FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

If Another 911 Happens It's Cheney - US Peace Movement
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Rowan Berkeley
Banned
Banned


Joined: 05 Aug 2007
Posts: 306

PostPosted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:28 pm    Post subject: If Another 911 Happens It's Cheney - US Peace Movement Reply with quote

THE KENNEBUNKPORT WARNING
http://www.911blogger.com/node/10905

(note from Rowan - the presence of Kaminski on the signatory list has caused Jon Gold to get all excited again, and he is organising protests to Tarpley)

To the American people, and to peace loving individuals everywhere:

Massive evidence has come to our attention which shows that the backers, controllers, and allies of Vice President Dick Cheney are determined to orchestrate and manufacture a new 9/11 terror incident, and/or a new Gulf of Tonkin war provocation over the coming weeks and months. Such events would be used by the Bush administration as a pretext for launching an aggressive war against Iran, quite possibly with nuclear weapons, and for imposing a regime of martial law here in the United States. We call on the House of Representatives to proceed immediately to the impeachment of Cheney, as an urgent measure for avoiding a wider and more catastrophic war. Once impeachment has begun, it will be easier for loyal and patriotic military officers to refuse illegal orders coming from the Cheney faction. We solemnly warn the people of the world that any terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction taking place inside the United States or elsewhere in the immediate future must be considered the prima facie responsibility of the Cheney faction. We urge responsible political leaders everywhere to begin at once to inoculate the public opinion of their countries against such a threatened false flag terror operation.

(Signed) A Group of US Opposition Political Leaders Gathered in Protest at the Bush Compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, August 24-25, 2007

CYNTHIA MCKINNEY, FORMER US CONGRESSWOMAN, GEORGIA

CINDY SHEEHAN, CANDIDATE FOR US CONGRESS, CALIFORNIA

CRAIG HILL, CANDIDATE FOR US CONGRESS, VERMONT GREEN PARTY

BRUCE MARSHALL, CONVENOR, PHILADELPHIA PLATFORM

JAMILLA EL-SHAFEI, KENNEBUNK PEACE DEPARTMENT

WEBSTER G. TARPLEY, AUTHOR

ANN WRIGHT, COLONEL US ARMY RESERVE, FORMER US DIPLOMAT

DR. DAHLIA WASFI, WWW.LIBERATETHIS.COM

GEORGE PAZ MARTIN

JOHN KAMINSKI, LAWYER, IMPEACHMENT ACTIVIST

_________________
http://niqnaq.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15160
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cheney is planning another 911
It will make the twin towers look like a damp firecracker.
It's now OFFICIAL!
Don't let them get away with it!

Encourage everyone to sign up to this - as the US Peace movement is taking this up so should we - spread it as far and wide as possible. And ask anyone you think has a bit of clout to sign up too!
Send to MP's Police, media etc etc. It will be an excuse to attack Iran.



contact
BRUCE MARSHALL, CONVENOR, PHILADELPHIA PLATFORM
http://actindependent.org/


_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15160
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is a link to an image of the signed declaration

http://www.bilderberg.org/kennebun.jpg
http://www.bilderberg-mirror.org.uk/kennebun.jpg

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Rowan Berkeley
Banned
Banned


Joined: 05 Aug 2007
Posts: 306

PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What happened about John Kaminski?
_________________
http://niqnaq.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This Kennebunkport Warning affair seems to be getting murkier and murkier, with Webster Tarpley and Kevin Barret - who I have a lot of time for - saying the signatories are genuine, and then Dahlia Wasfi (whom I have no clue about) stating, "Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney, and Jamilla El-Shafei, none of us signed that document."

Cynthia McKinney's signature is not even on the document, and I find it hard to believe an alleged comment from Webster Tarpley that Cindy Sheehan has succumbed to threats to deny the authenticity of the warning.





On the one hand I'm leaning towards the view that keeping the Cheney faction in the spotlight might help to deter them - at least somewhat from their more egregiously blatant stunts, but on the other hand forgery - if that were indeed the case - is a moral if not statutory criminal offence under any regime's legal code.
Even that of the Era of Sweetness and Light.

Triple pinch of salt taken and awaiting developments is my view at present.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/10947?page=1[/img]

_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.

