9/11 Scholars Forum

Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths

Former high level government official will testify 9-11 was an inside job.

 

This former government high-level official is willing to testify what he knows about 9-11 and how it was an inside job.    I hope Dr. Pieczenik is for real.

 

This gives information about Dr. Pieczenik...

excerpt...

"Dr. Pieczenik trained in Psychiatry at Harvard and has both an M.D. from Cornell University Medical College and a Ph.D. in International Relations from M.I.T. He was the first psychiatrist ever to receive a PhD. focusing on international relations. He served as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and/or Senior Policy Planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker."

http://www.stevepieczenik.com/bio.htm

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24622

Top Government Insider: Bin Laden Died In 2001, 9/11 False Flag Attack

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations Steve R. Pieczenik says he is prepared to tell a federal grand jury the name of a top general who told him directly 9/11 was a false flag attack!

Bin Laden, “Was 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,” stated Pieczenik.

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 amongst 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”.

“I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public,” he added.

Pieczenik re-iterated that he was perfectly willing to reveal the name of the general who told him 9/11 was an inside job in a federal court, “so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd.”

Views: 191

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Let's hope he can stay alive long enough to testify, and hope he does not commit suicide with 3 bullets in the head, or a plane crash, or a heart attack...

Of course, this General will only have to deny that he said it and then there is no evidence to proceed from.

I hope he has hard core physical evidence or a recording of what was said, otherwise this will go nowhere...

I listened to Dr. Pieczenik yesterday on Alex Jones show with Paul Joseph Watson as the guest host interviewing him.  This is his third visit over the last week after having been interviewed a few years ago by Alex Jones.  The plan is for Dr. P. to be on again next week for more shows.

 

I have to give my impression about Dr. Pieczenik.  There is just something not right about his "testimony."  Dr. Paul Craig Roberts relayed a question for Dr. P. on yesterdays show asking something like ' Aren't you afraid you will be killed?"  The response from Dr. P. was no response at all to the question asked and that too seemed odd.  His main message seemed to be a threat to "the powers that be" that if they don't stop pulling off these false flags and psyops, there will be revolution in America bigger than 1776.'  Something rang hollow about that message and I got the distinct feeling that Dr. P. has an agenda and is just running another psy-op for the government, and he is a seasoned professional in creating and running psyops.

 

I do appreciate Paul Joseph Watson's article on GlobalResearch because it contained a listing of bin Laden's history and his usefulness over time, but I am afraid that the praising of Dr. P. is going to backfire on Alex Jones program and staff.

I listened to about 15 minutes of Dr. Steven Piecenik on the live Sunday Alex Jones (AJ) radio show yesterday on KLBJ 590 FM here in Austin, Texas.  Apparently Dr. P. contacted AJ after about two years of having last been a guest on AJ's Infowars GCNlive daily radio show.  Dr. P. wanted to be on AJ's shows again and has, in this new series of appearances, been on I think 4 times recently so far including yesterday's Sunday show.  The plan is for Dr. P. to be a guest several times in the near future on AJ's Infowars show. 

 

I guess AJ, Inc.  has decided to milk this "we killed bin Laden" story for as long as it can be.  Dr. P. apparently also is reaping some secondary gains from his being on the shows too.   They are making a very big deal out of Dr. P.'s "high level" credentials and government positions with 5 presidential administrations. 

 

Dr. P. has on the short times that I listened to these shows over the last few days consistently and pointedly cut in and shut up AJ so he could say how he is just an ordinary guy, just like any other ordinary patriotic American in ordinary occupations or who have held ordinary military service grades.  Apparently, Dr. P, who is an expert in creating and conducting "psy ops" or psychological operations for our U.S. intelligence and military agencies, regards his getting his spiel out about how he is "just an ordinary American"  is very important to whatever "operation" Dr. P. may be running now by being on these AJ radio shows.  But this seems quite incongrous to me.  If you go to Dr. P's site, link above, and you read the several recent articles by Paul Joseph Watson, writer for AJ, Inc., it has been made abundantly clear to us that Dr. P. is quite an extraordinary guy with several advanced degrees, several years of high level government experince, and high level experience in the extraoridnarily "glitzy" or "sexy" field of creating successful psychological operations in top secret intellgence operations.  So AJ and company are really pushing the "extraordinary Dr. P." and Dr. P is pushing the "just ordinary American Dr. P."  I think I am experiencing the intended "cognitive dissonance" in all this.

