US General Said 9/11 Was a Stand Down and a False Flag Operation.

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
US General Said 9/11 Was a Stand Down and a False Flag Operation to Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik,and his is prepared to testify in front of a grand jury.

Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik served as the deputy assistant secretary of state under three different administrations, nixon, ford and carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the department of defense.
pieczenik achieved two prestigious harry c. solomon awards at the harvard medical school as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

Steve Pieczenik, MD, PhD[1] (1943- ) was born in Havana, Cuba on December 7, 1943. He lived first in Toulouse, France for six years.

His family then migrated to the United States where they settled in New York City. Dr. Pieczenik is the author of State of Emergency and a number of other books.And also Tom Clancy's Op Center,was based on Steve Pieczenik.




Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, says that Osama bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job



Pieczenik said that the decision to launch the hoax now was made because Obama had reached a low with plummeting approval ratings and the fact that the birther issue was blowing up in his face, according to the article.

"This is orchestrated, I mean when you have people sitting around and watching a sitcom, basically the operations center of the White House, and you have a president coming out almost zombie-like telling you they just killed Osama bin Laden who was already dead nine years ago.

" Both bin Laden and the false flag 9/11 event, according to Pieceznek, "were used in the same way that 9/11 was used to mobilize the emotions and feelings of the American people in order to go to a war that had to be justified through a narrative that Bush junior created and Cheney created about the world of terrorism."




During his interview with the Alex Jones Show yesterday, Pieczenik also asserted he was directly told by a prominent general that 9/11 was a stand down and a false flag operation, and that he is prepared to go to a grand jury to reveal the general's name.

"They ran the attacks," said Pieczenik, naming Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Elliott Abrams, and Condoleezza Rice among others as having been directly involved.

"It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….

it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open," said Pieczenik, adding that he was "furious" and "knew it had happened."


Would the Pentagon and the Obama Administration be so nefarious as to kill (or pretend to kill) a false Osama? In fact, they would.
There are plenty of on-the-record programs of suggested and implemented CIA programs aimed at Western populations, including operations Gladio, Monarch, Paperclip, etc.
The Pentagon once debated and almost implemented a false flag operation in the skies of the US that was supposed to be an attack from Castro's Cuba. There is no reason why this mindset should have changed from the 1960s; in fact evidence shows it has gotten more powerful.
source





now if it is true that osama bin laden was killed by navy seals...instead of taking him alive...it would of been because they didn't want bin laden in court....it would of opened up 9/11 for a new investigation..and bring it all out in the open...

steve pieczenik bio

Interview of Steve R. Pieczenik - Alex Jones Show - April 24, 2002 (Partial Transcript)

SP: Well, it�s not a good situation but it basically says to me that this is an orchestrated type of war and I think that I didn�t want to believe it for a very long time.

And then I said that somebody is orchestrating something here with the agreement of the bin Laden family, knowing fully well that he would die.

And I think that Musharraf, the President of Pakistan, spilled the beans by accident three months ago when he said that bin Laden was dead because his kidney dialysis machines were destroyed in East Afghanistan.
Well, he was one of few that knew that he had a kidney problem.
That wasn�t well known before. Everybody thought he had a heart disease



SP: No way, Alex, I�m an American. The one thing you don�t do as an American is you don�t play and mess with my constitutional freedom.

I don�t care who you are, what your name is, what you think you are. When you mess with that, you are going to see me retaliate. And I warned the White House. I warned them, quite frankly. Some of the people who are involved because they know me well.

I said if I can help you up there and I helped both Bushes to get elected. Trust me, I�m going to help bring you down because you don�t play with the American public and their freedom.

And you don�t play with lives, American soldiers� lives that I value, because not only am I a physician but having been in wars, seeing these boys die for who, for whom, and the answer is no - as long as I live and I have a breath, I will still fight for that constitution.

The constitution was based, created by men who understood what it meant not to centralize power, to make sure that we had the freedom of the individual and that the individual was more important than the State.


you can find the recent interview with Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik on the alex jones you tube channel....as much as i find jones iratatting,he does get some great guests on some of his shows.

edit on 5-5-2011 by TheMaverick because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Absolutely hysterical!