It's them or us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
egw
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 101
Location: Brisbane, Australia

PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rowan Berkeley wrote:
What happened about John Kaminski?


It wasn't the same John Kaminski.

Though having just heard that there are doubts about who actually signed what, it occurs to me to wonder why on earth they - whoever they are - would choose to include this unknown 2nd John Kaminski as a signatory.

Why they would if their intentions were good, that is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15160
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have a listen to the full story of the Kennebubkport Warning here
http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=24495

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
egw
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 101
Location: Brisbane, Australia

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't bring myself to sit in front of a computer and listen to a recording of people talking. If it were Jesus and the Buddha, maybe, but not Tarpley. I learned yesterday that he has had Jim Fetzer on his show for a chat. Bleuchhh! I can only hope that if Tarpley ever says something important, someone will let me know.

He has done damage to his credibility with this Kennebunkport thing.

See here.

And here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thermate911
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 1451
Location: UEMS

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 3:48 pm    Post subject: Thoughts on Kennebunkpost et seq... Reply with quote

Can't agree with you, egw.

I've read and dissected this 'warning' numerous times now and, IMV, there's nothing in it that can be refuted. The 'massive evidence' expression could have been enlarged upon for sure, but we all know of the 'massive volume of evidence' - starting right back there with Norm Mineta and the NORAD/FAA 'dilemma'.

Have you noticed that those who have 'backed off' are women? Women of great heart but also women up to now not fully exposed to the ways of world's most powerful psychopaths?

We are all so mired in the product of psy-ops now it is becoming increasingly difficult not to treat it all as so much multi-dimensional chess with death the result of an error. I believe we might support this warning, regardless of all the axes to grind by the major players. It is a bald statement of truth, however far from being cast-iron evidence as yet. We know them by their acts.

Here's further psy-op stuff from the dubious CIA's KOS source to reinforce the point I'm not making!

""We Are Going To Hit Iran. Bigtime"
by Maccabee
Sat Sep 01, 2007 at 03:50:24 PM PDT

I have a friend who is an LSO on a carrier attack group that is planning and staging a strike group deployment into the Gulf of Hormuz. (LSO: Landing Signal Officer- she directs carrier aircraft while landing) She told me we are going to attack Iran. She said that all the Air Operation Planning and Asset Tasking are finished. That means that all the targets have been chosen, prioritized, and tasked to specific aircraft, bases, carriers, missile cruisers and so forth.

I asked her why she is telling me this.

Her answer was really amazing." ...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/1/183018/1527

-----------------------------------

Let's not fall prey to the divide and rule mob. Let's vote with our consciences and take advantage of any thread that leads to resolution of 9/11 and the collapse of the PNAC monster.
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
acrobat74
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 833

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TonyGosling wrote:
Cheney is planning another 911
It will make the twin towers look like a damp firecracker.
It's now OFFICIAL!
Don't let them get away with it!

Encourage everyone to sign up to this - as the US Peace movement is taking this up so should we - spread it as far and wide as possible. And ask anyone you think has a bit of clout to sign up too!
Send to MP's Police, media etc etc. It will be an excuse to attack Iran.

contact
BRUCE MARSHALL, CONVENOR, PHILADELPHIA PLATFORM
http://actindependent.org/


I noticed the US truth movement is handling this with very, very much scepticism. And that's an understatement.

Quite interesting to see Fetzer and Barrett jump on the 'warning' bandwagon.

By the way, where is this 'massive evidence' that the 'warning' talks about ?

Existence of real, tangible evidence easily differentiates reality from propaganda.

If such evidence existed presumably it would be useful in the actual effort to impeach Cheney, no?

If so, why has it not been provided, especially given the urgency of the matter?

Finally, US Senator Cynthia McKinney has confirmed, among other supposed signatories, that she did not sign the circulated document.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rowan Berkeley
Banned
Banned


Joined: 05 Aug 2007
Posts: 306

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are some very strange theories circulating on the US boards about this, such that Tarpley is sabotaging McKinney on behalf of Larouche. On the plus side, I see the issue has brought the always exhilerating Col. Jenny Sparks to the surface:
http://truthaction.org/forum/index.php

_________________
http://niqnaq.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
xmasdale
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1959
Location: South London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:40 pm    Post subject: Behind Anti-Iranian Threats Reply with quote

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6658



Behind Bush's Latest Anti-Iranian Threats


by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach, Global Research, August 31, 2007



President Bush's most recent ranting, in which he accused Iran of threatening to unleash a "nuclear holocaust," must be seen, for sure, in the context of the drumbeat for military aggression against the Islamic Republic.

