US Official calls 9/11 and Osama bin Laden Death "Hoax"

Originally posted by megabogie
if our government knew Bin Laden was dead back in 2001, Bush and Cheney would have claimed that victory for themselves.

not if doing so made them filthy rich
with oil and defense contracts kickbacks.
You would want to keep the boogey man alive
as long as humanly possible to fleece America
of it's military budget. paid for by it's
hard working citizens. This is why the military
budget never ever decreases.

some of those contracts were made visible to the
public in "Loose Change" and also in Alex Jones'
"Endgame".

Not only is it illegal, but also over 5,000 military service
personnel died due to crony capitalism. That makes it
conspiracy to commit mass murder. Ups the ante.
Truly is considered war crimes.

And Obama is just as guilty, as he perpetrated the same
crimes as Bush and Cheney did by continuing the same
policies.

This is the disease which Eisenhower warned us about
and JFK gave his life fighting against.

But of course I will be labeled a terrorist
for even mentioning it. Typical

"This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy."- From Wiki's Dr Steve page.. Yes it has been edited since yesterday and now it says up for deletion. Very shady IMHO.

There were two interviews with Dr Stev on Alex Jones in the 4th and 3rd. ATSer's, I highly encourage you to take time time to listen to these interviews. If there is ONE thing you do on this site today, make it this. I know, it's Alex Jones and some here don't care for him. Dr Steve chose this venue to give the interview. It's is mind-blowing the things Dr Steve has to say and he even says he WILL testify to what he knows under oath in front of a Congressional hearing.

I have listened to the two interviews, and I sincerely hope this guy is who Alex Jones says he is. He himelf has discreited some of the sttuff AJ has written and said about him....

The wiki articles were flagged when I looked at them a couple days ago. Something about no sources, reads like an advertisement and doesn't give a balanced view....

I'd really like to see something credible about this guys background...

The only things I've been able to find so far is that he's on the Alumni donor list for MIT, and he did indeed co-write a couple of the Clancy series and produce some of the made for TV movies...

Nothing about his days in the State Dept. though...

I'm the person who removed 90% of the information that was previously in his Wikipedia article from it. After noticing the above average number of views of the article, and the huge number of new posters posting silly stuff on the talk page, I decided to just google the article looking for places it was discussed. (and yes, I created an account specifically to reply to this post.)

There is absolutely no malice or conspiracy behind the fact that his article is going to get deleted. Wikipedia has very long-standing content inclusion policies - people must be notable to have articles, and things in their articles must be verifiable. Almost none of the stuff that was originally posted was verifiable in any way - if it had been, it would've remained. Anyone who led the kind of career Pieczenik claims to have led would have left a paper trail - for Pieczenik it is almost nonexistent.

there's also nothing unusual about the fact that his article has been nominated for deletion so soon after it was created - I would venture a guess that most articles that are ever deleted are deleted within two or three days of being created. It was one of a dozen articles I participated in deletion discussions of one sort or another on last night - most of the rest were things like bands that some dude just started in his garage, but the same policies apply to any of them.

If any member of this board can find any reliable source for Pieczenik's supposed accomplishments, please feel free to edit them back in - or if you provide it to me, I will be more than happy to do so for you. Wikipedia does have a specific definition of reliable source, essentially it means stuff like mainstream media coverage that people who are assistant secretaries of defense normally receive, or even stuff like the senate record of his confirmation of deputy assistant secretary of defense that would necessarily have to exist if he held that position. If anyone is able to provide anything like that, I can almost guarantee the article will not be deleted.

I have found several mentions Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik credentials in the New York Times.

Interviews with Government officials and private psychiatrists familiar with the medical examination of the former captives indicated that most of the freed Americans were experiencing predictable, temporary mental problems resulting from their stressful imprisonment.

Dr. Beahler confirmed reports by Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a former State Department psychiatrist, that the examination of the hostages at the American military hospital in Wiesbaden, West Germany, showed that many were experiencing Interviews with Government officials and private psychiatrists familiar with the medical examination of the former captives indicated that most of the freed Americans were experiencing predictable, temporary mental problems resulting from their stressful imprisonment.
www.nytimes.com...

Although there is no single psychiatric label for the problems it can cause, there is the kind of person whom some call the ''poweraholic,'' who takes the thrill of power so seriously he or she becomes lost in its pursuit.

''For some, the thirst for power takes on the character of an addiction,'' said Steve R. Pieczenik, a psychiatrist who has also been a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. ''Many of my patients have been power brokers of one kind or another: lobbyists, politicians, lawyers. These people are incessantly building a power base, forming alliances, typically with no specific goal in mind; they just enjoy the hurly-burly of power for its own sake.''
www.nytimes.com...

