic fields. It has not been Al Bielek who has been able to thwart the efforts of skeptics and a biased media to say otherwise. It only been me. I've been the only one that's really tried, until recently, when I've been joined by Gerold Schelm and Fred Houpt. A careful reading of the Viewzone article at will show h ow I caught the hand picked Navy representative lying about the PX and then unexpectantly caught him in another lie when he denied ever having heard of Area 51. "I'm not a nuclear test buff..." he said, as his excuse of not knowing anything about the top secret base. The only problem was that I had never mentioned that the base was located in the Nevada Nuclear Test Site, so why would he associate it with nuclear testing unless he did know about the base and its location. Now, does that sound like I work for the Navy? Gerold and Fred, both being foreign nationals and Gerold an officer in the German Air Force, makes the comment even more ludicrous.

"and prevent it's being proven in a manner which everybody can accept..."

This remark is truly ironic. The facts that we have been uncovering that show the PX really happened are very clear cut and the *easiest* to understand. They explain all the details and correct the confusion. When we are ready to present them in their entirety it will be actually the easiest way to understand and will win the skeptics over because we'll be able to prove it. So far, there is not 1 skeptical argument against the PX that we can't disprove. So far, there is not 1 Bielek originated statement that Bielek can prove. Bielek's version of events does exactly what he claims that we're trying to do. It is a version that not everyone can accept because on its face it's convoluted, ever expansive, and not supported by a single shred of evidence.

In what I'm beginning to call "Montauk Mania", Bielek's presented an entire laundry list of items that are suppose to be "evidence" which repeatedly fail to be supported once checked for accuracy and, in the case of the Schneider letters, clearly contradict his version of events. I have been accused, recently by one of these Montauk maniacs, of somehow missing the obvious point that if the cover-up has time control equipment, they could simply go back in time and replace the real evidence with phoney documentation. This is the excuse given as to why Bielek claims that the photo on his web site is of Edward Cameron and instead it says "A. Cameron" underneath the photo, not "E. Cameron". What the Montauk maniac is missing is that if indeed there was some kind of time travel switch-a-roo going on (and I'm not even going to get into why the physics and the spacetime diagramming for such a stunt would make it impossible) it is still then the "phoney" evidence that Bielek used to make his claim. He's the one that put up a photo that is clearly labeled "A. Cameron" and not "E. Cameron". And if this imaginary switch had been made when he found the photo he should have said so. But no, he didn't, just like he didn't say anything about Gustave LeBon dying in 1931 (see That kind of makes it tough for LeBon to even have been involved in the phoney early development story that Bielek has happening in Chicago in 1931. There is a pattern here, a pattern of put out anything, even if it doesn't make sense, so long as there's a story. Any story. There's two explanations for that. They're that crazy, or they think you're that stupid. In reality I think they're that crazy. Otherwise they wouldn't think that everyone could possibly be that stupid.

I truly wish Al Bielek had spent the time to do what we have strived to do. Find out the truth about the PX. He could have. It has not been that hard for us. He would've been a real hero for doing it. He could have found the real Dr. Rinehart when he was still alive. He could have found so much more, so much easier when the trail was fresher. I didn't start until the trail was over 50 years old. It's taken almost 10 years of hard and dangerous part time work to do it, only to have to turn my back on a man that I used to like and face the reality of that writing in the sky from the old "X-Files" show.

"Trust No One".

* * *