Difference between revisions of "The Kennebunkport warning"
m (False Flag attack on USA on or around 9/21 moved to The Kennebunkport warning: incident has become better known by this name)
Revision as of 14:30, 7 November 2007
This page is about a warning issued on approximately 2007-08-25 regarding a possible false flag attack on the United States on or about 2007-09-21. Some of the signatories later stated that they did not sign this document but instead signed a different document calling for the impeachment of Dick Cheney; see #The Warning.
Although the predicted attack did not happen, there is a theory that the 2007 nuclear missile flight incident which began just 4 days after the warning was issued may have been an aborted attempt to carry out the attack; see #News & Views RE1.
- 2007-08-29 The Kennebunkport Warning: A Hoax?
News & Views
- 2007-10-08 - RE1 The Kennebunkport Warning And The Rogue B-52 - Confirmation With A Vengeance by Webster Tarpley: theorizes a connection between the Kennebunkport Warning and the 2007 nuclear missile flight incident, i.e. that the latter was actually due to a Cheney plan to nuke a US city and blame it on Al Qaeda or similar, and that the incident only came to light due to resistance from within the military.
- David Brin had this to say about the Tarpley theory:
|David Brin said in a 2007-11-06 posting on Contrary Brin (with minor editing):|
There are elements of the Kennebunkport story that have appeal... like the notion that Air Force personnel in Louisiana did a "push back" aided by elements of the intelligence community, to forestall a peremptory, secret and lunatic attack upon Iran. It is an enticing tale, tying in the scandal of a B52, laden with nuclear weapons, flying over heavily populated US territory.
Alas, later paragraphs of this site expose logical holes and lurid extremes of tendentious subjective bias, of the kind that subtracts from the strength of those opposing the Bush Putsch, rather than adding to it.
1) Um.... is it even remotely within reach of human reason, that Bush could order a NUCLEAR attack on Iran and not expect it to backfire in public opinion? Indeed, the only conceivable reasons to do such a thing would be "manchurian" ones.
2) Claims that the Israelis cannot have attacked a Syrian nuclear facility because nobody sensed nuclear debris downwind are explainable if you assume that (as happened in the Osirik attack,long ago) the facility was destroyed in the last stages of construction but before fueling.
And so on... no time for more. What's irksome, of course, is that some of this might be true. I sure hope the military/CIA "push back" is. And not the mysterious deaths that followed.
The following text has been widely distributed around the internet, and is presumed to be in the public domain.
There is considerable doubt that the more credible signers actually signed the document; they apparently clearly remember signing a different document calling for the impeachment of Dick Cheney, and the eyewitness(es) who claim to have seen them signing the document below are apparently connected with the authors of that document.
Despite this, the author does seem to have at least some evidence to support his conclusions.
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 , PRESIDENT MAINE LAWYERS FOR DEMOCRACY
A mystery trader risks losing around $1 billion dollars after placing 245,000 put options on the Dow Jones Eurostoxx 50 index, leading many analysts to speculate that a stock market crash preceded by a new 9/11 style catastrophe could take place within the next month.
The anonymous trader only stands to make money if the market crashes by a third to a half before September 21st, which is when the put options expire. A put option is a financial contract between two parties, the buyer and the writer (seller) of the option, in which the buyer stands to benefit only if the price of the asset falls.
"The sales are being referred to by market traders as "bin Laden trades" because only an event on the scale of 9-11 could make these short-sell options valuable," reports financial blogger Marc Parent .
The trader stands to make around $2 billion from their investment should an event trigger a market crash before the third week in September.
Such a cataclysmic jolt could only happen as a result of two factors, China dumping its vast dollar reserves in reaction to the sub-prime mortgage collapse, which it has threatened to do , or a massive terror attack on the same scale or larger than 9/11.
9/11 itself was foreshadowed by unprecedented put options that were placed on United and American Airlines. Though the Securities and Exchange Commission refused to reveal who placed the options, private researchers traced the investments back to the Deutsche Bank owned Banker's Trust, which was formerly headed by then Executive Director of the CIA, Buzzy Krongard.
Put options on Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch, two of the World Trade Center's most prominent occupants, also spiked in the days before 9/11.
News of the suspicious trades is dovetailed by the comments of Former US Treasury secretary Larry Summers yesterday , who told ABC News that the risk of a recession in the U.S. was greater that at any time since 9/11.