Kennebunkport Warning

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by FredM, Dec 10, 2007.

  1. FredM

    Thread Starter Senior Member

    Dec 27, 2005
    124
    1
    This and other can be found at www.reopen911.org

    THE KENNEBUNKPORT WARNING

    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
    JAMILLA EL-SHAFEI, KENNEBUNK PEACE DEPARTMENT
    ANN WRIGHT, COLONEL US ARMY RESERVE, FORMER US DIPLOMAT
    DR. DAHLIA WASFI, WWW.LIBERATETHIS.COM
    JOHN KAMINSKY, LAWYER, IMPEACHMENT ACTIVIST, PRESIDENT, MAINE LAWYERS FOR DEMOCRACY
    GEORGE PAZ MARTIN
    WEBSTER G. TARPLEY, AUTHOR
    CRAIG HILL, CANDIDATE FOR US CONGRESS, VERMONT GREEN PARTY
    BRUCE MARSHALL, CONVENOR, PHILADELPHIA PLATFORM
     
  2. thingmaker3

    Retired Moderator

    May 16, 2005
    5,072
    6
    This colorful little burp in the American political feeding frenzy is from way back in August. Old news.

    Folk outside the US of A may not realize just how big a joke the "Green Party" really is.

    Even folk inside the US don't seem to understand what does and does not constitute grounds for impeachment. Interested parties should check Article II section IV of the US Constitution. 21st century America is not 17th century England.
     
  3. FredM

    Thread Starter Senior Member

    Dec 27, 2005
    124
    1
    August may seem like a long time ago.. but it is only 4 months!
    The real question is this.. Is there any basis for this warning? - I do not know the answer to this question.

    I have seen the DVD "Confronting the evidence" (the call to re-open the 9/11 investigation) and there were too many issues raised for me to feel at all comfortable that the enquiry was thourough and unbiased.

    Issues were raised which defy explanation - which is to be expected on a complex matter - but some of the major issues were never investigated at all by the 9/11 investigation..

    If there was ANY chance that 9/11 was deliberately 'enabled' by any persons in power in the USA, this should have been explored in (at least) the same way as any murder enquiry.. but these issues were not even looked at!

    for example.. It is claimed that Military aircaft which would normally have been available to scramble on 9/11 had been moved out of the area directly on Cheney's instructions..

    This could have been (a) A coincidence (b) A deliberate action to assist the 9/11 assault (c) That the terrorists obtained information abut placement of military aircraft, and timed the attack to coincide.

    The probablity of (a) should have been determined, and if (a) was highly improbable, serious investigation of (c) and (d) should have been undertaken.

    But NO REAL INVESTIGATION was done for this, or for MANY other extremely strange facts about 9/11.

    If 9/11 was enabled by persons at the white house (and I personally believe this likely) then the warning of another event like 9/11 orchestrated by the white house needs to be looked at seriousy.

    It seems that Jimmy Walter has given up (I dont blame him!) on wwwrepen911.org but http://911truthcampaign.net/index.php
    is still operating and DVDs etc are still available virtually free here.
     
  4. thingmaker3

    Retired Moderator

    May 16, 2005
    5,072
    6
    August of an even-numbered year is a very significant month to an American. It is when every American political party goes into over-drive to discredit the others. Anything making the news in August - especially if it comes from a rally at Kennebunkport - must be taken with a grain of salt.

    As to the (several year old) conspiracy theory that we ourselves are responsible for the 9/11 plane crashes, I've read a lot of it. It doesn't add up. It would take too many trained ninja working in too tightly a controlled fashion. The State Department just isn't that coordinated.

    And Dick Cheney is just not that creative. Nor does he have that kind of control over the military.

    Apply Occam's Razor. Which is more likely:

    1) A well-orchestrated conspiracy involving hundreds of high-placed individuals

    or

    2) Day-to-day oversights leaving a loophole big enough for a handful of fanatics to fly airplanes through?

    The shortcoming of Capitol Hill was not malice, it was an incompetence. Our sin was not some sinister killing of our own, it was our naive lack of foresight.
     
  5. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Look at the bright side of all this - the aliens are no longer accused of having control of the White House. Haven't see one shaking hands with the prez in months.
     