Within the space of a few days, several articles appeared in the mainstream press, indicating that the Cheney project for launching a new war is on the front burner. Most explicit was the report of two British think tankers, Daniel Pletsch and Martin Butcher, issued on August 27 and leaked by Raw Story the following day. Their study, entitled, "Considering a war with Iran: A discussion paper on WMD in the Middle East," claimed that the US could destroy Iran's nuclear program, industrial base and government infrastructure within days.
But Bush's specific reference to Iran's alleged ambitions to develop a nuclear bomb, should be placed in the category of one who "doth protest too much." What Bush did NOT mention is a development of major significance, which may well have been the trigger for his wild assertions. This was the agreement reached by the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran, which proved that the persistent, rigorous approach pursued by the IAEA, to solve the conflict over Iran's nuclear energy program through diplomatic means, has yielded results which the Agency itself has dubbed a breakthrough. The contention of the Bush-Cheney administration, which is bent on war at all costs, has been that the efforts of the European Union group of three (Great Britain, Germany and France) as well as those of the IAEA, have been destined to failure, since Tehran was only interested in gaining time to build its bomb.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking to journalists in Tehran on August 28, announced unequivocably that he believed, on the basis of the agreement with the IAEA, that the entire matter should be considered "closed." This was not empty rhetoric of the sort often attributed to Ahmadinejad, but a statement of fact, as documented in the "Understandings of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the modalities of resolution of the outstanding issues," published on August 29, by the new Iranian all news station News TV, among others. The text makes clear that the discussion process involving Iranian chief negotiator Ali Larijani and his IAEA interlocutors, including Director General Mohammad ElBaradei, has borne its desired fruits: to wit, that through the question-and-answer process, whereby the IAEA has raised its queries regarding specific aspects of Iran's program and Iran has given its clarifications, has satisfied the agency's demands. In sum, the document states that certain specific issues have been fully resolved, and that those yet to be resolved, will be dealt with in the same manner, such that specific timeframes can be defined for "closing the dossier," as Ahmadinejad put it.

The text of the agreement was published on request of Iran, "as an INFCIRC document and to be made available to the public through the IAEA website." It states: "Pursuant to the negotiations between H.E. Dr. Larijani, I. R. of Iran's Secretary of Supreme National Security Council and H.E. Dr. ElBaradei, Director General of the IAEA, in Vienna; following the initiative and good will of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the agreement made, a high ranking delegation consisting of the directors of technical, legal and political departments of the IAEA, paid a visit to Tehran from 11 to 12 July 2007 during which 'Understandings of The Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues, Tehran 12 July 2007' were prepared."

The text reports on the following meetings that took place in Vienna and Tehran on July 24, and August 20-21, following which "both Parties reached the following understandings...." First, regarding the enirchment program, which has been targetted by the Bush-Cheney cabal as "proof" that Tehran wants the bomb. "The Agency and Iran agreed to cooperate in preparing the safeguards approach for the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant in accordance with Iran's Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. The draft text of the safeguards approach paper, and the facility attachment of IRN- were provided to Iran on 23 July 2007. The safeguards approach and the facility attachment were discussed during technical meetings in Iran between the Agency and the AEOI from 6 to 8 August 2007. Further discussions will be held with the aim of finalizing the facility attachment by the end of September 2007."

As for the heavy water reactor in Arak, "Iran agreed with the Agency's request to visit the heavy water research reactor (IR40) site in Arak. A successful visit took place on 30 July 2007." Furthermore, it is reported that "On 12 July 2007, Iran accepted the designation of five additional inspectors" and "On 12 July 2007, Iran agreed to issue one year multiple entry visas for 14 inspectors and staff of the Agency."

