I'm Mike Hagan.
We'll be back in a minute with Dr. Dennis McKenna, Richard Glenn Boyer.
The music of ISM all night.
Stick around.
It's going to be awesome.
Now that's the way to begin a radio show.
All right, I'm Mike Hagan.
This is Radio Orbit.
You're listening to it.
It's KOP on Columbia, 89.5 FM.
And that was the music of ISM.
The song was called Beside the Sun.
It's from their new release on STM Records.
It's called Monkey Underneath.
We'll hear more from ISM and their aptly titled disc throughout the show tonight.
And what a show it's going to be.
Aside from the rhythms of ISM, we've got Dr. Dennis McKenna live from his home in somewhere around Minneapolis, St. Paul.
Richard Glenn Boyer from his place in California.
A little more about that in just a minute.
But just first let me do a quick thanks to Ken Stedman for spending some time with us last week.
To Lizzie West and the White Buffalo.
Wonderful music live last week with them.
And more from them in a month or two for sure.
And thanks certainly to Debbie Johnson.
Wonderful stuff.
Free Range Radio Theater.
Every Monday, an hour before this program setting us up just right.
Okay.
All right.
So let's get right to business here.
We're going to be trying out a couple of new things tonight.
So here's what's going on.
We've got Dennis and Richard on the phone with us.
We've got a studio full of a diverse group of individuals loaded with questions.
We've got live chat going on at the website.
So yeah, hop on the web and click over to MikeHagan.com.
You'll find info about our guests tonight, links to their sites, links over to our chat room
and the forum where folks are already discussing this stuff.
As I was writing my little intro here, I wasn't sure if we were going to be able to announce this or not,
but we are streaming live right now on the web.
First time ever.
Radio Orbit live on the web.
If you're anywhere in the world right now and you've got access to the web, get on it.
Go over to www.cosmicwavesradio.com.
Thanks to the wonderful guys over there, Carrie and Paul, everybody else over there.
My friend Charlie here at the station who made this possible.
We just got it going tonight.
I mean literally just under the wire here.
So I'm really pleased.
And I didn't even announce it on the website because we didn't know if it was going to happen or not.
But it's up on the forum now if you want to find the link.
But just cosmicwavesradio.com and you'll see it easily from there.
Okay?
All right.
So we'll do the usual first hour stuff later and we'll get right to our guests.
All right?
Our first guest tonight, he's a good friend of the program.
He's a man doing tremendously important work for the better part of four decades now.
His name is Dr. Dennis McKenna.
He should be no stranger to listeners of this program.
We welcome him back to the show.
And as if that weren't enough, we've got Richard Glenn Boyer with us as well.
Richard is a senior fellow in law and policy at the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics.
And he also serves as a director for that organization.
Richard has demonstrated a lifelong commitment to freedom of thought and information flow.
He's an accomplished attorney.
He's been admitted to practice in the United States Supreme Court.
It's actually a really interesting story.
We'll talk to Richard about it and filed the first ever freedom of thought brief before the Supreme Court in 2002, just a few years ago.
A synopsis of a lot of this stuff can be found on the website.
I've got links to all this stuff up.
So you can find out much more about both Dennis and Richard by going to MikeHagan.com and getting curious, clicking around a little bit.
And so without further delay, Richard, welcome to Radio Orbit.
Dennis, welcome back.
Thanks.
Great to be here.
All right.
Good to be here.
Thank you, as always.
Okay.
Well, gosh, an exciting night for us here.
And I couldn't think of a better way to introduce this program to the World Wide Web live.
Of course, people listen to the show through the archives for a long time, but this is the first time we've been live, you guys.
And I'm so pleased that Dennis, you, and Richard could be the ones to share it with us.
Great.
Let's hope it works.
Yeah, let's see.
Yeah, I know.
Yeah, it's like we're swimming in the dark right now.
All right, a couple things out of the way real fast.
The website's Dennis, www.hefter.org, H-E-F-F-T-E-R.
You can also go to Arrowhead.com or Arrowhead.org, I guess it is.
Arrowhead.org.
Yeah, .org, and there's an interesting page there with a lot of information and links about Dennis and his brother.
Richard's website, www.cognitiveliberty.org.
And Richard also has a website at convictionfree.com.
That's his law firm.
So, all right, before we get too busy here, Dennis, the first thing, we spoke a few weeks ago, and I've got a few e-mails with questions.
Everyone was pretty pleased to hear that you had safely secured some of your botanical specimens from South America back here.
And I know these things are kind of slow, but at any rate, people are interested in if there's any news on that front and sort of what's the latest at Hefter.
Oh, well, as far as the Amazon project, yeah, we were able to get all of our samples out from South America.
We're finally getting things hammered out with the Peruvian government as far as permissions to export these things.
So we've done that, and now we're sort of in the lab phase of things, and it's kind of slowed down.
But basically, we have to work through this 130 samples or so and, you know, make extra screening in the neuroreceptor screens.
My colleague, collaborator on the grant is Dr. Brian Ross.
And just looking for something special?
Looking for novel molecular structures that hit a certain range of receptors that we're interested in.
Okay.
All right.
So more about that, people.
There's a paper that actually I put up, Dennis, that you wrote a while back from the Peruvian conference in Iquitos that's called The Future of Ayahuasca.
And that's up on the website.
And, of course, if you go to Hefter, I'm not sure exactly what's there, Dennis, but I'm sure there's certainly some things that they can check out.
Yeah, there's a lot of information about Hefter there.
Hefter is, as your listeners probably know, it's a nonprofit organization, basically geeks, people like myself, Dave Nichols, Charles Grobe,
other either neuroscientists or psychiatrists or, in my case, ethnopharmacologists.
And, basically, it's a similar organization to MAPS, which is the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies.
We're just, as a result, much less poorly, much more poorly funded.
But our focus is on clinical research with psychedelics, trying to get these things used for various types of...
Okay.
So, with that taken care of, Richard, thanks for being patient there.
And Dennis has been on the program a couple of times, and the listeners are pretty familiar with his work, I think.
But you are a little bit more new to the program.
So, perhaps a little bit of background, the Center for Cognitive Liberty, an interesting title, of course, for those unfamiliar.
What it is, we'll have to define cognitive liberty, even, I think, maybe where we might start.
But tell us a little bit about you and the website and the mission for the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics.
Okay.
Well, first, thanks.
But the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics is formed in the beginning of the year 2000 to try and look at the way that it evolved or what we think is going to happen
and what we're placing our bets on and helping to usher along is an evolution of human rights,
which will come to move beyond the rights that have been associated with the body and recognize that there are...
This is very ripe right now, besides psychedelics and hard technology...
Brain fingerprinting, this whole thing.
Brain fingerprinting and then a whole bunch of pharmaceutical-type drugs, everything from SSR.
A lot of developments for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics was designed and continues to...
How long have you guys been in operation?
...of the dot-com boom, and a lot of the people who had made lots of money at that time really liked this idea
and were excited about it and funded it in a grandiose ideas of how easy it would be to fundraise in the world.
You know, the PayPal thing's not working out for me so well, you know?
Yeah, well, you know, I probably decided that's just not my bailiwick.
And so now we only do projects that the funding kind of comes very easily because I don't like going around and so forth.
Dennis, how were you introduced to Richard and his work?
Well, I'm not sure exactly.
We've been sort of traveling in the same circles for a long time.
It was probably one of those infamous Friday night dinners or one of those kinds of things.
Quote-unquote dinners.
Right, right.
Well, no, they weren't dinners.
Excellent, by the way.
But I've known of his work for some time, at least since 2000.
And I have great admiration for what he's doing because I think, you know,
his notion of cognitive liberty, he's really cut to the chase here in a sense.
The war on drugs and that whole issue is really just a small subset of the issues that he's trying to address,
which basically comes down to, you know, freedom of thought.
There is always this dynamic tension between, you know, that the government or the authorities,
whether it's the government or religious ecclesiastical authorities or some combination of these,
you know, has vested interests in controlling people's behavior and especially what people are,
they are basically being brought to bear to influence how people.
You know, but what is diffusing and in some ways quite worrisome because there's, you know,
a distinct possibility that, you know, they can exert influence beyond just,
and Richard has identified this problem and is standing up basically for the freedom to,
you wouldn't think that you'd have to, but apparently we do in this day and age.
So, you know, he's taken the lead on this.
That's very important work.
Well, Richard, let me ask you a question about that.
You know, we talk about human rights all the time,
and I think about in this country, you know, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
You know, we name it that, and we have certain rights that are afforded us.
It's the right to practice religion, the right to the freedom of speech,
the right to, you know, freedom to assemble, all these things,
to ask for redress of our grievances, which doesn't work out very well, actually.
But where does it talk about freedom of thought?
Well, that, of course, is the problem is that it doesn't.
It's kind of the zero amendment.
It's the amendment that wasn't mentioned partly because I think it was kind of unthinkable
that there would be some way to really tinker with somebody's thoughts directly
or the government would take such a step to stop people from doing that themselves.
And so it wasn't ever written into the Constitution,
but it's there because it's every time you look at any of, not all,
but because we have this marketplace of ideas and we want,
you can undercut the first amendment quite easily rather than targeting speech,
killer thought, whether it's by, you know.
So the idea of cognitive liberty, a kind of un-
it's not mentioned in the context of privacy or the right to unreasonable searches.
Right, the fourth amendment comes closer.
Fourth amendment.
These are rights that underlies and the basic principles fit
and would speak to the same.