  6. FredM

    Thread Starter Senior Member

    Dec 27, 2005
    124
    1
    Occam's Razor cannot be reliably used on matters where human behaviour is involved.. It is not even absolutely reliable where the subject is completely 'rational' or 'scientific'.. Try applying Occam's razor to the 'conspiracy theory' regarding the trigger for the Vietnam war, and one would have concluded that the theory was false - In fact, it turned out that the trigger was, indeed, a fabrication.

    I am not saying that I believe ALL the theories put forward about 9/11 - Sure, if explosives had been pre-positioned, and the planes had been modified, etc, then hundreds of peeps would need to be employed / in-the-know.. But this does not mean that some smaller "assistance" could not have been provided by a FEW conspirators in high places - Perhaps only 5 to 10 people would be needed to implement diversion of military aircraft, for example.

    Look at the number of people involved in Watergate.. No, Occam's razor "proves" nothing on this issue
     
  7. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Well, Gen. MacArthur grounded all the planes in the Philippines long enough for the Japanese to destroy all of them. Was that a plot to help defeat the US?

    Joe Kennedy, Jr, died when his B-17 blew up as he turned on the autopilot during Operation Athena (I think it was). Just an accident, or a plot to get him out of the way so his younger brother Jack could be put into the White House?

    Franz Ferdinand kept to his schedule despite an earlier attempt on his life with a bomb, which enabled Gavrillo Prinzep to successfully assassinate him. Was he a participant in a plot to start WWI?

    The fact that something happened and a few people could have mitigated/avoided it does not prove a conspiracy. In fact, Watergate tends to establish that conspiracies are not terribly likely to go unnoticed.
     
  8. thingmaker3

    Retired Moderator

    May 16, 2005
    5,072
    6
    Then there's the question of clear motive. I've read the shadowy conspiracy engineered 9/11 so that the conspirators could... conspirators could...

    That's were it breaks down. The alleged "motive" is everything from oil to corporate profits to world domination to revenge for an assassination attempt on George Senior. The shadowy conspirators have equally shadowy motives.

    But then Jimmy Walter has been chasing shadows for half a century!:D
     
  9. FredM

    Thread Starter Senior Member

    Dec 27, 2005
    124
    1
    Agreed.. BUT on an issue like 9/11, ANY POSSIBILITY that the << few people (who) could have mitigated/avoided it >> did this deliberately, should have been completely eliminated.

    It was (is) the fact that there was NEVER any REAL INDEPENDANT investigation of 9/11 which casts a big question mark over what REALLY happened.. It is the way that 9/11 has been used as a justification for numerous illegal actions by the USA which gives the conspiracy theorists credibility..

    The way that 9/11 was somehow "linked" to Iraq, despite the fact that it had nothing to do with 9/11 (Saudi, on the other hand..) .. The way that the American targets for 9/11 were named, even before the dust had settled.. The way that 9/11 debris was removed and disposed of, and the speed / method of doing this (preventing any examination).. The way the buildings collapsed .. The vanishing Pentagon plane .. All give grounds for questions as to whether "The whole truth, and nothing but the truth" has been given. I think it likely that Something extremely strange happened on 9/11 - And that some cover-up is a big possibility..

    And I DO NOT LIKE THE FACT that an event like 9/11, which had (has) MAJOR implications for the world, should have gone without any real investigation - particularly if there is ANY possibility that those running the USA had any part in deliberately enabling this event.

    And, while there is ANY possibility that 9/11 was 'enabled' by persons in the white house, warnings like Kennebunkport must be observed.
     
  10. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    Do you honestly believe the controlled explosion theory?

    Dave
     
  11. FredM

    Thread Starter Senior Member

    Dec 27, 2005
    124
    1
    I do not believe it.. I think it is HIGHLY unlikely that an operation to plant explosives in several high profile buildings could have been performed without being noticed.. I think it highly unlikely that, had such an action occurred, no leak about this operation would have been made by someone (although, if such a leak had happened, would it ever have been made public?).. BUT..

    I do believe that the issues should have been independently evaluated..
    Unlikely may not be the same as impossible..
    There MAY be a super-secret team in the CIA (or wherever) with the capability and mentality to commit an act like this.. there MAY be (?!)

    Enough (video) data is probably still available for experts to evaluate the collapse of the buildings - despite there being no remaining debris available for analysis.. A thorough independent Multinational scientific evaluation of ALL questions SHOULD be done - Preferably under the supervision of the ICC.

    This is not an issue like JFK.. This is an issue of utmost global significance - Wars are being fought over it, more to come.. ALL and EVERY doubt must be addressed transparently.
     
Loading...