truthaction.org

[Col. Jenny Sparks]

[Dem Bruce Lee Stylez!]

[medicis]

[aldo-p2]

Cohorts? Hmm.

Perhaps you have never heard of the power of individual action? Individual thought? Individual's sense of what is right, what is necessary in any given circumstance?

Thanks medici for confirming that even (possibly?) well meaning Americans have quite got out of the way of independent action. Group hugs and this obvious 'laager mentality' are the NWO's best weapons - and they don't even have to try, as you are sinking yourselves - it would seem almost deliberate.

I will bow out with a repeat of what would be considered a deep Freudian slip here in Europe:-

[medicis]

Regarding aldo-p2

[Cohorts? Hmm.

Perhaps you have never heard of the power of individual action? Individual thought? Individual's sense of what is right, what is necessary in any given circumstance?

Thanks medici for confirming that even (possibly?) well meaning Americans have quite got out of the way of independent action. Group hugs and this obvious 'laager mentality' are the NWO's best weapons - and they don't even have to try, as you are sinking yourselves - it would seem almost deliberate. ]

-- actually, I much prefer rum. Or tequila in a pinch. Never much cared for ‘laager’.
I am curious, however. Exactly what ‘independent action’ can you attest to on your own part?

[I will bow out with a repeat of what would be considered a deep Freudian slip here in Europe:-

Quote:
at every available oportunity we out those who have given us cause to be untrustworthy.
Now doesn't that sound just like a Bushism to you? From the responses I have received here, it appears that we are all 'untrustworthy' when it comes to fighting for truth and justice. ]

-- Did you mean parapraxis or projection? In any case, that wasn’t my statement so why are you placing it here? Who is the “we” in “it appears we are all ‘untrustworthy’ “ …? Further, exactly what fights ‘for truth and justice’ do you claim ownership of?


[So the NWO have won - they needn't have bothered making any effort after all, as we're doing it all for them.
.
Enjoy your freedom while you can. The time is now numbered in weeks. ]

-- I am so glad you included yourself.

[A word about Cindy Sheehan, a very brave woman with a great heart, much damaged by circumstance. Such decency and honesty is surely worth preserving yet she does not have the tools to withstand her foe. No utterly decent person has. The best they can do is stand firm in love and light and leave the immediate fight to those who have already been burned and tainted by this greatest foe humanity has ever had to come to grips with. ]

-- So, by implication from your statement, I wonder, in exactly which ways have you become indecent?

[I repeat, in my grossest conceit (actually born of a combination of experience and age): You are still sleepwalking - or worse... ]

-- I would love for you to define “worse”. Care to take a stab at it? I’m also slightly curious regarding your “experience and age”. Further, conceit is conceit no matter how produced. Arrogance. If there has been a signal behavior I’ve witnessed in the KW group it has been that. Which you acknowledge sharing. I recall back in the sixties or perhaps the 70’s watching Jacob Bronowski’s ‘Ascent of Man’ and reading his book. He expressed the seminal insight, whilst gathering some dirt from a field at Auschwitz, that the greatest crime of the Nazi regime was arrogance. Arrogantly believing only ‘they’ knew the truth. Arrogantly imposing their beliefs and ‘solutions’ upon their fellow man by whatever means they felt necessary.
Perhaps when you to come to a site like this - or any other place of discussion - if you were to honestly propose your concerns and possible solutions, approaches and strategies you believed might stop the NWO and engage in debate of them with due respect to other’s views and persons, perhaps you might get a little further. Perhaps we all would. But you haven’t done that. All I’ve read from you is the dire warnings (yes, I and I presume others here know as much as you about what is looming) and the arrogance that it must be your way or the highway. But interestingly, you have never once explicated just what your way (or you and your ‘nebulous cohorts’) actual strategies and tactics are. ALL you have done is criticize and ‘ad hominize’ the folks here. In amongst your dire proclamations. Kind of the ‘Bizzaro World’ version of ‘How to win friends and influence enemies’.