Right, I mean, the whole idea of freedom of speech, for example,
I mean, it seems sort of intuitive, but really not.
But, I mean, of course, you have to be able to have the thought.
Well, that was the whole thing in order to make the speech.
By controlling language.
It wasn't about, you know, an old double job.
Amazing.
Now, you're sort of on the other side of, not really on the other side of the issue,
but you're involved in development and research of some of the things
that Richard is talking about here.
Now, how does this fit in with the work that you're doing?
You mean the drugs just treat schizophrenia?
Yes, the stuff that you're working on with the grant from Hefter.
Well, sure.
I mean, I don't think that you can arrest these technologies.
You know, pharmaceutical technologies are going to be developed.
You know, other types of neural technologies are going to be developed.
I was just reading something before I came down here in the Otney Reader
about some of these brain implant machines that they're now using.
Originally, they were used to try to be adapted to things like obsessive-compulsive disorder.
That's amazing.
You know, I think the key thing here, all of these technologies are going to be available.
There's really no way that we could...
Technology in and of itself is not, you know, evil or good.
Right, the wisdom behind it.
And I think the key thing here is the issue of coercion.
You know, if a person has, say, schizophrenia or obsessive-compulsive disorder
and perceives that as a problem and wants to be, you know, wants to be treated,
if it's their choice, it's when government steps in and says,
it's not your choice.
We're going to...
And Richard has argued, I think, a couple of cases in this respect.
You know, there was one previous case, which I'm sure you can tell us about,
you know, in which a person basically stopped taking their medications
and as a result was psychotic, and because they were psychotic,
couldn't be tried for it.
And the government's...
So that's true.
So that they could then...
You know, it's the same issue that comes up with abortion.
You know, nobody is forced to get an abortion.
But what the government wants to do is to take the element of choice away.
They want to, you know, speak into this issue of privacy.
It's all about control.
And they, you know, the uterus.
A woman should...
And it's very much the same issue.
It's all about, you know, how these technologies are going to be applied.
I mean, I think it's great that we have neuroimaging technologies now
that can examine brain states in fairly fine resolution.
We can use them on Tibetan monks.
Maybe we can understand a little more about what mystical states of mind are
and psychedelic states of mind and that sort of thing.
But, you know, when you come to the point where, for example,
you can't step on an airplane without undergoing a brain scan,
then I think we have to be very careful.
And we're not there yet, but give it five years.
Interesting.
Yeah, there's actually...
I'm on the web right now, you guys,
and I'm looking at a story that I found a couple weeks ago,
and it had to do with this organization that calls themselves Terasem,
the Terasem Movement.
But, Richard, this is something that I thought might interest you.
But check this out.
It says,
The Terasem Movement has posted online streaming videos of a moot court hearing
on the petition of a conscious computer to be treated as a legal person.
A moot court hearing is a legal role-playing exercise conducted by real lawyers and judges
in preparation for anticipated actual judiciatory proceedings.
So there's also a technological side of this whole thing, too,
that we haven't even talked about yet.
Actually, yeah, the Terasem people are really interesting.
I'm going to be out there.
It's going to be interesting.
I think that it is moving ahead in a way that it will generate some see-making at some point.
The kind of the problem that I see,
and which I lose sleep over sometimes when I get really neurotic about it,
is that the legal system is psychedelics are with the novelty of technology.
It's just the opposite.
If we're coming into something that's a direction that's a wise policy,
and God knows we need to do that.
If we had formulated wise policy, for example,
I mean, we knew what the issues were.
We knew what the problems were going to be.
But we didn't deal with it.
And now we're in a heap of shit.
Am I allowed to say that?
Ah, heck yeah.
Why not?
You know, we're only talking to the whole world, Dennis, so.
But, you know, you know what I mean?
Tension, sort of, between the need to proceed cautiously with things like cloning.
For example, all these neurotechnologies, psychopharmacology, you know, and with respect to psychopharmacology, I would say, you know, it's not the illegal drugs that we need to be worried about.
It's the corporate drugs. And because those are the tools that the control society can use to essentially control what people can think, very much in the sort of Brave New World thing.
A gram is better than a dam. That was the motto. And so, you know, we need to wisely regulate these things.
But I think we've we've shown time and again that outright prohibition doesn't work. I mean, it certainly doesn't work with drugs.
Yeah. Well, Dennis, it seems like that the point that that I get from both of you in this first segment here is that there are both there are two sides to all of these things, whether it's technological or pharmacological.
There they can be used for great benefit, perhaps. In other words, maybe there's reason to be really excited about some of the stuff.
But at the same time, there's the there's the other polarity of it.
They can they can be used for great benefit or for great harm. And it depends on who's who's using them, you know, and for what purposes.
And given, you know, the current political climates and and what is going on, it's worrisome because, you know, if if you if you could have a belief in a, you know, compassionate, wise,
wise, you know, compassionate, wise leaders that could be trusted to use these things in a wise way, then we wouldn't worry.
But in fact, it's quite the opposite. You know, you can pretty much assume that, you know, that the uses to which these technologies are going to be put will probably not be for the greater good.
They'll probably be for the consolidation of of power in the in the hierarchies that already possess it.
This is the scary part. All right. You guys will look. That's a that's a chance to take a break.
OK, so we're going to play play a piece of music here. We'll come back.
And Richard, I want to talk a little bit more about we'll continue along the same line.
Maybe you can talk about some of the legal cases that you've run across that that are dealing with these exact issues.
Maybe some of the ones that we're doing well in. In other words, I'd like to talk about the UDV case at the Supreme Court.
To me, that was a stunner. And and and then maybe, you know, I don't know, just some successes and failures.
Maybe you can tell us a little bit about that when we come back. All right. I'd be happy to.
OK, great. All right, everybody. This is Mike. You're listening to Radio Orbit.
It's KOP in Columbia. And my guests are Dr. Dennis McKenna and Richard Glenn Boyer.
Information about them can be found on my Web site, www.mikehagan.com.
If you want to listen to this program live on the Web, you can do that, too, at www.cosmicwavesradio.com.
And it'll be simple. You'll see it right up on top there. OK.
All right. So another piece of music here from my new friends.
The band is called Ism. The CD is called Monkey Underneath.
And this is called Wake Up and Write It Down. We'll be back in just a few minutes.
What do you have to do? That's right. That's Ism.
Again, wake up, write it down.
If you want to find information about that band, they're at www.ismmusic.com.
All right. There you have it.
As I said, this is Mike. You're listening to Radio Orbit.
It's about 1145. Now, 1143 on Monday evening.
It's the 1st of May. It's May Day.
And we're live with Dr. Dennis McKenna and Richard Glenn Boyer from the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics.
And, Richard, I'd like to ask you real quick, if you could just sort of give us an update,
like we talked about before the break, about some of the cases that you've run across.
And then everyone here was screaming at me at the break for me to shut my mouth
and to let them ask you guys some questions.
And so I think we're going to start doing that right after we hear that from you, okay?
What about the UDV case? Maybe we could start with that.
I thought that was an interesting one.
Well, that's one that is, you know, there was a victory in,
and that's in no small part due to Dennis' work and his colleagues at the Hefter Institute and elsewhere.
That's a case that involves – maybe Dennis should talk about what's involved in the church,
and then I can talk about the legal side of it.
That would be great.
Okay, well, the UDV, which is short for the União do Vegetal, I'm not sure I'm saying it right,
it's a Brazilian sect, I guess you could call it, about 10,000 members that uses ayahuasca,
which is the Amazonian hallucinogenic beverage that's very important basically throughout the Amazon basin.
But a few years ago, a few decades ago, I should say, there were several syncretic churches that were formed
in Brazil that use it in a very nontraditional way, in a shamanic, psychedelic.
They use it much more like a sacrament, similar to the way the Native American church uses the UDV
really since the early 70s, and then there's another daimae that's been around since the 30s.
And they use this thing as a sacrament.
Where do they get the leaves and the vines, Dennis?
Well, they grow very much in a sacramental way.
And then in 1993 or thereabouts, they incorporated a chapter in the United States called a church.
It's fine.
They were practicing religion.
And then in the summer of 1999, if I recall, they were at the DEA, and the sacrament was seized, about 50.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I don't believe anyone was charged.
They just seized it, and they said, well, you know, you might be charged with a controlled substance.
The crux of that is that, of these plants...
Which happens to occur in all of our brains, by the way.
That's right.
And everywhere else, it's in thousands of plants.
Right.
Hundreds that we know of, and probably thousands more.
It was the UDV that actually sued the government under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, as it turned out,
and basically said, you know, you have no right to interfere.
And that started this legal proceeding that...
So that's the sort of...
Richard could tell you much better than I about it.
Please do, Richard.
It also just changes the underlying way that...
Right, not a lot of money involved in it for anyone.
I don't know if there's any money.
It's just to speak to anybody else.
They're harming themselves.
These guys are taking a drug that's very dangerous.
And I think it was, by and large, Dennis' work in this, which he has been doing for, I don't know how...
Three, four.
More like four.
Four decades on ayahuasca that people knew about this.
But B, there's political implications for him, as a scientist, to be working on something like...
Pushed on through and did this work.
There was actually some studies and evidence that there wasn't any clear evidence.
This was actually causing them any harm or actually doing them any good physically.
Maybe I could speak to that a little bit, Richard.
Yeah, I'm not taking credit on this, but we had a track record with the UDV because in 1993,
I was invited to a conference in Sao Paulo in 1991, to which we were invited.
They had a scientific agenda.