Under the rubric of "Past Outstanding Issues," the question of plutonium experiments was dealt with. Here, the joint text reports that in the course of July and August, the IAEA presented questions, and Iran, answers, to various issues. Then, in a sentence which might have caused heart tremors for Dick Cheney, the text states: "On 20 August 2007 the Agency stated that earlier statements made by Iran <are consistent with the Agency's findings>, and <thus this matter is resolved> (emphasis added). This will be communicated officially by the Agency to Iran through a letter."

Regarding other vital issues, a clear timeline is set for the question-and-answer process to yield its results. regarding the issue of P1-P2, the IAEA says the Pu experiments should close by August 31, and that it will therefore provide all its remaining questions to Iran by that date. Discussions are scheduled then for September 24-25 in Tehran, followed by a mid-October meeting, both to clarify the questions. "The Agency's target date for the closure of this issue is November 2007," says the text.

And, for remaining issues, the same sensible approach is adopted: "once all the above mentioned issues are concluded and their files are closed," further questions can be submitted by the IAEA, again with specific dates, and Iran will respond, within deadlines.

In a final paragraph entitled "General Understandings," the document asserts five points which must have sent Bush ballistic. Since it is absurd to imagine that the establishment press will give the public any insight into what is going on here between the IAEA and Iran, it is worth quoting the points in full:

"1. These modalities cover all remaining issues and the Agency confirmed that there are no other remaining issues and ambiguities regarding Iran's past nuclear program and activities.

2. The Agency agreed to provide Iran with all remaining questions according to the above work plan. This means that after receiving the questions, no other questions are left. Iran will provide the Agency with the required clarifications and information.

3. The Agency's delegation is of the view that the agreement on the above issues shall further promote the efficiency of the implementation of safeguards in Iran and its ability to conclude the exclusive peaceful nature of the Iran's nuclear activities.

4. The Agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of the declared nuclear materials at the enrichment facilities in Iran and has therefore concluded that it remains in peaceful use.

5. The Agency and Iran agreed that after the implementation of the above work plan and the agreed modalities for resolving the outstanding issues, the implementation of safeguards in Iran will be conducted in a routine manner."

The gist of this document is that, contrary to the hysterical ravings from the White House, diplomacy does work, and that if Iran were treated as a normal country, with due respect, as Tehran has always insisted, then progress could be made on any front. The implications of the IAEA-Iran "understandings" are profound: we are not dealing here with a "rogue state" or a member of the "axis of evil," but with a sovereign nation which correctly asserts its right to nuclear energy technology, in the framework of the IAEA and NPT.

The fact that the IAEA reached this groundbreaking agreement has thrown a major monkey-wrench into the Bush-Cheney cabal's plans for war, based on their claims that Iran is building the bomb. But then, Washington will quickly retort, aren't the Iranian Revolutionary Guards killing our troops in Iraq?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xmasdale
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1959
Location: South London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course we can speculate on all sorts of scenarios unfolding.

Bush is becoming an increasing embarrassment and liability to the Republican party. He may be drinking again and evidence seems to suggest that Cheney is the gung-ho boy pushing to advance the pro-war lobby's agenda.

So why not assassinate Bush, make it look as though the Iranians did it, declare, as Blair did, that an investigation would be a ludicrous diversion because we know who did it, and have Cheney launch an all-out attack on Iran and possibly declare martial law at home?

Would Russia tolerate it; would China? Would they risk a nuclear war on their doorstep in an attempt to stop it?

I shudder at the evil which would unfold.

This madness must be exposed and stopped.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 5281
Location: East London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't find anything on Cindy Sheehan's 'Gold Star Families for Peace' site, except the following; if she had signed, one would expect it to be there:

THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING


Anti-war protesters march in Kennebunkport
August 25, 2007

KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine --Even though President Bush wasn't in town, hundreds of anti-war protesters including Cindy Sheehan marched by the Bush family compound on a scorching, muggy Saturday.

"This is really energizing to be with people who want this war to end," Sheehan, who lost a son in Iraq, told the cheering crowd. "We can't put our signs away and sit on our couches. We have to press Congress to end this war."

Activists from a number of states came to a local school to begin a two-mile march to the Bush summer home at Walker's Point. Along the way some pounded drums, chanted and carried signs and banners with slogans such as "Don't Pay for this War" and "Care for Vets."