Bolding emphasis mine - for reasons obvious

reply to post by burntheships


great job!

reply to post by kgorman

are you also planning on wiping out the entire history
of anyone else who decides to rat out the 9/11
truth movement ???

now that one has come forward,
there will be more

bet on it

and the walls crumble and
humpty couldn't put them back
together any more.

I have found several mentions Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik credentials

Thanks, I'll take a look at the cites and edit them in to the article assuming nothing is wrong with them.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
reply to post by kgorman

 

are you also planning on wiping out the entire history
of anyone else who decides to rat out the 9/11
truth movement ???

I delete stuff that is unsourced that I cannot find sources to no matter what it is about.

reply to post by kgorman


he's listed as an author of the Clancy series on google books... books.google.com... =4cjCTbKeM9CitgfO3oCrBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

He isalso listed as an author and his credentialls are on www.clancyfaq.com...

Wiki-p, snopes, fox...all part of the same machine. A machine that needs to be shutdown, dismantled and retooled.

What struck me most about these reports was that Barry..uh, I mean Barack had strict oversight and participation in the deciphering of the intel and formulation of the Ops Plan. Ha! From what perspective? Basketball? I found that more laughable than the sea burial!

How pathetic, watching him read from those GD teleprompters with a straight face.

Wag my dog.

It is my best guess that the General
whom he talks about here is none
other than Gen. Wesley Clark (Retired).
Just a hunch

Gen. Clark is also on the list of
Military Personnel for 9/11 Truth.

reply to post by freedom12


I’m with you on this. If he is credible, which is seems that he is, and he is willing to go forward with this information, then this will get very interesting. My questions just have to do with, as someone already mentioned, why didn’t this come out as strong in 2002 when he brought this up? Also how do we help his cause? He says he is willing to go forward and tell the name of the general that admitted this info to him, so what is he waiting for? If any of this is true, there truly will be a revolution.

I will say he is extremely convincing and intelligent. He takes a very good approach by not being party affiliated in any way, and as I said, he potentially has the credentials. Is this guy too good to be true?

reply to post by boondock-saint

are you also planning on wiping out the entire history of anyone else who decides to rat out the 9/11 truth movement ???

I swear, Boondock, sometimes I just adore you.

reply to post by wearewatchingyouman


Thanks!

I find it really suspect that Wikipedia removed his credentiialed history!

That is like a big red flag!

Heres a few more articles...might as well slap them up....we can see if they get scrubbed.

Inside, Clancy and Piezcenik offer this acknowledgment: ``We would like to thank Jeff Rovin for his creative ideas and his invaluable contribution to the preparation of the manuscript.''

Huh?

If anybody's name deserves to be on this project, it's Pieczenik's. ``Paul Hood is based very much on my own career over 20 years as a crisis manager,'' he said.

He's a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and hostage negotiator, serving as a deputy assistant secretary of state under Presidents Nixon, Reagan and Bush.

He and Clancy are unapologetic about the credits.
News Bank

''For some, the thirst for power takes on the character of an addiction,'' said Steve R. Pieczenik, a psychiatrist who has also been a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. ''Many of my patients have been power brokers of one kind or another: lobbyists, politicians, lawyers. These people are incessantly building a power base, forming alliances, typically with no specific goal in mind; they just enjoy the hurly-burly of power for its own sake.''
www.nytimes.com...

he's listed as an author of the Clancy series on google books... books.google.com... =4cjCTbKeM9CitgfO3oCrBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Someone has brought up more specific details of his role in the books on a subpage somewhere, which I will dig out if you want - it made it look appear that Tom Clancy consulted him for the series, and thus listed him as a cocreator of the books, but that he was not directly involved in the writing of them. (This is also what the cover makes it look like - on the physical book he's listed as cocreator, not author.) He is currently credited as cocreator in the article.

Heres a few more articles...might as well slap them up....we can see if they get scrubbed.

I am the person who has been 'scrubbing' the article as you put it. As I already said, if y'all provide reliable sources that can verify his backstory, it can be readded.

Originally posted by NightGypsy
I swear, Boondock, sometimes I just adore you.

well thank you
(cheesy grin and kicks rocks)

I am just hunting truth as everyone else is

I am single by the way
**** cough**** cough***cough**** hint **** cough ****

Burn, can you provide an additional link to the first story? the one you posted doesn't seem to be working.

But yeah, this is how Wikipedia works - details that people can provide evidence for get to stay, and ones that people can't provide evidence for get to leave.

Originally posted by kgorman

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by wearewatchingyouman

 

Heres a few more articles...might as well slap them up....we can see if they get scrubbed.

I am the person who has been 'scrubbing' the article as you put it. As I already said, if y'all provide reliable sources that can verify his backstory, it can be readded.

I am waiting to see this...get to work kgorman cause you should not have challenged me.

There are dozens of articles out there, and some of them are pay per view, which means once I pay
my 2.95 for the article I own it. Then I can publish it on the internet and the whold world will see.