They were actually also had a political agenda because at the time, they were negotiating with
the Brazilian regulatory agencies, an agency called CONFIN, which is kind of a combination
of the DEA and the FDA.
They handle, in Brazil, both illegal drugs and the medicinal drugs.
And they were trying to convince CONFIN that it was okay, that it wasn't a health problem
or a drug abuse problem.
So they needed some outside investigators, preferably some Americans, to come in and do a biomedical
study.
So they were basically willing to throw the whole thing open to us and let us come in
and do whatever we wanted to do.
Do EEG, do blood samples, do psychological screening, psychiatric evaluations, and all this stuff.
So we did that and published that.
There's been a number of papers that have come out, but the bottom line was that there was no
evidence that the drug was harmful.
All of our subjects had been in the UDV at least 10 years, which means that they'd been
taking ayahuasca on average, or WASCA as they call it, on average once every two weeks.
We did psychological testing and we found they actually performed better than the control
group on tests for verbal recall and memory and cognitive functions and personality traits
and all this stuff.
No evidence of physical harm.
So there was, in a sense, it wasn't a clinical study, it was an observational study, but there
was this body of data that showed that it was probably in the context in which they used
it.
A lot of these people who had joined the UDV were pretty dysfunctional when they joined
alcoholism, drug abuse, all this kind of common in Brazilian society, I guess any society,
but turned everybody around.
I mean, they were so straight-laced, they didn't even use tobacco.
So they all felt very good for them to separate that variable from the context in which it's
used.
But anyway, that was, we were able to, or we, I was on the sidelines in this case.
I was an advisor behind the scenes, but we were able to sort of...
Dennis, was there any historical evidence brought forward?
In other words, the long-term use of these things via shamanism and those sort of traditions?
Well, I mean, that body of data is, but we didn't use that much in the case because we
had the data for the...
And the way they use it is so different than the shamanic use.
You know, it's almost like, I mean, they are the same drug, but the context of their use
is so different.
It's very much like the Native American church.
Okay.
All right.
Richard, really quickly, what's it mean?
What's the decision mean?
Oh, that's a good question.
It depends.
For people who use things, well, anybody who's not in the UDV, it means that...
Join the UDV.
Well, yeah, this is a narrow decision decided on its facts, and so it really protects those
people, and there's no way to...
Primarily because...
I wonder, though, Richard, something that I've wondered about now, the Santo Dime to come
along and say, we're a legitimate religion.
We've been around even longer than the UDV, and we have even more members in Brazil.
What they don't have in the States, there are a lot of Dime, you know, cults or a lot of
members of the Dime in the States, in different parts of the States, but they don't seem to
have quite the same order UDV does.
Yeah, well, I agree.
I think that they would be the next in line.
I mean, you know, there was the...
I agree that now the Santo Dime to the progression where the Court does, it's definition.
Wow.
Why the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was actually passed?
Exactly.
So the argument from somewhere I think is...
People shouldn't, from what you're saying is, found an ad hoc religion.
It's not going to get you anywhere if you, you know, suddenly find the first church of
methadrine or something.
That's exactly right.
It's a tough, it's a really a tough thing because the whole, there isn't, theoretically
under the principles of our laws, our freedom of religion isn't supposed to depend on whether
you're a member of a thousand-year-old religion and these people are entitled to their protections.
But in this area, when you bring up drugs and religion, it's a touchy, it's a really
touchy area, my theory is that it's partly because, and when you, when you look at the
way the laws are, the theory of the law, the law is about, it's an exoteric system in which
the truth is determined by going out and consulting a book.
You go out and read the codes, you read the Constitution.
That's identical in its methodology to the Bible.
That may be one thing that helped the UDP in this case because they are,
definitely, a highly structured, hierarchical, top-down organization.
They have a doctrine, they have books, they have a certain, you know, thing you have to
do to be a member in good standing.
You have to study the doctrine and if you want to advance in the organization, you have to
go through levels.
Just like any other, any formal religion.
I mean, they are a formal religion under every sense of the word.
The, the, I think that's what courts have done over the last, that fight against the
drug, not as a religion.
They'll say, this isn't a religion.
What this is, is your personal philosophy.
And so they, so I think the UDV, there wasn't any doubt.
Nobody could contest.
All right, you guys, look, let me do a quick ID here.
It's KOPN Columbia, 89.5 FM.
My name is Mike Hagan.
You're listening to Radio Orbit.
My guests are Dr. Dennis McKenna and Richard Glenn Boyer.
And you can find information about all of us on the web at www.mikehagan.com.
And let's continue.
You guys, we've got a whole bunch of people chomping at the bit here.
And I'm going to switch gears a little bit and bring in some of our guests in the studio
here.
Right now, we've got a young man whose name is Jesse.
And so, Jesse, I'm going to introduce you to Dr. Dennis and to Richard.
Ah, yes, yes.
And Dennis, thank you very, very much for, for gracing us with your presence.
Glad to be here.
Wherever here is.
It's everywhere.
It's everywhere tonight, Dennis.
Right.
So it is.
And I was recruited by Mike to ask some pertinent questions.
And earlier this evening, I was actually watching network TV.
I won't say which network.
But there's this constant parade of ads from pharmaceutical companies, one after the other,
trying to sell you on drugs to treat anything, from chronic constipation to acid reflux to
PMS, anything.
To man problems.
Treating the symptoms and not the root of the problem itself.
Now, maybe you guys can clarify this.
I have heard, and I'm sorry I haven't done more research on this topic, but ayahuasca
has, correct me if I'm wrong, been used quite successfully and adopted by, I believe, the
Venezuelan government and a couple other places to treat chronic alcoholism and opium and heroin
addiction with quite a huge success rate.
Well, yes and no.
I think it's Peru.
Peru.
There's not a lot of ayahuasca going on, but in Peru is sort of a hotbed of the shamanic
use.
And there are a couple of clinics in Peru that are using ayahuasca to treat alcoholism and
cocaine addiction and that sort of thing.
A place called Takewasi, run by a physician named Jacques Mabit, a French guy, is kind of at
the cutting edge of all that work.
I think.
You've got to go in there.
I think it's kind of a bit of a struggle.
I think it's a bit of a challenge.
And then there are some of the things I'm doing.
I think it's going to be the best to do.
So yeah, it's interesting.
And then there are some of the things that I've been talking about, there are some of the
things that I've been talking about.
That's going to be the best to do.
If you look at, you know, in our UDV study, if you look at these folks that we studied, these 15 men,
they all, we did structured psychiatric interviews with them,
and they all basically told the same story, which was that they were either alcoholics or drug addicts or both.
And when they joined the UDV, their initial experiences were quite terrifying, but they basically turned them around.
And they sort of saw where their lives were going, and they determined to change, and they did so successfully.
And what's lacking here, in a way, is that, you know, these are real-world situations.
We didn't do a clinical trial, and it wasn't a clinical trial, in the sense that clinical trials are done here.
For a long time, I've argued that we really need to do a clinical trial.
We need to, you know, jump through all these regulatory hoops.
Are there any concrete numbers on what the success rate is with this sort of therapy and this sort of treatment?
Not that I'm aware of.
I mean, that's the thing.
That's what's lacking.
There aren't concrete numbers.
There are no well-controlled trials.
And so what there is is rumor and anecdote and, you know, not to be dismissed.
I think that it probably is very good, you know, in the right context for doing that.
But what is lacking is any kind of, you know, definitive clinical study that mainstream medicine would accept.
And, you know, for a long time, I was advocating that we should do this, that, you know, we should try and get a clinical study going in the United States specifically to treat alcoholism because that seemed like the most obvious, you know, first application.
I've sort of come away from that notion, actually.
We talked about that last time you were on the air, didn't we?
Yeah, yeah.
Well, I mean, maybe it's partly a result of beating my head against the wall for five years and getting nowhere with the government.
In order to initiate a clinical trial in this country, you have to do what's with an experimental drug.
You have to file an IND, what's called an investigational new drug application, and you have to meet certain criteria.
Well, the fact that ayahuasca is, number one, a controlled substance, which they really don't like to...
Is it a Schedule I right now?
Well, DMT is.
DMT.
Is that analogous?
Is that for the N1?
DMT is in it.
That's the activity.
Oh, okay.
And the question of whether the plants are illegal because DMT is in one of the plants is up for grabs.
I maintain they're not.
They never have been, but I'm sure others would disagree with me.
You know, but we, you know, I mean, the thing is, it's a scheduled substance, and it's a botanical preparation.
And those are kind of the two things that the FDA really hates to deal with.
They don't like botanical drugs, and they certainly don't like botanical drugs containing controlled substances.
So the bar is really high to get an IND approved.
Both Dennis and Richard, this is relevant here.
There's a note that just came across on the chat room, and a gentleman says,
Richard Boyer, could you please comment on if we could bring a case against the U.S. government
about the molecule dimethyltryptamine in every human's brain?
In other words, you know, even the judges are carrying, you know?
Yeah, that's...
Fascinating idea.
That's something that I've kind of thought around the edges about and haven't focused too much on.
The way that the laws...
It's kind of a tricky thing, because right now there are laws of possession of certain drugs,
and there are also laws that outlaw the use of certain drugs,
and there are laws that outlaw being under the influence party.
Everybody is.
Everyone is.
Oh, my gosh.
How crazy is this world?
But there are little...
We apply to...
We couldn't get it, huh?
... drugs aren't just medicines, but only use, and if you can't...
Change, I think it is changing, probably the pharmaceutical industry...
They perceive the line between remediation or amelioration...
Why do they want to...
