| http://infowars.com/pieczenik_transcript.htm Interview of Steve R. Pieczenik Alex Jones Show April 24, 2002 (Partial Transcript) Dr. Pieczenik served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, and James Baker. He is a Member of the Council on Foreign Relations Go to His Website AJ: Our guest tonight is Dr. Steve Pieczenik and he’s one of the world’s most experienced international crisis managers. He has over twenty years experience in resolving international crises, working for four U.S. administrations. Dr. Pieczenik served as Deputy Secretary of State under Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance and James Baker. Working with Secretary of State George Schultz, Dr. Pieczenik has used his psycho-political expertise for the Secretary’s mediation of conflict in the Middle East between Israel, Jordan, Syria, again it goes on and on. He’s got best selling books. He’s basically an infowarrior, a crisis manager. In fact he, according to this and some of the news articles that we pulled up on him, coined the phrase, if these articles are accurate, this isn’t even in his bio here, but it says it there in some of the news articles, the “crisis mediation” and it’s just endless. It says in one of the bios here that he is also a member of the CFR. Steve Pieczenik, I really appreciate you joining us on the show. Of course, he is also a doctor and PhD as well. Good to have you on the show this evening, Sir. SP: Can I call you Alex? AJ: You certainly can. SP: You can call me Steve, Dr. Pieczenik or Steve, that’s fine with me. AJ: Well, Sir, I mean you’ve got a long bio here. (Crosstalk) just want to mention to the listeners out there. SP: Sure, anyway what would you like to start with Alex? AJ: Tell us a little bit more about yourself. Any key areas of your life, so folks know who you are. SP: Sure, I’ll be happy to. I started as a, I was a medical doctor training at Cornell University Medical College here. I worked my way up through scholarships and then got into the military. I was, during the Vietnam War, I was a very young O6, as many of you know, that is a colonel at the age of 32. I then went on to my training in psychiatry, at the same time at Harvard, and at the same time, I got a PhD from MIT in International Relations. AJ: Now that was the first MIT PhD, in this particular form of psychology. SP: Correct, Alex. And the reason for that was that I understood very clearly, a long time ago, thirty years ago that the very essence of relationships between countries and understanding what our national security is about has to lie in the psychological political arena. It’s not, necessarily that I am interested in what mother did or your father did, but I am much more interested in what kind of image perception propaganda has been created against us and what propaganda information we have to create against someone else. For example, one of the presidents whom I served. Unfortunately, he is ill now. But one of the most brilliant presidents I served and most people don’t recognize his brilliance. I think history will (garbled) and that is President Reagan, who was, as you know, an actor. But he had a photographic memory. And he understood the importance of psychology because he had been an actor and he understood that perception becomes reality. Well, this is a gentleman who using the study that I had worked on thirty years ago and had been intimately involved with him, using psychology and the concept of the perception, we were effectively able.. It’s a team effort. I’m not saying myself only. But Reagan was effectively able and the Reagan administration to bring down an entire Soviet empire without firing a gun by simply manipulating the psychology of perception. That we were forcing them into bankruptcy, which we were through the SBI (?) program and at the same time, manipulating their mind using the Chief of Staff. If you want me to go through the detail and showing him what our military capabilities were. And once he saw that both on land and on sea, he basically gave up. And that was Akhromeyev, who was then Chief of Staff of the Soviet military who was an Admiral, and who eventually committed suicide. But from that point on, we broke the entire, we won a war without having to fire a bullet. And that is the kind of thing that I talk about – psychological or psycho-political dimension. AJ: We are talking to Dr. Steve Pieczenik and he has worked at the highest levels of the psychological operations for four administrations. You are talking about controlling paradigms – paradigm management. SP: Well, that’s interesting. I’ve never used that word paradigm but you clearly – you must be a professor, Alex. But the notion is. No, what it is it’s a more sophisticated concept. For example, what I do is, I don’t just manage a conflict. I may sometimes be sent in on behalf of, for example, Secretary of State Schultz and Reagan. I was sent down to give Noriega a message officially that we would like for him to leave and we would provide the two planes, so and so and such and such. Well, he clearly, my sense was that he was not going to leave. And as many of you remember, this was a general who was chief of narco traffic out of Panama. And so, I would come back and report it. AJ: I’ve got to stop you for a second. This is intriguing. I have seen it reported that then in the military build-up before the strike, that they employed the