Joint Chief of Staff Says Clinton Cabinet Official Asked Him To Stage A False Flag Event

This is insane.

The Daily Paul reports:

Thanks to Trevor Lyman for spotting this at Salon.com. The following is excerpted from General Hugh Shelton’s new memoir, Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior:

At one of my very first breakfasts [as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff], while Berger and Cohen were engaged in a sidebar discussion down at one end of the table and Tenet and Richardson were preoccupied in another, one of the Cabinet members present leaned over to me and said, “Hugh, I know I shouldn’t even be asking you this, but what we really need in order to go in and take out Saddam is a precipitous event — something that would make us look good in the eyes of the world. Could you have one of our U-2s fly low enough — and slow enough — so as to guarantee that Saddam could shoot it down?”

The hair on the back of my neck bristled, my teeth clenched, and my fists tightened. I was so mad I was about to explode. I looked across the table, thinking about the pilot in the U-2 and responded, “Of course we can …” which prompted a big smile on the official’s face…

Continue reading at Salon.com

To remind you, this is a cabinet level official asking a US General to stage a false flag attack on Iraq prior to 9/11 2001.

They really, really were itching at the bit to get into Iraq at all costs. If a General writes this, then as far as I am concerned its a given.

Shocked? a little. Suprised? not at all. Not the first false flag planned / dreamt up in the White House. Cuba and a certain false flag airline incident anyone?

Be very careful here, we have a Clinton in the White House staff now, keep this up and she may have her buddy flip the internet kill switch so they can clean up this mess and make sure that only republicans are implicated.

No way, only Republicans do this sort of stuff................
Hmm, wonder if any of this came into play during the planning of 9/11 with the same people?

This is no suprise, great find tho, both parties are controlled by the same groups, they use the same tactics again and again. Tho this will just blow around in the wind, no major media attention, because they too are controlled.

Wow, how many documented cases of proposed state sponsored terrorism do we need before these criminals are held accountable. Its amazing how these political and military figures are willing to wipe their rear ends with the constitution of this great nation for personal or political gain. This, operation Northwoods and everything in between should be on the front page of every news paper, news website and radio news broadcast. The US Government are the real terrorists!!

Someone put together a comprehensive list please!

We have Gulf of Tonkin that comes to the top of my mind. We have the theorized Pearl Harbor and 9/11, not proven yet. We have the several plans that were written to get into Cuba but never carried out. We have the Israeli attack on our Navy.

Can a better researcher than me please unite all these different known and theorized events and present us a credible case against our government?

Originally posted by mnemeth1To remind you, this is a cabinet level official asking a US General to stage a false flag attack on Iraq prior to 9/11 2001.

No it wasn't.

It would have been more akin to bating, since it would have to be Saddam (or whoever in his military was responsible for the air defense over Baghdad) who pulled the trigger.

And like Operation Northwoods, where did it go? Oh right, where all the best laid plans of mice and men go: The paper basket

reply to post by imeddieone4202003


I agree with you that the mainstream press should act independently of governments to tell us what conspiracies they can document. There is no excuse for reporters being either incompetent or cowardly. I was an insider at the White House during the better part of the 1980s and know that the C.I.A. has an operation called Lantern that tells the print, broadcast and online news organizations what they are allowed to say and even gives them talking points. Is this thread the appropriate place for me to tell you more? If so should I limit my discussion to how the mainstream media is handled or should I also talk about false flag operations that were hatched when I was the Commander of a Strike Force answering only to Ronald Reagan? I am new to ATS, don't know how things work here yet and have already had a reply removed for being off-topic.

Originally posted by imeddieone4202003
Wow, how many documented cases of proposed state sponsored terrorism do we need before these criminals are held accountable.

In what way would this be terrorism?

reply to post by exponent


Intentionally using a soldier's life and a multi-million dollar piece of equipment to stage an event to create a lie to get into a war that will cost taxpayers billions and result in the loss of thousands of lives is terrorism by itself.

BUT

When you follow the slope and realize that if they would openly discuss this, then the "terrorism" that has been all over the news since 9/11 could be organized and perpetrated by the government, then it becomes painfully obvious that we cannot be sure what is terrorism and what is political set ups.

Could you have one of our U-2s fly low enough — and slow enough — so as to guarantee that Saddam could shoot it down?”

Would have been a less costly than the twin-towers.

Of course, with the PNAC involved in the Bush administration all the way up to the top, there was no stopping the plan from taking form.

- Lee

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Intentionally using a soldier's life and a multi-million dollar piece of equipment to stage an event to create a lie to get into a war that will cost taxpayers billions and result in the loss of thousands of lives is terrorism by itself.

No it wouldn't be terrorism, because Saddam's forces would have had to shoot down the plane. It would be violation of airspace, something the US has been routinely doing since they invented high altitude spyplanes.

BUT

When you follow the slope and realize that if they would openly discuss this, then the "terrorism" that has been all over the news since 9/11 could be organized and perpetrated by the government, then it becomes painfully obvious that we cannot be sure what is terrorism and what is political set ups.

Perhaps if you're paranoid you can't be sure, but I think that a bit of critical analysis usually does the job.

Operation Northwoods

Operation Northwoods

This wouldn't be the first time. Undoubtedly will not be the last.

I recall it being reported before the attacks on the morning of 9/11, that Iraq shot down a Global Hawk, or Preditor. Then I thought I saw it after the 2nd attack. Or maybe they shot down a very sophisticated stealth plane, and we would have easily spotted the U-2 FF.

Seems like these admissions of late are pretty suspicious. The syphilis testing has been known for a long time. Planning and plotting false flags has been known for a long time.

Why do they come out and admit them now?

I bet they admit to these and will admit to others in the future so that the one they didnt admit to will seem more "real."

Like the armed robber who gets caught gun in hand and insists he was going to rob the person but he never would have killed them.

We admitted to these others but we didnt admit to at least looking the other way on 9/11 so obviously that one was "real."


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com