They're only cussed to diagnose with some illness, but in fact, if they can do...
The other 90%.
The other 90% of us, then, hey...
If there's a buck to be made, you can be sure that the law will be changed.
Of course.
I mean, it's already happened.
Yeah.
I mean, I think Viagra and these sorts of good examples...
I mean, you can't tell me that 40% of the male population of the country has erectile drugs.
So this is a lifestyle drug.
Wow.
I mean, it's purely and simply a lifestyle drug, and the pharmaceutical industry has become very
creative at...
Making up diseases.
Yes.
They will invent a drug, and then the syndrome that the drug treats is soon to follow.
And I think that pretext is only going to be one of the interesting...
I got that, I think, you guys.
It's...
What is it, 1215?
Oh, my God.
Oh, man.
Yeah.
So that's definitely applications for these things.
You know, they're very...
Or just look at SSRIs.
I mean, SSRIs originally were pretty much for depression.
Dennis, for the people who don't know what the acronym is.
The depressants, the so-called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.
Okay.
Originally, they were brought out to treat depression, but now they're being...
Obsessive-compulsive disorders, sometimes even smoking.
All right, you guys.
It is quarter after 12.
We're going to take another break.
We'll come back.
We've got a question from Bob.
We've got Kyle, but we'll go age before beauty.
And then...
But Mandy, who's the lovely young lady in here with us, if she's ready to talk, we'll bring
her in as well.
So anyway, Dennis and Richard, thanks, you guys.
Stick around.
We'll have some more music here that'll keep you awake, okay?
All right.
All right, you guys.
As I said, this is Mike.
You're listening to Radio Orbit.
It's KOP on Columbia.
We're streaming live at CosmicWavesRadio.com.
You can also check all of us out on the web at MikeHagan.com.
Dennis and Richard, all of their information can be accessed through my site.
And as well as this band that you're going to hear right now, they're called Ism.
And I like them.
I ran into them about a week and a half ago at the Blue Fugue.
And they sent me their CD.
And this is the title track from this new recording.
It's called Monkey Underneath.
And listen to this.
Great song.
Great stuff.
Great message.
And good stuff for this evening's conversation.
This is Mike.
You're listening to Radio Orbit.
Check out Ism on the web at ISMMusic.com.
And one more time for us at MikeHagan.com.
One more time.
That's Ism.
And this is Mike Hagan.
You're listening to Radio Orbit.
My guests are Richard Glenn Bohr and Dr. Dennis McKenna.
We're having an interesting conversation about drug laws and pharmacology and technology.
And let's get back to it here.
So, guys, first, thanks for sticking around with us.
Still hanging.
All right.
I know.
All right.
Dennis, you're no old geezer.
You told me you're an old geezer.
And you're no old geezer.
You'll be up all night, I think.
Older than you.
Well, you know.
Everyone else here is younger than me.
Actually, no.
We got people older than you here, too.
We got Bob who's going to talk next.
All right.
We're all talking age.
How old are you, Bob?
69.
Oh, hold on.
I should turn on your damn microphone.
All right.
There you go.
I'm almost 70.
Almost 70.
So, Bob Bolt.
Okay.
And you're still awake.
That's good.
Oh, yeah.
I'm revving.
Got the coffee going.
All right, Bob.
You got a question for Richard or Dennis?
Yeah.
Actually, this is a little more for Richard.
I'm curious as to how optimistic you are about our chance of actually affecting change socially,
politically, for cognitive liberty.
If so, where do we, you know, the people, where do we fit into this?
What kind of political activity?
Where do we direct our efforts or something?
Yeah.
In terms of activism.
That's a great question.
And actually, my thinking on it at any given moment, I think it's going to happen in the
next instant.
And then there's time of liberty.
And you can do.
Maybe that the change in this area, on one hand, I think it's going to come about gradually.
Something may bump this system.
You know, that's somebody figured out a way.
This is just a lot of these other drugs are somebody was...
I'm sure they are.
That idea, it's not a lot of these issues have things.
You know, we're talking in some sense about people's right to form alliances.
I would say that's my answer.
I mean, it's interesting while, you know, this whole, with the UTV and the Supreme Court,
at the same time, people are free to...
DMT is in all kinds of plants.
Beta carmelins are in all kinds of plants.
I mean, that technology, the idea of, you know, introducing the gene for, say, DMT into
a common grass, I mean, the common grass is already out there.
There's, you know, thousands of...
Potentially, there are hundreds of plants that contain DMT that we know about.
And that's only because people have bothered to look.
So, in fact, there are probably thousands.
And that's one of the ways that we can fight back, I think.
I mean, I think it's interesting, we can enlist the plants almost as allies in this fight for
cognitive liberty.
That's right, Dennis.
You know, we're free...
And it's almost like a slow kind of bioterrorism, you know, although I don't like the term
terrorism because we're not terrorizing anybody.
We're not killing anybody, unlike the dominator government.
But, you know, we can fight back that way.
We don't have to create huge infrastructures and cartels for manufacturing and distribution
of pharmaceutical drugs.
We can simply, over generations, you know, propagate plants, exchange plants, give them
to your friends, give seeds away, you know, transmit the knowledge of how to prepare these
things and how to use them in a, you know, in a good, life-affirming way.
And I think gradually you can reach out to hearts and minds and you can actually change
societies that way.
But it's a slow process.
You know, it works itself out over generations, not in a few years.
You know, Dennis, you said to me one time in an email when I was frustrated about a decision
that had been made in a court actually in England with regard to the psilocybin with
stroferiocubensis.
Right.
And you said, well, Mike, they've got all the media and they've got the guns and they've
got the power and the money, but we've got the plans.
We've got the plans.
And that makes all the difference.
He's damn right it does.
And so, all right, Bob, I think, has a follow-up here.
Just another thing that makes me very optimistic about it is the concept of the Internet, which
has given a whole power to sort of micro, you know, micro demographics, I guess you would
say it, where there's a real attempt now to control the Internet and to, you know.
They ain't controlling us, baby.
We're doing it right now.
But the way they did with broadcasting, you know, they really destroyed broadcasting in
many respects, I mean, like KOPN is a little island of, you know, of sanity in this whole
sea of commercialism.
But the Internet, I think it resists the temptation or it resists the power structure to desire
to control it.
Because as soon as they find some way to control it, people sort of evolve around it.
It's like a wonderful virus or something.
It's like a brain.
It's like a neural network.
Yeah, and what Dennis said about the, you know, developing these alternative networks
for distribution and for understanding and that sort of thing, this is kind of stuff
that can get slipping under the radar of the attempts to control it.
So that's a very optimistic thing.
I'm happy to have heard that.
Yeah, it is.
It's an optimistic view.
But it's also a view that calls for patience, I think.
You have to take the long term.
I mean, people have always had these alliances with plants.
That goes back as far as you care to look back, you know, and governments come and go, laws
come and go, civilizations rise and fall.
But people maintain their relationship with nature.
You know, the thing that worries me a little bit is that, you know, the entrenched power structures
have become so powerful and so destructive, we now actually have to worry about the destruction
of me.
If they get that going, well, we won't have to worry about much of anything.
All right, Dennis, thanks.
Okay, let's see.
Kyle over here in the corner, my friend Kyle.
Kyle Cook.
I'm just a curious.
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
Hold on.
I did it again.
I've got to turn the mic on there.
Hello.
All right, there we go.
This is Kyle and Dennis and Richard.
First of all, I'd like to thank you guys for being with us.
I'm only 21 years of age, so I'm kind of ill-informed compared to everyone else.
But, you know, you've got to start somewhere.
My first kind of unanswerable question is, you're talking about the dominating government,
and we have been a lot.
And I think we can agree that most of the people who make the decisions as far as what
we can and can't do are the same ones who agree that God created this entire earth that
we live on, our universe.
And my first question is, did God make a mistake putting all these things all over the planet
for us to find?
Okay.
And my second question is, how successful would the war on drugs be if we called it the war
on nature?
But kind of a real question for either one of you.
No more rhetorical questions.
I've got to bring it all down to earth for a second here, because these are the things
that come into my brain.
But anyways, as far as pharmaceutical companies and lobbyists go, how much money gets poured
into campaigns from these pharmaceutical companies, and how does that influence decisions
on what is legal and illegal?
And if that does influence to a greater degree, why is lobbying legal?
Richard.
You're welcome, Dennis.
Yeah.
No, I've had my say.
Weigh in on that one.
I don't know the numbers, but there's no question that what the numbers are.
Who knows?
Huge.
Yeah, there's no question about that.
That's why I think that if the so-called battle is framed and only framed as, that's a tough
fight.
Oh, man.
If, though, the pharmaceutical companies come to see some interests that are in parallel
with the plant people, then we've got, you know, a battering ram that's going to come
through the door.
But, you know, those are kind of questions where, like you said, when you spoke to them,
they can't really, I certainly can't answer them.
And the war on drugs is, as you mentioned, a war on nature, not just nature, but human nature.
Right.
Again, back to cognitive liberty, Richard.
And so this is what the government's been very successful about is, you know, when they
talk about the war on drugs, people don't question that rhetoric and instead lap it up
when, in fact, it's similar to saying that the war on censure, that banning books and
the attempt to suppress ideas in print, that was not a war on paper and ink.
And nobody would have fallen for that.
People would have said, bullshit, that's a war on trying to stop me from reading other
thoughts and getting different ideas that the government, for some reason, is afraid
of.
And I think it's the same thing with the so-called war on drugs.
That's a misnomer.