It will be hard to top the belly laugh I just had after reading this.

"Truthers" always crack me up.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMaverick
 


Who is the top US general ?



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I can't believe people are still skeptical even with all this new evidence coming out.


When are people going to WAKE UP!



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
you guys are good...you watched a 12 min vid,and read the whole thread...in 4 mins..amazing !



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


I take it you believe the O.S then? Can I ask you why you took this stance? I'm not trying to flame you or anything I'm just curious, also why was this article hysterical if I may ask?



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
already existing thread here

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMaverick
 


Time will tell, thats for sure. I am anxious to hear more...I sure hope our Government didn't do something like this, but I am open minded.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
I know an 8 star general who told me Alex Jones is a complete waste of space.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


lol..made a hour before me...that a teach me for making a dinner halfway through making the thread..

that other one been thrown into the ATS Skunk Works...??

this guy Pieczenik is real.
edit on 5-5-2011 by TheMaverick because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Go before a grand jury and testify to hearsay -- get right on that.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by spyder550
 


yeah,but just imagine if bin laden was taken alive...it would of gone to court,and the world would of demanded to watch it,which would of opened up 9/11,there would have to be a whole new investigation,this is were this man would of came in as a expert witness.
and how do you know this man don't have incriminating documents,his playing with fire,going so public with this,and with his long successful career,i doubt he would want to tarnish it,if he truly didn't believe in what his is doing.

Logically last thing they wanted,was bin laden having his day in court.

besides...this is not some news pundit,or celebrity....it's a man who worked at the heart of the darker side of the american government.

this man is respected.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TheMaverick
 


Who is the top US general ?



Does it matter? People higher up the food chain have come forward already. No scientist outside the umbrella of NIST defends the OST anymore either. The "just kids in their moms basement" conspiracy theory of the 911 deniers (debunkers) is long burried.

Sometimes I wonder, if Rotschild or Bush or Obama would come forward and say killing 3000 of our own was a necessarry evil to maintain and increase our geopolitical power, would 911 deniers believe them, or would they smear the president of the united states a wifebeater?
edit on 5-5-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


I don't suppose it does matter to you but it does to anyone with any critical faculties.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I dont see how the word of a general would be important at this point, when people of higher status in the intelligence, political and military spectrum have already said the exact same thing. You didnt believe the officers before him, why would you believe him?

It makes me wonder, if Obama would come forward and admit to 911 having been an inside job, would he be just another truther for you? There isnt much more space left to the upside as far as American figures go, than the president of America.
edit on 5-5-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
No scientist outside the umbrella of NIST defends the OST anymore either.


You really believe that?

There are a handful of scientists who support the notion of the government's involvement, and literally hundreds of thousands who simply don't care because they're satisfied that the consensus is generally right.

You don't see them on websites or forming groups because nobody is really that interested any more. And they're hardly going to waste their time setting up advocacy groups for something that is generally accepted. You don't see people forming web groups demanding that the existence of Mars be acknowledged either - because pretty much everybody acknowledges it.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


So where are these plethora of scientists who defend the NIST report? I am not aware of any scientists outside the umbrella of NIST which defended the NIST report. Actually not even the scientists under the NIST report accepted any challenges to defend their work. The only architects and engineers which said anything about 9/11 made a case for controlled demolition and a good one.


Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by Cassius666
No scientist outside the umbrella of NIST defends the OST anymore either.


You really believe that?


You don't see them on websites or forming groups because nobody is really that interested any more.


So you are saying the scientists who do not say anything, side with the people who composed the NIST report. That works both ways bubba. The other side can claim those "mute architects" just as easily and say those architects obviously side with the scientific community that DID speak out on 9/11.

Who is more credible, a small group from one country under the direction of an administration looking to build a case for war or a larger group, from different countries, with no agenda other than the ones that 9/11 deniers/debunkers invent for them? Do you really believe that those academics make those allegations to sell Coffe mugs?