[A final clarification: I (and my nebulous 'cohorts', of course) have no affiliation with any group, movement or creed, only that of fighting evil with all my (oh, sorry, 'our') might until my last breath. OTOH, it appears you here on 'truthaction'(!) would rather tackle ancilliary, lesser evil problems to no real effect.]

-- Precisely what effect have you (and your ‘cohorts’) had? In any place. In any respect. Other than to create division and discord. Very effectively. Arrogantly. Concerned viewers want to know.
I am not a Christian but the ‘By their fruits.…’ admonition does come to mind.

[IOW, 'Fiddling whilst Rome burns'.]

Seems to me you are simply shooting Greek fire all about.

[Visibility 9-11]

<a

Message from Chris Emery, OKC Bombing Investigation Committee Re: Kennebunkport Warning

To Whom It May Concern:

After carfeful review of the conduct and statements made by some individuals responsible for the drafting and promotion of the KW document and subsequent postings of that document on various websites showing signatures that are allegedly NOT approved by the signees; I am withdrawing my support of the KW document and my signature from the list off signees offering such support.

It is unfortunate that verbal attacks have been made against personal friends of mine during the promotion of the KW document. I know first hand that these verbal attacks are unfounded and counterproductive to the 911 Truth truth movement.

Therefore: I am withdrawing my name from the list of signatories of the KW document effective immediately and I have informed the writers and promoters of the KW document as such.

Chris Emery
OTR Films, LLC
OKC, OK

[Visibility 9-11]

To: tarpley@tarpley.net
Cc: chrisemery@[redacted]
Subject: PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM KW DOCUMENT SIGNEE SUPPORT LIST
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 20:46:51 -0400

To Webster Tarpley and Bruce Marshall:

After carfeful review of the conduct and statements made by some individuals responsible for the drafting and promotion of the KW document and subsequent postings of that document on various websites showing various signatures that are NOT approved by the signees; I am withdrawing my support of the KW document and my signature from the list off signees offering such support.

It is unfortunate that verbal attacks have been made against personal friends of mine during the promotion of the KW document. I know first hand that these verbal attacks are unfounded and counterproductive to the 911 Truth truth movement.

Please make no mistake that I do support the principle of the document calling for the immediate, resolute impeachement of VP Dick Cheney.

I DO NOT agree with the unfounded statements made about some 911 truth activists and radio show hosts that are trying to present the KW document in an even handed, level headed manner.

Therefore: I am withdrawing my name from the list of signatories supporting the KW document - effective immediately - 7:45 PM - CST Sunday - September 9, 2007

Respectfully submitted:

Chris Emery
OTR Films, LLC
OKC, OK

[Arabesque]

http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=207

[JoanJones]

Regarding Hoaxter Fraudley's most recent broadcast:

[Arabesque]

Precursor to the KW: Pre-Kennebunkport Warning Writings

The Kennebunkport warning was not the first of its kind. In fact, many of the principals involved in supporting the Kennebunkport warning had issued previous warnings, press releases, and radio interviews about the subject of another false flag attack in the months before the Kennebunkport controversy. In particular, Scholars for 9/11 Truth issued a press release that claimed “a fake attack on the US” was looming, Webster Tarpley issued a previous warning entitled “Cheney Determined To Strike This Summer”, and Captain May issued several warnings in Portland about a possible nuclear false flag incident. May was interviewed by both Kevin Barrett and Jim Fetzer on their radio shows to discuss the possibility of another false flag attack.

Webster Tarpley, The Next 9-11: Cheney Determined To Strike This Summer: Only Impeachment, Removal or General Strike Can Stop Him, http://www.911truth.org/ July 21, 2007. http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20070724182855127

Scholars for 9/11 Truth, GOP Welcomes New 9/11: Reports Lay Groundwork for Attack, Scholars Say, http://pr-gb.com/, August 3, 2007: http://pr-gb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5697&Itemid=9

“A spate of new reports of al Qaida resurgence appears to be laying the foundation for a fake attack on the US to bolster support for the ‘war on terror’ and Bush's sagging political fortunes.”