It's a complete red herring that gets people focused on these little pills and plants and
powders when what's really at stake here is what form of consciousness are you permitted
to have and who is going to say what's right and what's wrong and, in a way, kind of build
like a Berlin wall that's inside your mind and you cannot go to beyond it.
Right.
And I think that that's, you know, that's what we're, what is being faced here and getting
people, I think, to kind of back up or walk beyond the way that the government has framed
this and using, you know, millions of dollars.
They've been able to do this very successfully.
But I think that the Internet is a hope and in small ways this kind of knowledge of these
plants and what their potentials are and ways to use them has a remarkable staying power
and it's been.
passed from human to human over
over eon
and like Dennis says I think that
clearly in the long run
it has to
if it doesn't win then
it's darkness and doom
but you know how long
that will take is
kind of what the battle is about I think
I mean I think we can take heart
in fact
in the fact that the war on drugs
is a miserable
failure
you know as some wag said
the war on drugs
is over and drugs won
Dennis you know
one of the funniest things
that was responded about the last time you were
on the air with Stephen Buhner was
you made this amazing comment about how
essentially we are bags of drugs
we're just these enzymes
we're made of drugs
and as we've been talking about tonight
many of them exist in our own metabolism
etc etc that are considered
illegal for you know
for silly political reasons or whatever
but it's it becomes outrageous
right well I don't know
I mean I think it's part of the
disinformation
strategy
of the dominators
that they
sort of demonize
these completely
I mean it's absurd
to make a war on drugs
you're not making a war on drugs
wars are not waged
on drugs
any more than wars
are waged
against terror
you know
the whole concept
is absurd
there's no such thing
as a war on terror
terror is a tactic
you can't wipe it out
any more than you can
you know wipe out
the entire spectrum
of
of species
there's always a tendency
to
to set up the
to demonize
the
you know drugs
terror
whatever
wars
are made on people
and
the war on drugs
is largely a war
against
our own citizens
you know
the war on terror
is
a war
of terror
in a sense
I mean not the terrorists
I'm not defending terrorists
but terrorists
are people that
have a beef
for one reason or another
legitimate or not
and they choose
that tactic
because
the recourse is open
and I don't think
that the government's
really interested
in this solution
they're interested
in perpetuating
what some have called
the military
industrial complex
congressional
complex
yeah
so
you know
it's all about
entrenched power
wanting to preserve
sloganeering
and this
you know
this war on drugs
but again
it's this use of language
that is so
manipulative
right
all right
look
it's called propaganda
that's right
it's propaganda
it's an old
it's an old story
so
all right
look
here's one
from the web
you guys
Richard
please ask Richard
about the current
state of subliminal
mind control
being used
in various media
i.e. motion pictures
music
commercial advertising
etc
I am sure
after all these years
it has now been
made a science
well I've looked
into that
a little bit
there was
something back
I think it was
there was an actual
attempt to use
subliminal advertising
to sway
a presidential election
and there's evidence
to this
I think it was in
2000 election
when the republicans
ran
that
at one point
it flashed
the word democrat
or rat
or something
yeah
the word rats
clearly in there
in a subliminal
time
frame
the republicans
tried to say
that that was
it's hard to believe
that advertising
I think
I don't know
a whole lot
about
there is a whole
field now
that's going on
called neuromarketing
where universities
in fact
are allocating
some of
imaging technology
examine the way
that
this actually
in the last
presidential election
stuff
and it's
one of those
areas where
I don't like
to talk about
it too much
without having
plenty of time
to put in
little nuances
because you can
sound like
a complete
kook
if you
talk about
some of
these things
but it's
neuroimaging
technology
is a good
example of
here you've
got a
technology
that's built
to be
put by
people
they make
a decision
and then
they follow
that decision
up with
behavior
it has
the potential
to be
put to
an ethical
compass
here
the fact
that we're
talking about
it is good
Richard you
remind me
of this
there's a
woman
whose name
is Juliet
Shore
and she's
a professor
at either
Boston College
or University
of Boston
or something
anyway
but she's
written a
book
that's called
Born to
Buy
The Commercialization
of Children
and it's
amazing
and I have
a two and a
half year old
son so I'm
sort of interested
in this stuff
and I was
blown away
this is a
woman who
came out of
sort of
an insider
position
from
a large
corporation
as a
marketing
executive
and my
god
what she
reports
is
I tell you
what
if you have
children
it'll make
you shake
like Dennis
says there's
one technology
that I think
is incredible
and exciting
and nothing
but cool
in the abstract
and that's
hypersonic
sound
it's a
way of
transmitting
sound
which is
kind of
like an
audio
laser beam
in a way
but really
really tight
so that
you can
stand
three feet
outside of
this beam
and you
hear nothing
but you
walk into
it
and it's
high fidelity
very clear
in your head
music
or whatever
it is
what companies
are doing
now
I'm told
that in
toking
popping
open
and glug
glug
and
it's just
in this
zone
or something
in front
of the
machine
yeah
exactly
right
it's only
in like
about
the
three feet
in front
of this
machine
but there's
no
warning sign
it comes
right into
your head
and it's
been you
project
something
target
somebody
who's
in the
middle
of the
crowd
and tell
them
to
you know
these
would
be
and
there's
also
security
which is
being able
to have
the autonomy
over
with the
drug
as long
I mean
the key
thing is
as long
as it
doesn't
hurt
anyone
else
you
should
be
allowed
to
do
that
but
you
know
I've
often
wondered
or
I'm
beginning
to
wonder
you know
maybe
Richard
myself
people
like
outmoded
ideas
and
a hundred
years
from
that
dinosaur
completely
wired
in
a
total
telepathic
communication
at all
times
and
the
notion
of
idea
that will
be
swept
away
I have
no doubt
that's
going to be
the case
and I think
about that
all the
time
the reason
I
still
listen
to the
constitution
and so
if I'm
a
constitutionalist
and
look
you guys
it is
about
13 minutes
before
one o'clock
so here's
the question
if
you're
going to
bail out
at the
top of
the hour
then I
won't
take a
break
here
and
we'll
talk
for
more
minutes
if
you'd
like
to
stick
around
even
for
a
few
more
minutes
maybe
until
quarter
after
we'll
take
a
break
here
and
then
we can
come
back
and
let's
see
this is
number
eight
this is
a song
that is
called
no more
fitting
I think
no more
this is
ism
and
you can
find out
information
from them
as well
as
Dr.
Dennis
and
Richard
Glenn
Boyer
on my
website
at
www.mikehagen.com
back in just
a minute
with them
and more
of your
questions
this is
Mike Hagen
you're
listening to
Radio
Orbit
my
guests
are
Dr.
Dennis
McKenna
and
Richard
Glenn
Boyer
and
they've
been
generous
enough
with their
time
to spend
going on
two hours
here with
us
so we're
going to
get right
back
here
to them
and
we have
another
question
from
Bob
who's
in
the
studio
with
us
here
and
I've
got
a
couple
more
on
the
web
as
well
so
Bob
what
do
you
have
for
the
it's
kind
of
like
we're
talking
about
two
different
categories
one
I
would
refer
to
sort
of
the
body
drugs
alcohol
meth
tobacco
caffeine
heroin
cocaine
that sort
of
thing
versus
the
psychedelics
yeah
you're
but
you're
you know
we're
sort
of
talking
about
psychedelics
here
and the
freedom
to be
able to
explore
mentally
using
these
psychoactive
substances
but
there's
a
whole
problem
I
mean
like
we're
in
mid
Missouri
there's
like
a
methamphetamine
epidemic
here
I
mean
these
guys
are
you
know
in
these
little
trailers
cooking up
this
stuff
with
kids
running
around
and
that
kind
of
thing
and
clearly
something
has
to
be
done
to
regulate
it
I
mean
I'm
basically
a
libertarian
I
I'm
not
advocating
that
drugs
should
just
be
completely
unregulated
you know
I don't
think
that's
practical
and
that
gets
back
to
that
issue
about
harm
to
others
you know
like
the
kids
that
are
around
the
meth
labs
and
that
sort
of
thing
you know
I
think
you
but
the
whole
concept
of
war
on
drugs
is
misinformed
you know
if
you look
at
I
mean
like
I
sometimes
tell
my
students
you know
there's
no such
thing
as
a
bad
drug
you know
but
human
behavior
with
respect
to
drugs
can
be
very
bad
and
what
we're
really
talking
about
is
regulating
human
behavior
and
I
think
and
Dennis
you
could
substitute
technology
for
the
word
drugs
exactly
well
drugs
are
kind
of
technology
yeah
it's
all
about
human
behavior
and
I
think
with
respect
to
something
like
methamphetamine
which
is
it's
a
drug
that's
very
hard
to
form
a
positive
relationship
with
I
mean
there
may
be
people
that
do
it
yeah
but
that's
really
what
it
is
there
may
be
people
that
are
able
to
do
that
but
they're
few
and
far
between
so
you
know
what
about
what
if
we
were
to
legalize
meth
and
make
it
a
I
mean
just
pick
the
worst
drug
you
can
imagine
okay
meth
what
if
we
were
to
legalize
it
and
make
it
care
provider
who
would
have
an
opportunity
to
say
well
you
know
maybe
you
should
rethink
this
do
you
really
want
to
shoot
crank
and
they
can
talk
about
all
the
reasons
maybe
why
that's
not
a
good
idea
and
if
the
person
says
yeah
doc
you
know
I
really
want
to
shoot
crank
okay
here's
your
prescription
you
know
but
then
they
have
to
go
back
the
next
time
and
have
that
conversation
again
so
you
create
opportunities
to
intervene
in a
sense
not by
preventing
them
from
doing
it
but
by
informing
them
that
maybe
there
are
better
choices
they
could
be
making
I
think
that
would
be
you
know
a
more
humane
way
to
approach
it
and
probably
it
would
work
better
I
mean
what
the
situation
that
works
now
it's
just
the
you
know
you
have
no
opportunity
to
educate
people
that
maybe
this
isn't
a
good
idea
you
know
I
really
believe
in
education
over
coercion
that's
the way
to
get
people
to
maybe
you
and
Dennis
can
talk
a
little
about
that
for
a
minute
sure
that's
a
conference
that's
sponsoring
along
with
well
it's
at
the
Stanford
law
school
but
it's
being
sponsored
by another
organization
at
Stanford
and
also
the
idea
of
the
conferences
to
actually
begin
some
kind
conference
it's
a
three
day
conference
two
full
days
and
like
a
Friday
evening
and
it's
open
to
the
public
too
yep
anybody
who
wants
to
go
there's
a
fee
to
get
in
I
to
enhance
us
to
make
us
actually
better
than
we
are
we
really
haven't
talked
about
that
much
Richard
what
do
you
see
happening
there
we
have
all
these
things
happening
with
nanobiotechnology
and nanoneurology
and nanohist
Dennis
you should
really
start
IBM
the
itty
bitty
machine
company
that
you
want
to
start
that's
great
yeah
well
if
any
of
your
listeners
have
about
million
dollars
we'll
get
right
on
well
you
never
know
that
area
I think
is
one
where
it's
popping
right
now
it's
very
legitimate
issues
but
then
again
in
schools
when I
got
out
of
law
school
I
think
it's
going
to
be
interesting
when
some
are
emerging
for
example
VR
technologies
virtual
reality
do a
pretty
good
job
of
it
get
very
close
to
what
maybe
it
won't
even
structure
as
something
that
needs
to be
regulated
or
maybe
mission
and
all
kinds
of
exoskeleton
devices
but
you
know
my
folks
right now, exists by and large outside of our bodies, whether it's police or tapping phones
or whatever methods the government uses to control drug use, turned into a drug.