 

Another feature of Dr. P.'s "story" and radio performances of late is that on yesterday's radio show, Dr. P. made a big point of the fact that our last three U.S. presidents, blatantly got up in front of the American people and bold faced lied to them.  He referred to Clinton as a sociopath and I think Bush 2 and Obama also in similar terms, though I did not take it down and do not know if there is an archive of yesterday's show anywhere so I can listen again.  Dr. P.'s message was, because we have total lying presidents, that  "Americans have a PROBLEM!   If something is not done now, some action by American populace is not taken right now, then the powers that be better full well realize that there will be another REVOLUTION of the people just like 1776.  This urgency and imminency character to Dr. P's message is what makes me think Dr. P. has his own operation and agenda going on here and that he may be again still be working for the government.  I do not know if AJ is "in on this" possible operation or will be a victim of it just like his listeners and readers.

 

The "lying" story aspect seems incongruous as well because I ask 'Are not what Dr. P. spent his government career doing, creating powerful and successful "psy ops" the same thing as the "lying" or creating fictional theatrical performances for the purposes of manipulating target people and outcomes, the creating and promulgating of "lies" too?'  So Dr. P. is just as much of a "liar" as are Bush, Clinton and Obama.  So how are we Americans supposed to be riled up because our last three presidents have spoken outright lies to us when Dr. P. has been lying in the shadows of government for pay for most of his career.  (Of late, Dr. P. helps and consults with novelists like Tom Clancy for their popular novels as well as consults on big movies in HollyHoax.  "fiction" is another word for "lie".)

 

I just think somebody needs to expose this latest schtick of Alex Jones and Alex Jones staff and radio shows with Dr. Steven R. Piecenik, and discuss what a successful outcome for Dr. P. would be if indeed Dr. P. is running a psy-op on all Alex Jones listeners these days.  It cannot be a good outcome because it is based in lies, deception and manipulation.

 

 

et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos

 

This man is scheduled to appear on coast to coast tonight may 10, that should be very good.
"but unless we have real reason to doubt

this person's intentions, let us not.  at least not yet"

 

I stated my gut feeling.  One purpose of free and open discussion is to allow the expression of initial gut feelings.  It is OK for me or anyone else to express doubts and doubts about a person's intentions.

 

I look at the record and see how many people were "eliminated" who expressed doubts about the official story of JFK assassination.  (Read Col. Craig Robert's book on this subject.)

 

We have, for 9-11, a new "official orthodoxy" superimposed on 9-11 truth, superimposed on official goverment theory, that is, the "Jones and Gage boys" and their thermite two-step.  It is now somewhat verboten to express doubts about Steven Jones and Richard Gage.

 

I suggest listen to Dr. Piezcenik and observe patterns and judge for yourself.  Do not hold back expressing initial impression and doubts.  That is A OK in my book and I would never advise anyone to suppress expression of such impressions as that would be innimical to free and open discussion.  It looks to me like he is the new superimposition of a new Dr. Steven Jones or Richard Gage.

 

I gave specific reasons for my impressions.  Perhaps someone could comment on why my reasons are not sufficient reason to express doubts.  I have been in the 9-11 truth game and the truth game for about 13 years.  I see the same kinds of operations being played on us, but now with even greater frequency and sophistication.

 

Jeannon

 

I have not listened to this man yet, but you are correct about misinformation.  I am very frustrated with humanity these days because people are such very clever and constant liars.  They don't stop and think that they are part of the world and their actions determine the kind of world we live in.  

 

I believe in the scientific method, and I learned what I know about that by listening to Jim Fetzer on a 4 part radio interview that I forget where but was maybe 5 years ago, where he "took us back to school".  We need to separate the real from the fake data, and you are right, separate the truth tellers from the liars.  The next step is to apply explanations to the data and see which explanation is best, but even there, I believe that people like Judy Wood get hung up in their egos.

 

So from paid ops to ego to just bad people, it is so very hard to find "truth" in this world, and I think it is fracturing as a society.  



Thoth II said:

 

Jeannon

 

I have not listened to this man yet, but you are correct about misinformation.  I am very frustrated with humanity these days because people are such very clever and constant liars.  They don't stop and think that they are part of the world and their actions determine the kind of world we live in.  

 

I believe in the scientific method, and I learned what I know about that by listening to Jim Fetzer on a 4 part radio interview that I forget where but was maybe 5 years ago, where he "took us back to school".  We need to separate the real from the fake data, and you are right, separate the truth tellers from the liars.  The next step is to apply explanations to the data and see which explanation is best, but even there, I believe that people like Judy Wood get hung up in their egos.

 

So from paid ops to ego to just bad people, it is so very hard to find "truth" in this world, and I think it is fracturing as a society.  