Police gave no official crowd count, but other observers estimated that at least 1,200 demonstrators turned out. One of the marchers, Alice Copeland Brown of Canton, Mass., said about 3,000 people were there.

Brown said her son has recently returned from duty in Iraq, but others are not coming home alive. Brown said billions of dollars are being wasted on the war that could be used for schools, health care and other public services.

"Our children are dying for nothing," she said.

Dick Nelson of Lebanon, N.H., said he was visiting Maine and decided to come to the rally with his 16-year-old daughter, Andrea.

"It seemed like our civic duty," said Nelson.

A small-scale Vietnam Wall-like monument, listing the names of the soldiers killed in Iraq, was set up on the school's sports field where the protesters assembled. Organizers included veterans' peace groups.

After the march, the Indigo Girls musical group entertained the demonstrators at the rally site.

Some protesters called for Bush's and Vice President Dick Cheney's impeachment, but others had more moderate messages of support for the troops and opposition to the war.

"You can support the troops and not support the war," said Anne Chay, whose son is serving in Iraq.

Democratic presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich, who was also a frequent visitor to Maine during his 2004 campaign, told the crowd, "We simply have to get out of Iraq. We have to end this war."

Organizers had previously hoped to draw as many as 10,000 protesters to the rally.

Observers said verbal skirmishes with some of the counter-protesters broke out along the march route, but no violence or physical confrontations were reported. As many as a few dozen counter-protesters were said to be in the area.



© Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

_________________
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thermate911
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 1451
Location: UEMS

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
This madness must be exposed and stopped.


I started a tally of posts around the net which that phrase - you're the 2300th I've counted since 17th July.

It is also the phrase that makes the 'Kennebunkport Warning' seem entirely relevant and justified at this juncture.

Short of storming the Whitehouse, Rockefeller Institute, Fed Res & CFR, what more can be done to alert the world's population to the fact that their immediate fate lies in the hands of a few known psychopaths and war criminals?
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 5281
Location: East London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems it was a hoax:

http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/2007/08/kennebunkport-warning-hoax-s hreds.html

_________________
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thermate911
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 1451
Location: UEMS

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hardly, outsider!

I quote from a quote in your link to winter patriot:-

"Based on emails I have received, it is obvious to me that the big name people are afraid, but I believe that they should not defame those who asked them to sign the petition.

In my view, this accusation of falsified documenting casts a cloud of suspicion over the brave efforts of those signators who are standing by their decision to sign the petition. I stand with those who signed it who are not backing down.

Laurie Dobson"

---

I think disinfo is going into overdrive. FUD, too! This document states the truth - that is enough to support those who wrote and signed it - to the hilt - NOW.

What's the alternative - watch whilst those who speak out FOR ALL OF US get carved up and trashed?

What are we - flakes, wimps or genuinely serious about neutralising the NWO? Do you think it can be achieved entirely without loss of 'good guys? History implies otherwise...
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
egw
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 101
Location: Brisbane, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A post by arabesque:

In Summary:

We now have FIVE people who:

1. CLAIM they did NOT sign the Kennebunk Warning
2. Say they DID sign another document
3. INDEPENDENTLY claim the document signed involved IMPEACHMENT
4. SUPPORT 9/11 truth and another investigation
5. HAVE NOT attacked the authors of this document

On the other side we have:

1. Multiple accusations of "liar", ad-hominems, and unproven speculations about "fearful signers"
2. No apologies for these accusations and ad-hominems against non-9/11 truth activists.
3. Direct support for DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS (Fetzer, Tarpley, Craig Hill (citing Judy Wood), and Morgan Stack have ALL supported DEW in some form).
4. No indications that the signatures will be removed from the warning.
_________________
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6316

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Someone just dropped this on Myspace bulletins Sad

Quote:
I found this Posted at Rumor mill news and Rense


I have a friend who is an LSO on a carrier attack group that is planning and staging a strike group deployment into the Gulf of Hormuz. (LSO: Landing Signal Officer- she directs carrier aircraft while landing) She told me we are going to attack Iran. She said that all the Air Operation Planning and Asset Tasking are finished. That means that all the targets have been chosen, prioritized, and tasked to specific aircraft, bases, carriers, missile cruisers and so forth.