And that's a good thing if you need this drug.
It really is, precisely.
But what quickly happened was court alcohol-related offenses
and people being arrested in applications to, we could well be.
Right, I've read reports up to like 75% or something like that.
Yeah, exactly.
So I think at the stake of the next, your body.
Amazing.
They go inside.
Drugs will be used.
And then another sort of even more bizarre side to that coin,
what we sometimes think of as the good.
There are scenarios.
Dennis, one of the guys here in the studio just wrote on a piece of paper and held it up and wrote MKUltra.
MKUltra.
And of course, we know there's this amazing history, odious history certainly, of all of this stuff.
Amazing.
And still ongoing imaginary.
I mean, I imagine.
You know it, right.
Okay, well, okay, here's another one, Richard.
Again, this one's from the web.
Ask Richard his opinion of Edward L. Bernays or maybe just what the role of PR is in general in this whole game.
PR, public relations?
Yeah, public relations.
Well, I think it's going to drink what they're selling or are they going to look around.
Kind of guy in Wasco.
So, I don't know.
I mean, that's kind of in well.
Right now, it's kind of got its propaganda machinery really oriented.
It does come back to the idea that...
As I'm reading the news here, the synergies between these things are just amazing.
Here's a story here.
Listen to this, you guys.
It says, what if you could one day unlock your door or access your bank account by simply thinking your password?
Too far out, perhaps not.
Researchers at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada are exploring the possibility of a biometric security device that will use a person's thoughts to authenticate her or his identity.
I'm not sure how far these are going, but what I've heard is the following scenario, which would be, you could walk up to your ATM machine, which, you know...
Outrageous.
Well, I don't know.
I mean, I think that's got some exciting...
Oh, yeah.
It's exciting applications.
It's amazing to me.
It's amazing.
It is amazing.
Now, here's another one, Dennis.
Name a technology to use it to my agency.
Yeah.
Well, now here...
That seems to me.
Yeah, and we're easily self-deluded, too.
That's for sure.
I think...
Who was it that said that man's ability for self-delusion was limitless or something like that?
But anyway, Dennis, here's...
We talked about this off the air.
The Lancet, which is a big UK medical journal, calls for LSD testing.
And I know this was sort of like, well, duh.
But anyway, they're talking about...
And in fact, the interesting thing about this article was the journal's editor, Richard Horton, said he was not advocating recreational drug use,
but championed the benefits of researchers studying the effects of drugs such as LSD and ecstasy by using them on themselves in the lab.
Now, this is like back to the 60s, right?
Mm-hmm.
Wow.
It's amazing.
Well, yeah.
I read that editorial.
I'm not sure I got that out of it.
But, you know, that's the old shamanic method.
Right, right.
You know, heal yourself, right?
Right, right.
And, in fact, you know, psychedelics mainly probably do have medical applications, but there is this issue of why should they only be taken by sick people?
There's no doubt that to understand consciousness and to understand the nature of the brain-mind relationship and this area of enhancement, you know, in some way they really are.
And cognitive liberty.
I mean, they really are, B, that was hold on, and one of the issues with cognitive liberty is mind expanses are about, the government reason that psychedelics are so dangerous, you know.
Politically.
They really are dangerous in the eyes of the government because, as I think we said before, you know, they make you have funny ideas, and funny ideas are inherently dangerous.
Use the sanctioned drugs.
Right, it makes people into, people who think too much are inherently dangerous.
All right.
Okay, I've got to do it.
It's quarter after one, so.
You're going to cut us off.
No, I've got to do this.
This comes from the web.
Mike, Dennis, La Charrera, yep, I've got to drag it out again.
Not so much in a recounting of the events, but how Dennis looks back 35 years ago to that time period.
How has it influenced his path?
We all know where Terrence went with it, and how does it play into his current work, if at all?
It would be interesting to get his take on the time wave theory, if you guys have time, but how does that piece of work play, and does he look at resonant time periods at all?
So I don't know.
That's a lot.
But anyway, how do you look back at La Charrera?
How do you look at La Charrera 35 years ago?
Well, I look at it as something that happened 35 years ago.
So it was very important.
It set me on a path that in some ways I'm sure I wouldn't be going the direction I went or am going if it weren't for La Charrera.
But it's very hard to, I mean, I'm not obsessed with it.
You know, I've been there, I've done that, and I'm trying to take what I've learned from it and move on.
One little echo of the past is somewhere, I think it was in the Invisible Landscape, or maybe it was in one of these books, saying,
Mayday, Mayday, Mayday, Mayday.
That would be me.
And here we are.
Here we are, you guys.
Here we are.
It's like Mark Twain's little thing that history isn't.
Right.
Wow, I love it.
And it's so true because there have been some certainly resonant things happening in my life in the last few months, I've got to tell you.
So anyway, well, look, I think you guys, I think that's a good place to wrap things up.
I can't tell you how much all of us appreciate it, and it's been an absolute pleasure.
And Dennis, as I always tell you guys, your time is so valuable, and I recognize it, and I appreciate it.
And so do all the listeners, and in fact, listeners now tonight, wherever they may be, not just locally and regionally.
So from my heart, both you guys, Richard and Dennis, thank you so much.
Always a pleasure, Mike.
Thanks very much for having me on.
It's been a blast.
You bet.
And we're going to put more and more of these things together as we move forward.
And I'm getting close to having the opportunity to broadcast more frequently than just once a week.
So anyway, we've got big ideas, and you guys are real important in all of these things.
So thanks again, and we'll be in touch, all right?
Okay.
Good night, everybody.
Richard, we'll talk to you downstream.
Sounds good.
Wonderful.
All right, everybody, that was Richard Glenn Boyer and Dr. Dennis McKenna.
As I've said all night, you can find information about those wonderful gentlemen on the web at www.mikehagen.com.
And hey, Dennis, are you still there?
I'm still here.
All right.
Sorry.
This just came in on the chat.
It said, ask about Terrence's kids.
How are Finn and Cleo?
Doing well.
All right.
Easy enough.
Doing well.
That's all we need to know.
We know Kat's doing well, and we're going to try to put something together with her in the future.
Yep.
All right.
Thanks again, Dennis.
We'll talk.
Okay.
All right.
Ciao.
All right, everybody.
This is Mike.
You've been listening to Radio Orbit.
It's KOPN, Columbia.
I'm just absolutely thrilled that we were able to bring the program to you tonight live, streaming
over the Internet, thanks to the gentlemen and women at CosmicWavesRadio.com.
Thanks to Dennis and Richard one more time, and thanks to ISM.
We'll hear a little bit more from them right now.
This is called Breathe.
You can find information from them on the web as well.
Once again, that's ISM from their recently released CD, Monkey Underneath.
We've heard stuff from them all night.
Great, great new rock and roll band from New York City.
And we'll play a couple more from them as we finish up the show tonight, okay?
All right.
So, wow.
Amazing.
Dr. Dennis, thanks again.
Richard Glenn Boyer.
You can find out information about both of these guys on the web.
Dennis at www.hefter.org and Richard at cognitiveliberty.org.
And, of course, those links will be up at my site from here on out, and you can always
get over there from my site, okay?
So, let's talk a little bit about what's coming up on the program here, if I can find my notes.
Well, we did it, you guys.
We streamed the show live, and it's happening right now.
And I couldn't be more excited about it.