psychological technique of having the Delta Force and others do raids in and out of the area, touch down for six months, to de-sensitize them, so when the real attack came that they wouldn’t respond with SP: That’s correct. I can’t confirm or deny it but I can say yes. (laughs) That’s exactly true. AJ: You may not know it, but they had that on the History Channel. SP: Oh, I didn’t know that was on History, then I can say yes. OK, I’m glad you told me, yes. General Cisnero(?) and I, we worked on a psyops program, that’s psychological operation, and we are very good at that. I don’t mean me. But the United States is. And we’ve lost some of that capability over the past administration. I’m not pointing fingers. We lost about 40% of our military intelligence capability. And I would come back and every year talk at the National Defense University at Carlyle War College – as a way of showing my appreciation to the military and try to train them in psychological operations. Some of what we saw – we saw that very effectively done in Afghanistan. When we basically gave warning to all the civilians and then we basically went in and broke up the Taliban and then starting going after al Qaeda. We used a lot of psychological operations on (garbled) which I can’t go into but we are using it right now, hopefully, around the world because of the 68 countries now with al Qaeda individuals, 68 countries filled with al Qaeda membership, including our own country. And we’re are using both psychological operations, we are using military.... AJ: Let’s talk about his story. I mean we heard it was twenty dollar bills, now it one-hundred dollars bills, with just the picture of George Bush. And I mean that’s an obvious propaganda move and even the person pulling the hundred dollar bill out realizes that it’s propaganda but still can’t help having a pang of liking George Bush for that split second. So, isn’t that acclimating them, conditioning them, whether they like it or not? SP: Well that’s a good point, Alex. Yeah, I mean, there have been crises, for example, where I had three buildings here held hostage by a fundamentalist group called the Hanasi(?) Muslim. And he knew he was being manipulated. The FBI called me in and I used the Koran to take over the control and eventually he couldn’t help but follow the orders that we giving to him and he eventually released the hostages. And so, in that sense, it’s a very powerful tool and we are getting back into using that very effectively. That’s exactly right, Alex. What I do – I’ve done a lot of negotiation, I do a lot of stategy and tactics where I’ve done a lot of things. For example, with the Gorbachev and Reagan negotiations, with Arafat, I worked against him, I would track down terrorists and then I worked against Arafat, I worked with Osama bin Laden in ’78, ’81. In ’79 when he was in Afghanistan and with Saddam Hussein when he was our ally and I worked against him when they weren’t our ally. AJ: Now again folks, we are talking to Dr. Steve Pieczenik and he is one of the infowarriors in four administrations, crafting much of the police that we have seen over the last twenty, thirty years. And I am so honored to have you on the show tonight. I hope we can keep you for a while. SP: I’d be happy to, Alex. AJ: I’m not going to mince words, I’m going to cut to the chase. SP: Sure. Go ahead. AJ: About these technologies that you are talking about that are great for defending the country being used by the wordsmiths, by the spin doctors, in camps in this country against the American people. Whether it’s gun control or big government or any of it. And I’ve seen the telltale signs all over the place. And that’s why we have you here, so hopefully the American people can become more aware of these tactics. I mean, certainly it’s just 101 Marketing to use psychology, but it’s getting a little more sophisicated than that. Can you .. SP: Well, yeah, I agree with you Alex. One of the things that I have been in disagreement and it keeps coming out of the conservative movement. I mean I’ve worked with these - is that the issue of the suppression of our civil liberties is unjustified and particularly in this case on terrorists. And when I mean specifically, for example, I can understand that we have to have vigilance and we have to have surveillance. But you do not change the constitution or alter it to such a degree that we have posse comitatus, which I hope your audience understands – that means military control can come in and take over civilian control. That’s a no-no. AJ: Well I had the former professors on this show, the former JAG colonels and generals, they say it was gone in ’96 and they are concerned about it. SP: I’ve very concerned about it because what happens is, you know generals – I have a lot of respect for but it’s not generals that make the decision. It will be a consultant who works for somebody in the White House who may not necessarily know what he or she may be doing. And then we are talking about civil liberties and profiling – where you suddenly get thrown off the plane. They won’t tell you why. You could be blond, blue haired, you could be dark and brown eyed. I mean I was almost in preventative detention down in Reno, Nevada, and I said to the police, can I use the word terrorism? He said no. Can I use the words, are you arresting me? He said no. Then why are you sorting me out? And they couldn’t give me an answer. I