Captain Eric H. May, A Dawning Dictatorship? (911-2B & NSPD-51), http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/, August 6, 2007. http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/08/06/may.htm

See a list of Eric Mays warnings about an attack in Portland here:
http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/08/next-911-predictions-propaganda-motive.html#_edn50

The Kennebunkport Warning, August 27, 2007. http://911blogger.com/node/10905

What is the significance?

Jim Fetzer (known for the divisive break-up of Scholars for 9/11 truth and the promotion of discredited theories such as DEW and TV fakery) and Scholars for 9/11 Truth (including Kevin Barrett), Captain May, and Webster Tarpley all endorse the Kennebunkport warning and have all endorsed previous warnings of another false flag attack.

Captain May was interviewed by both Jim Fetzer and Kevin Barrett on their radio shows about a potential new 9/11. http://911scholars.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=53

"Captain May's interview on Dr. Kevin Barrett's radio show discussing his article Next 9/11, Summer, 2007? (7-24-07)"
http://mp3.wtprn.com/Barrett/0707/20070724_Tue_Barrett2.mp3

"In his July 3 interview with Dr. Kevin Barrett, Captain May addressed the prospects and probabilities of a July false flag attack on U.S. soil, and of a consequent escalation of the Mideast War (Iraq and Afghanistan) to World War Three (Syria and Iran, et al.)." http://mp3.wtprn.com/Barrett07.html

Jim Fetzer and Scholars for 9/11 Truth sent out a press release before the KW (see above). Jim Fetzer showed up on Tarpley’s radio show shortly after the KW was made public and then made a press release endorsing it.

Webster Tarpley, Kevin Barrett, and Jim Fetzer are all members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth--only a few scholars remain at this organization after its divisive break-up in late 2006.
http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=35

Kevin Barrett comments on 911blogger that is was “overwhelmingly probable” that the anti-war activists were “lying”. http://www.911blogger.com/node/11427

In fact, Cindy Sheehan had already endorsed the possibility of another false flag attack on Alex Jones' radio show:
Sheehan: Distinct Chance Of Staged Attack, Martial Law
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/120707distinctchance.htm

Why would Cindy Sheehan "lie" if she has already endorsed the possibility of a false flag attack? Note distinction here: "Possibility" does not mean "Massive Evidence" as stated in the KW.

See these other prison planet articles about Sheehan's support for a new 9/11 investigation and her belief that the WTC towers collapse resembled controlled demolition:

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheehan_supports_new_911_investigation.htm
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/sheehan_twin_towers_looked_like_controlled_demolition.htm

This could all be a coincidence, but it is interesting nonetheless.
_________________
Arabesque: 911 Truth
2008 Declaration: Standards and Strategies for 9/11 Truth
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

[nomad]

[Dem Bruce Lee Stylez!]

[Arabesque]

The Kennebunkport Unanswered Questions

1. Five individuals claimed to have signed a document involving impeachment. Does this document exist? Who else signed it?

My guess is that it does not exist in another form. Although I can not prove it, my suspicion is that the signatures were taken from this original source and turned into the KW. It is interesting that the signers independently claimed to have signed a document involving impeachment. As I have suggested elsewhere, in order for the anti-war activists to be “lying” it would mean that they would have all agreed to come up with the same explanation that they signed a document involving impeachment.

2. Who originated the Kennebunkport Warning? Who set up the meeting of the anti-war activists in Kennebunkport? Was this at the behest of the anti-war activists or 9/11 activists? Who initiated the meeting and what was the advertised purpose of the meeting? Were any issues relating to a potential false flag advertised in setting up the meeting?

