It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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."
source
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.
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.
Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TheMaverick
Who is the top US general ?
Originally posted by Cassius666
No scientist outside the umbrella of NIST defends the OST anymore either.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.