said you are making a big mistake, you are violating my first amendment, you are violating my second amendment, and every other amendment. Can I talk about guns? No. So basically that’s where I agree with you and your audience and that is we cannot let the federal government or any government suppress our liberties in any way whatsoever. Now, is there propaganda that’s given to the American public. Absolutely. And I say that... AJ: Let me stop you professor. What was this story where they come out and go – oh we’ve got the office of strategic influence, strategic laws and manipulation, and then we are going to activate it. But we all know it was already operating for hundreds of years. Every country has one. Then, so that was a lie to say it new. Then they say, oh we are not going to use it anymore, we were just proposing it. Your take on that. SP: Well, I was actually, but don’t call me professor. One thing I am not is a professor of anything, but I do join you in saying that I tried to stop that vehemently on the radio. My neighbor who is around the block was in charge of that and I don’t know her all that well, Ms Clarke. It was clear to me that they didn’t know what they were doing. What they were doing was creating what we call of fusion of what we call blackops, black operations meaning covert, and white noise, that means real facts and information. Well, you don’t do that in the military. The reason you don’t do that anywhere in the United States, but particularly in the military is that you compromise the integrity of our military and at the same time, it was the stupidest idea I’ve ever seen because they said they could divide the lies from the non-lies and I said that’s ridiculous. Furthermore, we have had problems in the past where the CIA and other organizations that instill disinformation in overseas countries and American reporters pick it up as fact. And then they have been really hoodwinked and the American public doesn’t know what is fact and what is reality. AJ: And then that discredits the media organs which are needed by the government to form public opinion. SP: Well, it’s interesting that you say that. There has been an interesting kind of balance. CNN has been very, I would say, pro-Palestinian or pro-Arab in my ways, what I would consider. Whereas, thank God my friend Roger Ailes is the head of the MSNBC network, which is more conservative that the FOX network, where you can see some questions. Like Chris Matthews and the O’Reilly Factor, where we can get into some issues and really start discussing them from another perspective. That is, it doesn’t have a particular bias that is lent by the government. Now, it’s true, sometimes the government brings in, you know, they want to give their message. But if that message is out of whack, I’m more than happy to go on the air and say that guy is not telling the truth. And that’s why I go on these radio stations to say look, in my opinion, now I’m not gospel and I’m not, everything I say is not written in stone. I’m as human as anybody else. But I’ve had a lot of experience. And one of the things that I do not believe in, is the notion that policy, that’s what is unfortunately true about Washington. Politicians consider most of us, as American citizens, as pretty stupid and not very bright. And they think they can herd us around. And the answer is, they are mistaken. And I’ve said that repeatedly, that they have underestimated the intelligence of the American public, repeatedly, administration after administration. But this time around, Alex, we don’t have the flexibility, because we are in what we would call a constant struggle or war against the El-Jihad and the Muslims – Islamic fundamentalists who are more than happy to destroy much of what we have. And we can’t afford, at the same time, to be told all kinds of stories that do not correspond to reality. So that is where I do agree with you, Alex. AJ: Okay, thank you for that. You were, again, deputy assistant Secretary of State.... SP: That’s correct. AJ: under Henry Kissinger, Vance and Baker, in key positions in many other administrations, you are also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, correct? SP: Yeah, I know what you are getting to. But I’m also a member of the National Rifle Association, too. I didn’t put that down. The real issue of the Council on Foreign Relations, this is where you would be concerned and others is that the Council on Foreign Relaions was once, many, many years ago, I’d say 15 or 20 years ago, a very elite Northeastern organization. What it has really turned into is pretty much, with all due respect, I think that is an old resume, but basically I haven’t attended a meeting in well over a year or two because it has become very much a rotary club. Basically it is the same people, returning by, saying the same thing and I eventually found it of very little help. It was an organization basically designed not to influence or direct everything, although, many of the secretaries of state have come out of there previously. Particularly before World War II, right after World War II. AJ: Since 1922, when it got founded, it was out of the Royal Institute of International Affairs.. SP: Right, it was the Rockefeller family that funded it and built it up and there was a sense that there was a conspiracy here and I can tell you for a fact that a member of the group that you are talking to, that