3. Were there any discussions about “massive evidence” or a potential false flag in Kennebunkport?

4. Most of the abusive language and accusations of “fearful” signers are coming from LaRouche Associates. Is this connection a coincidence or is it a conspiracy? http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5868#5868

5. Why did many of the KW signers issue previous warnings? Jim Fetzer, Kevin Barrett (via scholars for 9/11 Truth), Webster Tarpley, Captain May, and even Cindy Sheehan (on Alex Jones’ radio show) all issued PREVIOUS warnings of a potential false flag. http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6526#6526

6. Many of the KW supporters have ties to controversial 9/11 activists such as Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Was Webster Tarpley’s radio interview with Jim Fetzer set up in advance of the controversy or after it erupted? What was Jim Fetzer's intended role in this controversy?
_________________
Arabesque: 911 Truth
2008 Declaration: Standards and Strategies for 9/11 Truth
A 9/11/2008 Resolution: Start Your Own 9/11 Blog

[leland]

Hello All,

My name is Leland Lehrman. I live in Lamy, NM near the train station that serves Santa Fe.

I'm running for US Senate against one of the most corrupt Senators in DC: Pete Domenici.

I also appeared recently on Tarpley's show and commented to the effect that those spending time destroying the message of the Kennebunkport Warning were either inexperienced or possibly COINTELPRO.

I would like to revise this position while leaving those two options in place, for it is clear to me that there are those arrayed against KW who are in fact COINTELPRO and some who are inexperienced.

However, legitimate criticism of Tarpley et al's methods and arguments have been made and as a friend of Mr. Tarpley I would like to acknowledge them on his behalf, although without his permission.

Berlet is without doubt COINTELPRO. His Ford Foundation (CIA) funding is proven and his appearances on Democracy Now and the History Channel to counter Griffin and 911 truth are all the evidence you need for that.

His attack on Tarpley is not proof of Tarpley's bona fides, but it is pretty close. I have worked with Tarpley at relatively close quarters for several months now, and have examined his past work on the Red Brigades in Italy and his biography of George Bush Senior. His Synthetic Terror book comes on the heels of long effort to expose oligarchy's control mechanisms.

Oligarchy is in fact the problem, whether religious, racial, classist, ideological or nationalist. Oligarchy hides behind any and all divisive doctrines, manipulating populations through war, false religion (mind control) and related scams such as fractional reserve banking, which are really no more than sophisticated gambling rackets designed to quickly parasitize a host population and render the parasite supremely powerful.

Read Smedley Butler's War is a Racket for a good analysis from a US military leader who saw it up close.

So now, to some of the more delicate questions regarding the signers and their actions. I have seen Cindy Sheehan allegedly backtrack before on statements that she made, for example that she was concerned about Israel's influence on American foreign policy. It is possible that she did so again. I am not yet quite clear on the circumstances of the signing and the aftermath, but I am certain that feelings were hurt all the way around, to include Webster and Bruce Marshall as well as the retractors.

The Kennebunkport Warning was and is a well-stated, timely message to a groggy but searching American public on the dangers our country and world now face. Even if the signers weren't clear on what the warning really said, the fact that it was assigned Hoax Status on the internet when it was a very supportable document, with masses of evidence far in excess of the cited Yuval Aviv story, meant that Tarpley and Marshall immediately felt sabotaged, although there is still some uncertainty about where that actually comes from.

On the subject of LaRouche, I have never seen a more complex situation reduced to such an unbelievably useless caricature as Mr. LaRouche and his network. Anyone who has actually taken the time to read their intelligence reports from around the world, their analyses of philosophical, political and financial situations and their work on the cultural infiltration by the CIA into the postwar era would never for a moment reduce their value to zero even if there are grave problems with their tactics, other positions or egos.

It is rare that any voice we listen to says everything we want to hear, but that does not mean that everything it says is useless or wrong, and the psychological "slides" generated by the word LaRouche are the same as those generated by the word "conspiracy theory" or "antisemitism."

This guilt by association is a very slippery slope, although I do agree that Nico Haupt and Jim Fetzer's TV fakery promotion are extremely disconcerting and I have not yet determined Webster's position on the subject. I have a message in to him right now asking for some understanding.