Thanks for your thoughts, Thoth.

I would have liked to have heard that 4-part lesson from Dr. Fetzer.  We are fortunate to have him still doing radio shows and blogs and keeping all the big unresolved events uppermost in our thinking and discussions.

 

One thing I have always sort of held as a rule of thumb over the years when considering someone who has operated within the top levels of our US intelligence apparatus is "once CIA, always CIA."  "They" seem to own their top operatives for life, and they will make use of the person after they have seemingly "retired" or been "out of the business" for a very long time.  When that "retired" person becomes a liability because of what they know, they have an accident like Mr. Colby did. 

 

That is a concern of mine regarding Dr. Piezcenik.  If he really played such a high and top secret role, he is still on their side no matter how good his words sound now.  I guess what he may be doing is some form of playing the role of the controlled opposition.  Remember, he is a psy-ops expert and a psychiatrist so he should be able to do a very good job of playing that role.

 

I have learned to trust my initial impressions, my gut feelings, and if I opine that "something is not right" about Dr. P., I am sticking with that and posting my feelings until I gain additional clarity on the subject.

 

One of the best measures of whether truth is being pursued and set forth is to "judge the fruits".  What comes of the "important people" and their "bombshell" testimony.  Does further delving and searching for truth stop when most seem to consider that this VIP has told us all we need to know?

 

Again, I appreciate thought sharing and discussion.



 

This is my first post as I just became a member. For the record, I listened to all the recent Alex Jones Show interviews of Dr. P. I am a retired Cardiac, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery and I found Dr. P.'s comments about OBL's medical history to be very intriguing.

 

Dr. P  alleged that OBL had Marfan's Syndrome which certainly could be true based on the external appearance of the man alleged to be bin Laden in videos of the late 1990's and through December of 2001. However, no actual evidence was produced by Dr. P. to substantiate the Marfan's claim. Admittedly, it would be difficult to come by. Yet, Dr. P made the statement as if he has absolute proof that OBL had Marfan's.

 

I posted a piece on my blog http://moralphilosophyofcurrentevents.blogspot.com/2011/05/problems... which addressed the medical issues re: OBL including the question of his alleged Marfan's. In addition, I contacted Paul Joseph Watson on 2 occassions and informed him of my observation that the "new videos" show a man who has normal movement of his left upper extremity.  Yet in 2001, it appeared to be paralyzed. I discussed the pathophysiology and suggested that it would be unlikely for OBL to have regained full use of his left upper extremity. In my second message to Watson, I sent the url to the above blog post in which I suggest that Dr P. may have more evidence to present on OBL's alleged Marfan's Syndrome diagnosis. I have not heard back from Watson after the second e-mail message to him. After my first message, Watson actually quoted me in a post he made at one of Alex Jones' sights with regard to the paralysis of the left upper extremity back in 2001 saying: "A doctor has said" or something similar.

 

It would be very helpful if Dr. P would delineate what evidence he has that OBL suffered from Marfan's Syndrome.  It may be possible for Alex Jones or Paul J. Watson to ask him about it in subsequent interviews or by e-mail. This claim by Dr. P is not trivial as the natural history of untreated Marfan's Syndrome is extremely poor. That alone could establish that OBL was extremely unlikely to survive until 2011 which would make his recent summary execution impossible. I am aware of course that a great deal of other evidence suggests he died in December, 2001.

 

With respect to Jeannon Kralj concerns my advise would be that it is critical to verify all claims with at least 2 sources if possible, especially if the individual making them has a history of working for the national security state. The late Colonel Fletcher Prouty insisted that it must always be assumed that anyone who once worked for the CIA still does whether they claim to be retired or not. I think that is good advise. Nothing important can be lost in doing so but a great deal might be--if a reasonable degree of suspicion is not maintained--at least enough to allow for independent verification of any new or unusual claims that person may make.

 

As an aside, I share Jeannon's visceral unease with Dr. P's repreated claims of being just an ordinary American given his past history. It struck me as too self-effacing to be genuine, but I could be wrong.  Jeannon's advise "judge the fruits" is excellent. We must watch very carefully what becomes of Dr. P. for all kinds of reasons.   

JPH

 

I heard Joel Skousen on the radio this morning expressing concerns about Dr. Pieczenik similar to but much more on point and insightful than mine.  His weekly newsletter is absolutely great analysis from a conservative perspective.  WorldAffairsBrief.com

 

 

World Affairs Brief, May 13, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

 

 

 

QUESTIONS ABOUT DR. STEVEN PIECZENIK

Meanwhile on our own side of the search for what really happened, Alex Jones came up with several blockbuster interviews with one Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, touted as a former Deputy Secretary of State and the greatest insider expert on psychological operations and military intelligence. Frankly, I'm skeptical that this guy is really on our side.