I asked her why she is telling me this.

Her answer was really amazing...

She started in the Marines and after 8 years her term was up. She had served on a smaller Marine carrier, and found out through a friend knew there was an opening for a junior grade LSO in a training position on a supercarrier. She used the reference and the information and applied for a transfer to the United States Navy. Since she had experience landing F-18Cs and Cobra Gunships, and an unblemished combat record, she was ratcheted into the job, successfully changing from the Marines to the Navy. Her role is still aligned with the Marines since she generally is assigned to liason with the Marine units deploying off her carrier group.

Like most Marines and former Marines, she is largely apolitical. The fact is, most Marines are trigger pullers and most trigger pullers could care less who the President is. They simply want to be the tip of the sword when it comes to defending the country. She voted once in her life and otherwise was always in some forward post on the water during election season.

Something is wrong with the Navy and the Marines in her view. Always ready to go in harms way, Marines rarely ever question unless it's a matter of tactics or honor. But something seems awry. Junior and senior officers are starting to grumble, roll their eyes in the hallways. The strain of deployments is beginning to hit every jot and tittle of the Marines and it's beginning to seep into the daily conversation of Marines and Naval officers in command decision.

"I know this will sound crazy coming from a Naval officer", she said. "But we're all just waiting for this administration to end. Things that happen at the senior officer level seem more and more to happen outside of the purview of XOs and other officers who typically have a say-so in daily combat and flight operations. Today, orders just come down from the mountaintop and there's no questioning. In fact, there is no discussing it. I have seen more than one senior commander disappear and then three weeks later we find out that he has been replaced. That's really weird. It's also really weird because everyone who has disappeared has questioned whether or not we should be staging a massive attack on Iran."

"We're not stupid. Most of the members of the fleet read well enough to know what is going on world-wise. We also realize that anyone who has any doubts is in danger of having a long military career yanked out from under them. Keep in mind that most of the people I serve with are happy to be a part of the global war on terror. It's just that the touch points are what we see since we are the ones out here who are supposedly implementing this grand strategy. But when you liason with administration officials who don't know that Iranians don't speak Arabic and have no idea what Iranians live like, then you start having second thoughts about whether these Administration officials are even competent."

I asked her about the attack, how limited and so forth.

"I don't think it's limited at all. We are shipping in and assigning every damn Tomahawk we have in inventory. I think this is going to be massive and sudden, like thousands of targets. I believe that no American will know when it happens until after it happens. And the consequences...whatever the consequences...they will have to be lived with. I am sure if my father knew I was telling someone in a news organization that we were about to launch a supposedly secret attack that it would be treason. But something inside me tells me to tell it anyway."

I asked her why she was suddenly so cynical.

"I have become cynical only recently. I also don't believe anyone will be able to stop this. Bush has become something of an Emperor. He will give the command, and cruise missiles will fly and aircraft will fly and people will die, and yet few of us here are really able to cobble together a great explanation of why this is a good idea. Of course many of us can give you the 4H Club lecture on democracy in the Mid East. But if you asked any of the flight officers whether they have a clear idea of what the goal of this strike is, your answer would sound like something out of a think tank policy paper. But it's not like Kosovo or when we relieved the tsunami victims. There everyone could tell you in a sentence what we were here doing."

"That's what's missing. A real sense of purpose. What's missing is the answer to what the hell are we doing out here threatening this country with all this power? Last night in the galley, an ensign asked what right do we have to tell a sovereign nation that they can't build a nuke. I mean the table got EF Hutton quiet. Not so much because the man was asking a question that was off culture. But that he was asking a good question. In fact, the discussion actually followed afterwards topside where someone in our group had to smoke a cigarette. The discussion was intelligent but also in lowered voices. It's like we aren't allowed to ask the questions that we always ask before combat. It's almost as if the average seaman or soldier is doing all the policy work."

She had to hang up. She left by telling me that she believes the attack is a done deal. "It's only a matter of time before their orders come and they will be sent to station and told to go to Red Alert. She said they were already practicing traps, FARP and FAST." (Trapping is the act of catching the tension wires when landing on the carrier, FARP is Fleet Air Combat Maneuvering Readiness Program- practice dogfighting- and FAST is Fleet Air Superiority Training).