When a small group of academics says we did not go to the moon, while the scientific community says we DID go to the moon, I am gong to side with the scientific community, especially if it makes a good case. Not every academic devotes his time to debate the moonhauxers either. Same for what is to be said about 9/11 I think I am going to side with the scientific community on this one, rather than a small group of academics organised under an orgnisation, that faced much scrutiny in the handling of the composition of this particular report.
edit on 5-5-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
So you are saying the scientists who do not say anything, side with the people who composed the NIST report. That works both ways bubba. The other side can claim those "mute architects" just as easily and say those architects obviously side with the scientific community that DID speak out on 9/11.


That's my point. They can't. Because if you don't speak out about something it generally means you accept the status quo. And the status quo states that the "OS" is broadly true.




Who is more credible, a small group from one country under the direction of an administration looking to build a case for war or a larger group, from different countries, with no agenda other than the ones that 9/11 deniers/debunkers invent for them? Do you really believe that those academics make those allegations to sell Coffe mugs?


The first group is more credible. Partly because it has evident expertise, and partly because the "thousands of academics" tend not to have the expertise accredited to them. I've looked up people from AE9/11 at random, and many are just kitchen designers or CAD drawers or, in some cases, not even involved in architecture or engineering at all.

And many seem to have answered a question that asked them if they thought there was something suspect about 9/11 - and this is then taken as evidence that they disagree with the NIST report. Suddenly they find themselves enlisted into the Truth Movement.

I don't think the thousands of academics make allegations to sell mugs. Indeed I don't think that they really exist in the form that the list compilers want you to think. I think that some people - many not academics - answered a question years ago and now they're being presented to the gullible as proof of something. And that's being done in order to sell mugs. And hats. And books.


When a small group of academics says we did not go to the moon, while the scientific community says we DID go to the moon, I am gong to side with the scientific community, especially if it makes a good case.


But the scientific community doesn't say we went to the moon. It holds it as self-evident. Find me a group with, ooh, 1500 scientists that says we went to the moon. Otherwise, according to your logic, any scientists who are silent on the matter don't count either way. So by your method we may well not have gone to the moon.


Not every academic devotes his time to debate the moonhauxers either.


Well, quite. So by your logic they might well agree with moonhoaxers.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by Cassius666
So you are saying the scientists who do not say anything, side with the people who composed the NIST report. That works both ways bubba. The other side can claim those "mute architects" just as easily and say those architects obviously side with the scientific community that DID speak out on 9/11.


That's my point. They can't. Because if you don't speak out about something it generally means you accept the status quo. And the status quo states that the "OS" is broadly true.




It aint the status quo at all. Making that claim is just being delusional. Half of all Americans dont buy the official conspiracy theory. As for the rest of the world, forget about it. The scientific community never accepted the NIST report as a scientific paper, or even as a vague deciption of what happened on 911, partly because the presented scenario is impossible to occour, but especially because of the way it was composed, where data is withhold or altered, to fit the presented scenario. In the 70s the exploration of space was something the scientific community took an interest in and they all agree, we went to the moon. There has been enough proof of that. And in science there is no such thing as "self evident".

But if you want to argue with self evident, the scientific community holds it as self evident that random damage to a structure does not cause a building to implode, the way wtc 7 did, or to explode, the way the twin towers did.

You are not seriously equating a flimsy paper with real evidence, which was accepted by the scientific community as was the case with the lunar expeditions. The paper published by Steven Jones has a stronger backing in the scientific community, than the NIST report and unlike with the NIST report, no data was withheld.

But if any conspiracy theory is a dogma to you, wether she has been fed to you by some guy on the internet or the president of the united states, then no matter what anybody says, be he an architect, an chemist an officer or the president of the united states, its not going to be good enough for you, just like with the moonhauxers.
edit on 5-5-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
Absolutely hysterical!


It will be hard to top the belly laugh I just had after reading this.

"Truthers" always crack me up.

how is this hysterical ?? what this guy has accomplished in his lifetime and experience...him >> (you and me X10000)..I'll take this guy's word over yours..he has seen things you haven't





new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join