 

First of all he claims a bit too much and exaggerates his background. He wasn't a Deputy Secretary of State, but rather a "senior official" at State--a catch all term that can be used by anyone whose has had some executive status at State for over 10 years. He hinted to Alex Jones that he was very instrumental in the creation of the US Delta Force. Not true, though he may have had some input into their hostage negotiation techniques, which seems to be his only really legitimate use at State.

 

He further claims to have had a major role in dozens of hostage and crisis incidents, including "the Hanafi Moslem Seizure in Washington, DC, the TWA Croatian Hijacking, the Aldo Moro Kidnapping, the JRA Hijacking, the PLO Hijacking, and many other incidents involving terrorists such as Idi Amin, Muammar Quaddafi, Carlos, FARC, Abu Nidal and Saddam Hussein."

 

Conveniently for Pieczenik, no civilian has any means of checking these claims since they are all classified, but his website is full of little teasers (like masking his picture) that give people a sense that he's playing with us or exaggerating. The real truth of his contribution compared to his claims is revealed in his statement that "he developed conflict resolution techniques that were instrumental in saving over five hundred hostages in different terrorist episodes." Well, if you put forth negotiating ideas that were used by others, you could possible claim personal credit for saving 500 people, but that would be a stretch. There's something promotional about his claims on his website http://www.stevepieczenik.com/bio.htm that bothers me.

 

I don't doubt Pieczenik's credentials relative to his book and movie partnership with Tom Clancey where he made a lot of money, but I do question his claims to have gone from an MD psychiatrist background to the top military and intelligence expert who fed Clancey all his scoops on military technology. Steven Cole was that guy, not Pieczenik.

 

Second, everything about his background is connected to dealings with globalists. He claims to have been working directly for the president, and knows all the neocons personally. He says he is an intelligence operative, and did regime change all over the world. You can't do that and not be a globalist. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and got his start in government as a protégé of globalist Lawrence Eagleburger. He brags about his close relationships over the years with Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft. He says he has worked with all the major neocons. We may accept the possibility that a person can come out of the bowels of the beast and act as a whistleblower, but this guy gives a fairly uncertain sound.

 

Surely, he did not object to their policies while in government or he would long ago have been cut off from his insider consulting relationships, which he still claims exist. But you can't both claim to support the views of the Right and be a regular guest on Alex Jones and still have access inside government. Those are two worlds that are mutually exclusive. The PTB can smell a good person just like we can smell a rat. A person who really objects to all of what they have done in the past 20 years can't have been blind to all this during his long stay within government.

 

Third, he often mentions defending "our democracy," and doesn't seem to have a clue that this is not the proper political doctrine of the constitutional Right, which objects to democracy in principle and asserts that we are a Republic. He said he "greatly respects, George HW Bush (who probably touted the NWO more than any other president) but objects to his son George W. Bush and Barack Obama, who he claims are both inept. Well, yes and no. The only thing for sure is that both are puppets of a larger controlling establishment.

 

You get the distinct impression from listening to his rapid fire analysis that he really is only focusing on the problems of the last two individuals to occupy the White House, and that he doesn't see that this is a systemic government problem that goes back decades if not centuries. He merely complains that this is "crony capitalism," which he mentions a lot--but which is not the core problem at all. In short, he doesn't see a globalist conspiracy--only a couple of bad presidents. His favorite president was Eisenhower, so he can't have much understanding of how presidents are manipulated. And, you can't be a real insider on our side and not know that George W. Bush and Barack Obama are not running the show, and that things don't change by simply getting rid of them.

 

His solutions about changing the guy at the top are simply useless. Neither does he understand the problem we have with a dumbed down populace. He says that "If we had another false flag, we'll have a second revolution." Nonsense. Americans are generally hostile to the concept that the government was responsible for 9/11, despite the evidence--let alone rebel at another hyped-up terror event. Look at how many bought into the phony bin Laden death ploy. All this belies his claim that "you don't psy-ops the American Public." In fact, the government does it all the time, and it works on most people. As a self-proclaimed expert, he ought to know this.

 

He also made several not-so-subtle threats to our "rogue" president, threatening him with "regime change" via the intelligence community, of which he claims some very close relationship. Look, I know these people in government and they are almost all yes men. I'm not buying this hype about either the military or the intel community turning on the president if he pulls another false flag operation. Once again, this shows a lack of understanding about how these operations are pulled off, and the power of the conspiracy we are dealing with.