She seemed lost. The first time in my life I have ever heard her sound off rhythm, or unsure of why she is doing something. She knows that there is something rotten in the Naval Command and she, like many of her associates are just hoping that the election brings in someone new, some new situation, or something.

"Yes. We're gong to hit Iran, bigtime. Whatever political discussion that are going in is window dressing and perhaps even a red herring. I see what's going on below deck here in the hangars and weapons bays. And I have a sick feeling about how it's all going to turn out."

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6316

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

and this:-
Quote:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2369001.ece

THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: “Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.” It was, he added, a “very legitimate strategic calculus”.

President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust”. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late”.

Related Links
Hardliner takes over Revolutionary Guards
One Washington source said the “temperature was rising” inside the administration. Bush was “sending a message to a number of audiences”, he said � to the Iranians and to members of the United Nations security council who are trying to weaken a tough third resolution on sanctions against Iran for flouting a UN ban on uranium enrichment.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last week reported “significant” cooperation with Iran over its nuclear programme and said that uranium enrichment had slowed. Tehran has promised to answer most questions from the agency by November, but Washington fears it is stalling to prevent further sanctions. Iran continues to maintain it is merely developing civilian nuclear power.

Bush is committed for now to the diplomatic route but thinks Iran is moving towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. According to one well placed source, Washington believes it would be prudent to use rapid, overwhelming force, should military action become necessary.

Israel, which has warned it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, has made its own preparations for airstrikes and is said to be ready to attack if the Americans back down.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which uncovered the existence of Iran’s uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, said the IAEA was being strung along. “A number of nuclear sites have not even been visited by the IAEA,” he said. “They’re giving a clean bill of health to a regime that is known to have practised deception.”

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, irritated the Bush administration last week by vowing to fill a “power vacuum” in Iraq. But Washington believes Iran is already fighting a proxy war with the Americans in Iraq.

The Institute for the Study of War last week released a report by Kimberly Kagan that explicitly uses the term “proxy war” and claims that with the Sunni insurgency and Al-Qaeda in Iraq “increasingly under control”, Iranian intervention is the “next major problem the coalition must tackle”.

Bush noted that the number of attacks on US bases and troops by Iranian-supplied munitions had increased in recent months � “despite pledges by Iran to help stabilise the security situation in Iraq”.

It explains, in part, his lack of faith in diplomacy with the Iranians. But Debat believes the Pentagon’s plans for military action involve the use of so much force that they are unlikely to be used and would seriously stretch resources in Afghanistan and Iraq.

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Skeptic
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 485

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks for those DD!
_________________
UK-based alternative news site:
http://www.underthecarpet.co.uk

HipHop:
http://www.myspace.com/skepticandjidsames
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
acrobat74
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 833

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Statements like 'I have a friend who...' posted somewhere on the Internet are not evidence for a major military confrontation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15160
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's clear, with plenty of evidence already posted, that this is a deadly serious announcement and warning.

Let us all hope and pray that Cheney's plans are thwarted.


Link



Link

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
acrobat74
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 833

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TonyGosling wrote:
It's clear, with plenty of evidence already posted


What evidence exactly are you talking about?

'I have a friend who...'?

Why not share this 'plenty of evidence' with the US authorities and impeach Cheney?

Quote:
that this is a deadly serious announcement and warning.


Again, based on...?
Quite a few people in the movement now treat it as a hoax.

I have no doubts the money-changing crazies would love some bloodshed, but let's not get carried away here.

What I see is:
- the Brits pissing off from Basra
- IAEA confirming 'the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activities'
- At the same time, I also see 3 US carriers in the Gulf of course (Tarpley)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15160
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I tell you what, I'll repost the file. In this sort of world situation where the rule of international law has been broken down and the United Nations rendered impotent it's a bad idea to ignore warnings our peers across the pond. I consider these people to be our peers.
acrobat74 wrote:
What evidence exactly are you talking about?

I suggest you watch the films and read the 56 page dossier before you pass judgement.

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

acrobat74 wrote:
TonyGosling wrote:
It's clear, with plenty of evidence already posted


What evidence exactly are you talking about?

'I have a friend who...'?