So, thanks to everybody that's been a part of that, CosmicWavesRadio.com, Carrie, Paul,
and Kent for introducing us, and Larry for helping me with everything that you've done
for so long and for giving me the courage to even, you know, attempt this stuff, and everybody
else, and all the wonderful listeners who have been encouraging us, and I just couldn't
be more pleased, and I'm so happy that we were able to do it tonight.
It couldn't have been more fitting to begin the worldwide broadcast with Dennis McKenna
and Richard, a wonderful addition as well tonight.
And, as I say, I'm just absolutely thrilled.
So, thanks to everybody who's been involved.
It was an historic occasion.
I don't know how many of you were listening.
Not that many, I'm sure.
I heard it live, but if you did, well, that's one that we can share, okay?
All right.
Thanks to everybody else who has been sending in art and music.
I love it.
Send more.
We love it.
Send it.
All right?
If you want Larry to do some work, you know, you've got to get him more art and music,
and then he can improve those sections of the website.
And there's some great stuff up there already.
So, hop on the web.
Go to MikeHagan.com and just click around.
There's lots of cool stuff happening, including archives of all of these programs.
So, if you weren't one of the lucky ones who got to hear this show live, you can, if you
register at the site, which costs you nothing and is very simple, you can have access to
the archives, which will be up in just, I don't know, 12 or 24 hours or something like
that.
All right?
And if you do that, you'll also be able to get some free music.
Yachai, my friends Jeff and William from Yachai Music have made their entire CD, Sweet Mother
Mercy, available if you go register at the site.
And Larry's made some pretty cool screensavers and some things there.
So, there's some freebies.
And like I say, it doesn't cost anything, and we're not asking for a whole lot of information.
All right?
So, get over there.
Let us know who you are.
And, of course, thanks to those of you who have already done so.
All right?
My email address, orbitradio at AOL.com.
The website, as always, MikeHagan, H-A-G-A-N.com.
The phone number here in the studio.
If anybody's out there, and I have to apologize, there were a couple of people that were calling
during the program and wanted to get on the air.
The problem is when I have two people on the air, i.e.
Dennis and Richard, I can't take a third phone call.
So, I wasn't able to pick up those calls.
So, if you'd like to call now, I'd be glad to talk to you.
I don't know if it's sort of ex post facto, but I don't know.
Maybe you could just yell at me or something.
Anyway, that number is 443-8255 if you want to give me a call, and I'll talk to you on
the air right now.
All right.
Let's talk about upcoming guests really quickly.
Marco Rodin, next week.
Really interesting guy who's come up with some new concepts of physics and aerodynamics,
a whole bunch of stuff.
And I'm not that familiar with his material yet, so I'm not going to speak at great length
about it.
But if you go to Rodin Aerodynamics on the web, you'll find out some interesting stuff
about this guy, Marco Rodin.
And he was on Jeff Rents just a week or two ago, and some people asked me if I would get
him on the program, so I'm going to try to do that.
Actually, not going to try.
We've already set it up, but I just need to get familiar with his material.
All right.
The week after that, Dr. Alan Goldstein.
You know, we were just talking a little bit about these advanced technologies, nanotechnology
in particular, with Richard and Dennis.
And the show on the 15th will be with Dr. Alan Goldstein, who's the professor of biomaterials
and the chair of molecular cell biology and biomedical materials and engineering and science
at Alfred University.
And he is at the bleeding edge of this whole nanobioneurotechnology movement or evolution,
explosion.
I don't know what the hell to call it.
But it is absolutely outrageous what Dr. Goldstein is going to talk about on the program in two
weeks.
And if you'd like to get a little bit familiar with some of that stuff, go on the web, go
over to my news page.
Actually, I think it's on the front page right now at MikeHagan.com.
There's a story.
If you page down just below the information about Dennis and Richard, right below that,
there's a story that's called I Nanobot.
And it's written by Dr. Goldstein.
And it's well worth reading.
And certainly, if you want to be familiar with some of these concepts before the program,
read that article before we talk to Alan Goldstein on the 15th of May.
All right.
The 22nd of May, I'll be just back from Las Vegas, a trip that I'm looking very forward
to and with great anticipation.
And the Monday I return will be a program with Rian Eisler, one of my favorite authors, who
wrote a book that I think is one of the most important books that's been written in our
age.
And it's called The Chalice and the Blade.
And I don't say that with hyperbole.
I really mean it.
It's a remarkable book.
And there's some concepts in there that are just really important.
Now, here's that caller.
So we're going to grab this phone call here real quick and say hello.
Welcome to Orbit.
Who's this?
This is Otto.
Hey, how you doing, man?
I'm doing great.
Good.
Great program you had.
And I was one of the people who tried to call in.
I'm sorry that I wasn't able to take the call.
Our phone system only allows two people to be on the line at any given time.
That's why I sort of had a little forum put together here at the station.
No problem.
I just had a...
I really enjoyed the program.
I had a couple of ideas I wanted to fold into the mix.
And some of them got kind of addressed.
But one of the thoughts was it did fundamentally come from a religious, you know, kind of a faith
orientation.
And at the same time, and I'm not quite sure how all these things fit together, but to
a certain degree, you know, we had the comments about cognitive liberty and about what kind
of mental states people have access to.
Right.
And kind of on the opposite side of the spectrum, ever since the Enlightenment, we've kind of
said it's not okay to be insane and to be abroad, you know, at large.
And so that's kind of another thing that we've got going on kind of from the other direction.
In the early Middle Ages, we didn't lock up crazy people.
But at some point, we decided it's not okay to be crazy and to be at large.
And to a certain degree, I think it reflects, you know, there's kind of like a temporary view
that, you know, your mind altered means...
Yeah, you know, a lot of Dennis' work over the years has been...
He's had a great interest in schizophrenia.
And, you know, the shamanic tradition sort of suggests that a shaman, one definition, is
sort of a sanctioned schizophrenic.
You know what I'm saying?
Oh, yeah.
Yet in this culture, it's something, as you say, I mean, they lock you away.
But it's definitely a reflection on the access to other than a very thin corridor of allowable
experience, you know?
We have a lot of our legal framework that traces back to some fairly European religious, you
know, the Puritan...
Well, you know, if you think about it, a hundred years ago, right at the turn of the century
between, you know, the 19th and the 20th century, we think of that, you know, with nostalgia and,
you know, thank God that's gone with and we're so much more advanced and enlightened than
that now.
But, you know, back then, they would put, you know, like pantalones on the legs of pianos
because the piano leg, you know, naked furniture just made people very nervous, right?
So we look at that and laugh, right?
Yet we have the same sort of attitude towards consciousness that they had about naked furniture.
And it's easy to make fun, but we really haven't moved that far.
And this is important that we start to recognize it because, I mean, hell, I mean, who can tell
you what your allowable experience is.
Well, and if you look at the confiscatory approach, we have...
Well, in fact, yeah, it's disguised a little bit better, but it's, you know, essentially
the same thing.
But that's the name of history, basically, you know.
But, you know, we have people now...
It's all about information and knowing who, you know, who your friends are, sort of.
I'll tell you what, you know, I'll take Richard Glenn Boyer on my team against any of these
government punks, you know, quite frankly.
So I think that we're learning that, you know, sometimes you've just got to take the bull by
the horns or so, or just do your own thing.
I mean, you know, I'm not advocating anybody do anything.
I'm advocating that I'll do whatever the hell I want, and I won't harm anyone in the meantime,
and I'll try to be a good person, you know.
Well, that's the rational argument for why the drug laws, even from a, maybe even potentially
from a conservative perspective, you know, the drug laws don't really make that much
sense from a rational point of view.
No, no, and from an efficacy point of view, I mean, it's been, as Dennis pointed out,
you know, just an abject failure.
I mean, you might as well argue that what it really is is a war on Central and South America
and the polity of those countries.
Yeah, and a war on personal freedom, I mean, you know, and this stuff, and money comes
into a lot of it, but money certainly is not one of the issues with the psychedelics, you
know.
There's never been a whole lot of cash generated from ayahuasca or from even mushroom, for that
matter.
It's because they're deconditioning agents, you know, and if you've got a whole lot of
of people taking deconditioning agents all the time, they start to see things through
a different lens, and pretty soon all of those established power structures start to
fall away, and that is why the psychedelics are illegal, because they just totally threaten
the establishment and all the institutions that are somehow sacred, but yet have been
absolute, we've been betrayed by all of our institutions, whether it was purposeful
or not, but they've absolutely failed us, but of course, institutions are like animals,
they just want to stay alive.
The third thing I wanted to fold in the mix, and I think some of your folks talked about
it a little bit, was really the role that technology is going to play within, and here I'm thinking
of a speech I saw that was put on by the Council on Foreign Relations, where they had Ray Kurzweil
come and speak.
Sure, I know Ray, yeah.
I've talked to his partner on the air, Dr. Terry Grossman, he's been on the program before.
Yeah, and so he gave this talk and he said, you know, we've got, you know, Intel has on
their 15-year plan, basically, that, you know, that 15 years from now, they're going to have
hardware capability equal to the human brain in terms of computational speed, and, you
know, the same exponential progress that we've seen in information technology on the hardware
side is also true on the software side, and MRI imaging and stuff like that's going to continue
to progress, engineered, that is, well, possible to make a switch with your thought and move
yourself into any virtual reality that you could get access to.
I mean, obviously, there's going to be a lot of programming involved there, but at that
point, you know, whether or not it's actually just done by technology or with suffering drug,
you know, what's the difference?