 

His most attractive claim, which is irresistible for believers in conspiracy, is that 9/11 was a false flag operation--which is true. But, for such a smart guy, he can't seem to come to any logical conclusions that leads him to suspect there is systematic evil lurking deep in the government that is capable of doing such an act. To him this seems to be something "new" and disturbing. But without the proper and broader implications of the 9/11 attack, which point to a much larger conspiracy against liberty, his charges are shallow.

 

His more tantalizing claim is that nine years ago he told Alex Jones that "a general working for Paul Wolfowitz" told him that "9/11 was an inside job." I'm sure there are several insider generals who knew what was going on. But, what is disturbing is Pieczenik's refusal to give us a name. If he's trying to protect his insider relationship with government, he wouldn't be saying this in the first place on the Alex Jones show. In fact, if he said it nine years ago, the PTB would surely have heard about it and cut him off from government contacts clear back then--but that doesn't seem to be the case, according to his current claims. So who is he trying to protect? The general? What's more important, the nation he is so concerned about or the general's reputation?

 

Piecznenik does claim he will reveal the name to a grand jury, but that is suspect since he surely knows the chance of a grand jury taking up this issue is absolutely nil. The real issue is that naming names would demand answers, and those questions and answers would point to a broader deeper conspiracy which Pieczenik doesn't seem to want to discuss. He never does.

 

With all this said, some of his specific analysis is true, but his use of it is weak. For example, he says that 80% of CIA are mercenaries and contractors, which is true. However, that's not really a problem related to the military-industrial complex, as he claims. It is related to government attempts to hide the illegal dirty work that goes on during all administrations and keep it away from the occasional honest military guy who might be disturbed by the evil he sees and be tempted to blow the whistle--as happened a lot during the 1980s when they didn't use vetted (for lack of principles and morals) contractors.

 

Thank you Jeanon for posting Joel Skousen’s remarks. His comments are very difficult to dispute. I largely agree with them, particularly with respect to Dr. P.'s failure to disclose the name of the General who allegedly told him in 2002 that the 911 attacks had been a "false flag" operation. 

 

I also agree with Skousen’s concern about Dr. P.’s apparent enthusiasm for George H. W. Bush who denied having been affiliated with the CIA in the 1950’s after having been given ample opportunity to admit it. Given that GHWB also denied knowing where he was on November 22, 1963, Dr. P.’s “great respect” for the elder Bush seems odd for someone of his purported past history and pyschological proclivities.

 

What Jeanon Kralj and Joel Skousen are describing is often referred to as a limited “hang-out” a technique which is sometimes employed by the intelligence community. A limited hangout, or partial hangout, is “a public relations or propaganda technique that involves the release of previously hidden information in order to prevent the release of more important details.” Dr. P. may have been assigned a limited hangout duty by the intelligence community in order to prevent disclosure of more disturbing information.  This of course assumes that he is still working with/for it.

 

I note that Dr. P was interviewed again by Alex Jones on Thursday May 12, click on the following link and scroll down page to the 11-05-12 show http://prisonplanet.tv/index.php?option=com_mediacontent&view=live where you can listen to the entire interview.

 

JPH



Dr. J. P. Hubert said:

Thank you Jeanon for posting Joel Skousen’s remarks. His comments are very difficult to dispute. I largely agree with them, particularly with respect to Dr. P.'s failure to disclose the name of the General who allegedly told him in 2002 that the 911 attacks had been a "false flag" operation. 

 

I also agree with Skousen’s concern about Dr. P.’s apparent enthusiasm for George H. W. Bush who denied having been affiliated with the CIA in the 1950’s after having been given ample opportunity to admit it. Given that GHWB also denied knowing where he was on November 22, 1963, Dr. P.’s “great respect” for the elder Bush seems odd for someone of his purported past history and pyschological proclivities.

 

What Jeanon Kralj and Joel Skousen are describing is often referred to as a limited “hang-out” a technique which is sometimes employed by the intelligence community. A limited hangout, or partial hangout, is “a public relations or propaganda technique that involves the release of previously hidden information in order to prevent the release of more important details.” Dr. P. may have been assigned a limited hangout duty by the intelligence community in order to prevent disclosure of more disturbing information.  This of course assumes that he is still working with/for it.

 

I note that Dr. P was interviewed again by Alex Jones on Thursday May 12, click on the following link and scroll down page to the 11-05-12 show http://prisonplanet.tv/index.php?option=com_mediacontent&view=live where you can listen to the entire interview.

 

JPH

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2021   Created by James H. Fetzer.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service