Why not share this 'plenty of evidence' with the US authorities and impeach Cheney?

Quote:
that this is a deadly serious announcement and warning.


Again, based on...?
Quite a few people in the movement now treat it as a hoax.

I have no doubts the money-changing crazies would love some bloodshed, but let's not get carried away here.

What I see is:
- the Brits pissing off from Basra
- IAEA confirming 'the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activities'
- At the same time, I also see 3 US carriers in the Gulf of course (Tarpley)


British departure may indeed herald an attack on Iran.
Iran has threatened to hold hostage British forces which are across the border from Iran if attacked.

By moving them close to an airport if an attack does happen they will be flown out at short notice...

Its not yet clear what is happening. Some pointers to think about.

Seems the planets are in alignment for
more imperialist agression:

1. Collapse of US credit markets (almost there, not quite yet)
2. Total dissilusionment with imperialist war
3. Stagnation with US military aims in Iraq
4. Republican party coming apart over Iraq
5. Lowest polls for Bush in any presidency
6. Local an area wide elections in November (no federal but lots of
state wide)
7. 3 carrier groups in Gulf

It's all bad, and, a sign of desperation. Some have postulating that
there will more likely be an attack in Pakistan than on Iraq, which is
politically less tenable (all of US allies in the Gulf *oppose* an
attack on Iran, as it happens, even Saudi Arabia).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thermate911
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 1451
Location: UEMS

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's good to see at least some here are keeping focussed on the message rather than the strange and divisive antics of the messengers.

I won't repeat myself about the 'massive evidence' phrase - pls see above.

What does concern me most is the wall of noise and fog going up on most 911 sites right now. From Joan & arabesque on truthaction to LaRouche exposees, so many posters seem to be ignoring the import of the actual message altogether.

CoIntelPro? Partly. Yet there are so many vested interests involved, so many axes to grind, so much in-fighting, one could almost be made to believe that known FACT was irrelevant!

The central known fact is that psychopath Cheney has a record of skullduggery going back decades. Why should he be treated any differently now his 'escapades' are so widely documented?

Corroboration of the 'Scherff' family connections and dealings would lend further credence to a 'grand' longterm design of 'creative destructionism' now looking so attractive to the BoGrove / Bilderberg mob

Recap:

There is nothing inherently false or misleading in this Warning - no mention of exotic destructive mechanisms - just a declaration that responsibility for the world's pain is now placed fairly and squarely where it belongs. On the Rockefellers, the Mellons, the Cheneys, the Warburgs and 10,000 other 'god-like' creatures of darkness.

The 'end game' has commenced. Why should humanity at large lose out to a few psychopaths?

---
a mundane footnote - this forums DB is acting up again, so apologies if this becomes multiple postings...!
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 5281
Location: East London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't believe for a moment that Cynthia and Cindy signed the Declaration then 'chickened out' and denied it, and I think it's highly irresponsible (and no way to greet our guest Cynthia Mc Kinney) by suggesting it.
Cynthia and Cindy have shown incredible courage in 'speaking Truth to Power'; it's worse than irresponsible, it's downright despicable to make these suggestions of cowardice with no evidence.

_________________
'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6316

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

acrobat74 wrote:
Statements like 'I have a friend who...' posted somewhere on the Internet are not evidence for a major military confrontation.


It would seem the only proof Joe Public gets is after the event has taken place, would we be in a position to do anything if we knew? Who knows? What are you suggesting? Maybe we could buy food run to the hills? Maybe we'd be worse off? Perhaps your plan is all worked out? I know mine isn't Razz

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
acrobat74
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 833

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Disco_Destroyer wrote:
acrobat74 wrote:
Statements like 'I have a friend who...' posted somewhere on the Internet are not evidence for a major military confrontation.


It would seem the only proof Joe Public gets is after the event has taken place, would we be in a position to do anything if we knew? Who knows? What are you suggesting? Maybe we could buy food run to the hills? Maybe we'd be worse off? Perhaps your plan is all worked out? I know mine isn't Razz


Nah I'm just trying to push the good people here for more precision & clarity.

It's about semantics more than anything: a plethora of indications is just that, not evidence.

I know, there's only so much one can do. Best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth News All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group