No, it's, yeah, the line becomes very blurry, and you're right, I mean, you know, this is
stuff that Dennis' brother Terrence spoke, you know, really clearly about many years ago,
you know, long before this stuff was coming to be, and his major, one of his major
points was the idea that not only is the technology advancing, but the rate of advancement is
advancing, both at an exponential rate, so people that talk in terms of 50 years from now
or 500 years from now or whatever, these are ludicrous statements because we're quickly
approaching a time where the development of all of these things goes asymptotic.
Like, it basically goes vertical.
Well, the title of Ray's book is The Singularity is Near.
Right, right, and that's a concept that, you know, came out at a NASA conference back in
1977, actually, by this guy Vern, I forget what his name was, Vernor Vinge, I think.
But anyway, you know, and Terrence talked about it, and there are, you know, many people that
have certain psychedelic experiences talk about something that seems strange in the future,
but who knows what it is, I mean, but technology is advancing like crazy, pharmaceuticals are
advancing like crazy, the synergies between them, this is the thing that's really interesting,
is that, you know, it's easy to look at one or two individual advancements and say, oh, you know,
okay, well, you know, I can sort of picture what that thing will look like in five years.
But trying to combine what that thing will look like combined with the other technologies
that it may be involved in, you know, in a synergistic manner, it becomes outrageous.
You just can't predict what's going to come out of that, you know.
Yeah, it becomes much more nonlinear.
Oh, my God, it's outrageous.
Yeah, it gets hard to even be able to comprehend.
Yeah, so we're getting, you know, that's where we're coming, you know, I guess the buzz line
for me is it's sort of like, you know, the number of options available are about to really increase.
Oh, yeah.
So I think I look forward to it, but it's going to be a strange thing, and a lot of people
are going to really freak out about the things that are coming.
But I don't see, I see less control.
I'm not one of these guys that believes that the control freakers, which I understand exists,
and I realize, you know, certainly that there are groups vying for control and working very
hard for it, but I don't think anyone's really being successful, and I think that they're going
to become less and less successful as time and the strangeness of time moves forward.
I think the horse is out of the gate.
I think that, you know, there's some of us who have enough respect for, you know, kind
of things that evolve over billions of years to happen, and so the challenge, I mean, when
you start to talk about these nanotechnologies in your bloodstream that, you know, just like
with, I think, you know, we're doing, we'll just have to kind of muddle through.
I guess, I guess.
Well, look, hey, I've got to get on with a couple things here.
All right.
But thanks for calling.
I appreciate it.
I'm glad you stuck around.
Good program.
Hey, thanks again.
Take care.
All right, so let's play another song here, and we'll come back and sort of finish things
up.
I've got a couple stories in the news.
We can do space weather, but we'll play one more from ISM here, and this one is called
Out of the Way, again, relevant to the conversation tonight, and more information about this wonderful
band from New York, and you can find them on my website as well.
This song's called Out of the Way, and I'm being redundant.
Radio Orbit.
This is Mike.
All right, so we've got a few more things.
Space weather, quickly.
Mars.
If you're looking for Mars, well, it's about 180 million miles from you, and it's actually
pretty dim right now, not easy to see, but tonight the moon will find it for you.
So the pair will be sort of side by side, and in the sky right now.
So get outside and go look at them.
Also, there is a pretty interesting sunspot right now on the front side of the sun looking
towards us.
It's designated number 875, and potential for anything from this puppy.
It's actually sort of like two of them together, and it looks like the eyes of a monster, as a
matter of fact.
So there's some interesting imagery of that at spaceweather.com.
And let's see.
What else?
Mark your calendar.
About a week from now, this comet that we've been talking about, 73P Schvassmann-Wachmann-3,
is going to be passing by the Ring Nebula in the constellation Lyra.
And if you have a decent backyard telescope, that should be an absolutely wonderful sight.
And Kent put it best.
He said that after, how did he put it?
He said, after studying the comet Schvassmann-Wachmann for an extended period of time, that he's determined
that it is beautiful.
And it is, if you see some of the imagery.
And so far, it hasn't hit our planet, and I don't expect it to.
There are some folks that are saying that might happen, but, well, you never know.
Anyway, for now it hasn't, so just put your gazers on and take a look at a beautiful comet blazing
through the night sky.
And the whole month of May should be pretty interesting with this particular comet, starting
next week.
Okay, let's see.
What else?
It's Astronomy Week, this week, May 1st through the 7th.
On the 4th, Jupiter at opposition to the Earth.
Let's see.
We also have the 95th Spring Meeting.
Oh, I have to tell you this.
This is actually very funny.
On May 4th through the 6th, we have the 95th Spring Meeting of the American Association
of Variable Star Observers, the AAVSO, as it were.
And this is in Rockford, Illinois.
That's my hometown.
Rockford, Illinois.
The 95th.
First of all, who would ever have imagined there have been 95 annual meetings of the American
Association of Variable Star Observers?
Most people don't even know what a variable star is.
And I'm one of them.
Anyway, May 5th, National Astronomy Day.
Go out and look at the heavens.
On the 5th as well, the Eta Aquarids meteor shower is peaking.
I'm not sure if we can see that in this part of the northern hemisphere or not.
But the Aquarids, or Aquarids, I'm not sure how you pronounce it actually, will be peaking
in the next week or so.
And also the 5th is the 45th anniversary of Alan Shepard, the first U.S. man in space.
He was on a launch or on a mission that was called Freedom 7.
And that happened in 1961, 45 years ago on May 5th.
All right, it's May now, so let me read a little bit about what's happening with the planets.
Jupiter will be as bright as it gets this month.
During the year, Jupiter goes through different phases, as all the planets do, of brightness.
And it'll be pretty bright all month.
And as I said earlier, it's at opposition on the 4th of May.
Let's see, if you are up at dusk and outside, Jupiter will be low in sort of the east-southeast sky.
And then it'll move up through the southeast to the south-southeast as the month sort of moves along.
And Jupiter is retrograding right now.
And it is a nice sight in the evening sky, right?
Saturn will be visible in the west-southwest at dusk in May.
It'll be pretty bright, as a matter of fact.
Let's see, what else is happening?
Mars.
Mars sort of descends in the west.
And it'll be a little bit to the lower right of Saturn, going towards the constellation of Gemini over the course of the month.
And let's see, what else?
Venus in the morning.
Low, low, low on the horizon as the dawn is brightening.
And moving from the south to the north, or north of east, I guess, as the month moves along.
All right, Jupiter opposite the sun on May 4th.
As I've said the third time now, that's what opposition means.
And, I don't know, last chance until late 2007 to see Venus and Jupiter simultaneously.
So, that'll be on the morning of May 4th.
All right, as I said, that comet, we're watching that.
If you really want to find out what's happening with that, go over to Kent's site at www.cyberspaceorbit.com.
He follows it closer than anyone, and there's wonderful imagery as well over at Kent's site.
And, let's see, there's more going on in the stars, as always, but we won't fiddle with it right now.
What else can we talk about?
Yeah, next week, we've got Marco Rodin.
Should be very interesting.
We're going to be talking about alternative energy, different ways of looking at physics, magnetism, electromagnetism,
all these sorts of things.
Let's see, news.
Let me go to the website here real fast.
I mentioned really quickly that story while Dennis and Richard were on the air about using your thoughts as passwords.
That's interesting.
Here's one.
Panel warns of a crisis in American physics.
Yeah, I've been saying, well, I shouldn't say I've been saying it,
but certain members of the community have been saying that for quite some time now.
And this will tell you how big the crisis really is.
Listen to what they're interested in.
After the conversation we had tonight, now check this out,
physics in America is at a crossroads and in crisis,
just as humanity stands on the verge of great discoveries about the nature of matter and the universe.
You know, particle physics have done virtually nothing for the average person.
Name one thing that particle physics have done to help you or me or anybody else in the last hundred years.
Anyway, a panel from the National Academy of Sciences concludes in a new report,
the United States should be prepared to spend up to half a billion dollars in the next five years
to ensure that a giant particle accelerator,
now being designed by a worldwide consortium of scientists,
can be built on American soil.
The panel said if that does not happen,
particle physics and the quest for fundamental forces and constituents of nature will wither in this country.
It said this is a risky investment.
Harold Shapiro, an economist at Princeton,
and the chairman of the 22-member commission said Wednesday at a news conference.
No, whatever, I'm over it.
Okay, the Lancet calls for LSD studies in labs.
I read that one to you.
Regenesis.
The first life form may have been RNA.
Everything after that point may be up for grabs.
It's even the structure of DNA.
Synthetic biologists have created DNA chains that function,
but are made of different sugars and acids than the stuff in our cells.
So that's going on.
Anyway, get on the web.
Go check it out at MikeHagan.com and go to the news page.
And there are lots of stories right on the front page there,
but everything is archived on the news page,
and there's lots of interesting stuff that I wasn't able to get to tonight.
But I'm glad I wasn't able to get to it because we had two and a half hours
with Dr. Dennis McKenna and Richard Glenn Boyer,
and it was a wonderful program, and I thank everyone who participated,
and all of the listeners out there tonight on the web who listened,
and for the guys and girls at Cosmic Waves Radio that made it happen,
for Charlie here at KOPN helping get the technology in place here,
and for everybody who participated in the show.
A wonderful evening, and I'm glad that we were able to pull it off.
So we'll finish things off.
One more from ISM.
Once again, their most recent release, Monkey Underneath.
This last one is called Crazy Dream.
And, man, it really has been one.
So we'll see you next week.
Marco Rodin.
In the meantime, don't forget, check us out on the web, www.MikeHagan.com.
Thanks again to everybody.