it is not any more conspiratorial there. There is a far more serious organization that we are concerned about and that’s called the Carlyle Group. That’s a private equity group run by a guy named Carlucci who is a former Secretary of Defense that are profiting very handsomely from this war. And I’m very much concerned about it because it because it could spread it. AJ: See, that’s amazing because I got some of the – I don’t know if you knew that some people were making some transcripts of some of your comments on KFI and I’ve got them here, I don’t know if they are accurate. But in these, you talk about the CIA and bin Laden in July and the rest of this ... SP: Correct. AJ: That’s accurate, you said that? SP: Yes, that is accurate. AJ: Okay, Sir, I want to hear this from you when we get back. BREAK AJ: We are talking to Steve Pieczenik and he has got more titles than the Queen of England. I mean he has been all over the place. No, I’m serious. You have really led, and I envy all the dangerous and exciting situations you’ve been in and I didn’t even know if I could believe this bio and did some a little LexisNexis search and you actually play yourself down a bit on your website. Why don’t you give that to them Steve. SP: Oh, I can’t. Alex, I think you did a good job. I’m more than happy. Let’s talk about bin Laden. AJ: Your website for those who don’t know it... SP: Oh well, my website is stevepieczenik.com and I have a new book coming out called, “Active Pursuit” under the name of Alexander Court, and another one called “Active Measure” under Alexander Court, C-o-u-r-t, that will be coming out this week actually. It’s about the violation of Sweden, how hypocritical Sweden was during World War II, in establishing neutrality and actually helped the Nazis. AJ: Yeah, they made a lot of money off of it. SP: Oh, they made a huge amount and the Wallenburg family in particular, made a lot of money and then they violated everything we stood for. And we forced Raoul Wallenburg to join the OSS to make up for their totally treacherous behavior but the worst part about it was that I wanted to. See, I use fiction to put reality in. And one of the comments was, I went after one of their famous Nobel Prize winners, an extreme liberal, by the name of Gunnar Nordahl, who accused us... I remember when I was up in North Korea and I saw him, he said that Americans were despicable, we didn’t like human nature and all of that. I said I’m going after this guy and I found out and I put it in the book. And the Swedes have never denied it. This is a famous Nobel Peace Prize winner and he wrote the welfare state. How do you create the welfare state? Well, of all things, Alex, what happened was, and this was a fact they never denied and I put it in the book in “Active Measure” by Alexander Court, and you will read it there. What he did was to sterilize innocent Swedish women between 1945 and 1974. He sterilized over 75,000 innocent Swedish women who had nothing more than perhaps, you know, abnormal a little bit of behavior problem, or they were teenagers. But the real reason was for economic reasons. He didn’t want to have any problems with a potential abnormal child so they thought this was the best way to maintain their financial capability, maintain their welfare state. So much for greatest of free.... AJ: Sounds like Margaret Sanger. SP: Well, it’s a lot more deadly than Margaret Sanger. This is a real effort to really neutralize their entire population and the guys are saying you are doing it for the welfare of the state. That’s called euthanasia. AJ: Absolutely and we see that now being legalized in many of those Scandinavian countries. SP: That’s correct and they don’t... they have denied...they have said we are looking at, and actually the kids don’t know about it. But it’s one of the things that again, again not all Swedes are bad but the point is that their government has been playing two-faced with the world for a long time, as many governments have and that is what your point is, Alex. AJ: Now Dr. Pieczenik, what I want to talk to you about tonight.... SP: is bin Laden and the.... AJ: Let’s get to that. We are about to break and start the next hour. Let’s talk about it then if you’ve got time right now. SP: Absolutely, I’ll give you the time. AJ: I want to talk about Henry Kissinger. I mean this guy, I’ve got his quotes on record where he says if there is a big enough crisis, we’d accept a new world order, global government. I mean he has said stuff like this on television and you worked under this guy. From talking to you, it sounds like you’re 180 from the views of Henry Kissinger. SP: Well, you are right on the nose. I, this I can share with most of your audience, that I was asked to work for him personally and I said no. I couldn’t, for many reasons that I don’t want to get into but primarily that I didn’t have the temperament to tolerate his type of, what we call, narcissistic behavior. He is very impulsive, childish and he rants and raves. As a psychiatrist, I don’t tolerate that and set limits very quickly. Secondly, I didn’t agree with his views but his deputy, Lawrence Eagleburger, who has been under (garbled) management has seen me negotiate the release of about seventeen hostages, (garbled) and he asked me if I’d come on board and work for the U.S. government. I said, no problem. I had a military commission. So the answer is you are right. BREAK |