One of my specialties is fence mending, as I understand and respect personal situations as well as political gravity. My opinion is that Webster and Bruce's feelings were hurt badly by the signer retractions and the subsequent trashing of their very important work and lashed out in ways that were perhaps not as understanding as they might have been. However, there has been precious little understanding for why Webster and Bruce might feel the way they do.

According to them, the retractors had ample chance to read the document but got nervous when the spotlight got turned on. They further assert that one of the signers has actually admitted to having signed it. It strikes me that a certain amount of responsibility shifting may have in fact happened once the four activists in question realized the gravity of the situation. It is even reasonable to assume that some of them may have become concerned that their funding may be at stake. This is of course an issue in the "activist" world.

I like to think that I would have simply crossed off their names and wished them well myself, but in the heat of the moment, accusations ran wild and reputations were on the line. Perhaps one might say that Webster and Bruce overreacted in some ways. But those asserting that the KW was a hoax were also overreacting.

Cosmos' handling of Bruce on his radio show was heavy handed and didn't recognized Bruce's obvious emotionality as worthy of respect, and therefore the emotional pain never healed and what may be a needless disturbance in the force goes on.

Everyone from Wolsey to Cosmos to Col. Sparks seem to be asking Webster and Bruce to grow up, but are they really demonstrating themselves to be entirely loving and generously parental? I'm afraid not.

Discussions of the four retractors put forth the idea that they "courteously" retracted and wished the KW supporters well, but is it not possible to be courteous as you kill?

Sure it is, and the coldness of it, the air of superiority and the "well-wishing" associated with the casual death blow of "hoax" allegations would be all the more cruel if it were cloaked in courtesy.

One of the other problems with the KW detractors is that although they claim not to have any problems with the substance of the warning and the hundreds of news items on which it is based, the years of research that is required to understand it and express it eloquently, their focus leads them completely off the track of the very important message.

9/11 is important on its own, but its importance may be vastly greater in the context of current events, as a powerful tool of resistance and positive change. At the very least, KW detractors should be assisting the actual work of the KW, namely using the 9/11 understandings we now have to become serious players in the upcoming strategic and activist decision making process in Washington, on Main Street and around the world. Why is this not happening in parallel? Why are the credits given to Mr. Tarpley so short-winded and offhanded on the way to constant thrashing?

Although I am certainly thankful for Cindy Sheehan's leadership in the peace movement, it might have been more useful for her to have stood in the way of her son's enlistment in the first place.

While she was agonizing over her son's service and eventual death, Mr. Tarpley had already put in decades educating people about the methods of the oligarchical control system. If I had to say who was more valuable to the movement right now, I might have to choose Webster. For all his personal failings, many of which are on display in this current ruckus, Cindy has an equal amount of them, and arrogant judgmental attitudes towards Mr. Tarpley and idolization of Ms. Sheehan are not the easily defendable positions that KW detractors assert.

The issue is more complex, I'm afraid, and specifically, there is some type of knee jerk protection for the feelings of Sheehan et al, while those of Tarpley and Marshall are not considered. There may be a reversed sexism happening here, with the women's feelings somehow immediately assumed to be more important than the men's. All of these issues are entirely human, and give me reason to hope that reconciliation can still happen. No voice has really tried to do that, so I am hoping mine can start the process. It is of course important that impeachment, 911 truth, peace, labor, civil rights, spiritual, environmental and economic justice movements work hand in hand to move our world to a better place, but that means we all need to do a little more understanding of "the other" and a little less judging and caricaturing.

Finally, I would very much welcome the opportunity to join Cosmos on his radio program to advance this discussion and would be pleased to talk with any of you at length. Please call, email or send a phone number.

Leland Lehrman
Publisher Mother Media
Editor, The Sun News
(505) 982-3609
http://mothermedia.org
http://thesun-news.com

You might also want to read my piece on Physics911.net for an idea of my contribution: http://physics911.net/nuclearfalseflag.htm

[imgstacke]