Skip to content or view screen version

Webster Tarpley: Your services will no longer be required

Jenny Sparks | 03.11.2007 05:47 | Anti-militarism | Terror War

Look out! He's coming to London with his Disinfo show! But don't be fooled--this man is not "leader" of 911Truth--he's been sacked; read why...

From: the 9/11 Truth Movement,
an unincorporated international association

To: Webster Griffin Tarpley,
author and a self-stylized leader of 9/11 Truth

Subject: Your services as a "leader" will no longer be required in the 9/11 Truth Movement

Mr. Tarpley:

It is with regret that we inform you that your services as a "leader" of 9/11 Truth will no longer be required from this point forth.

As with so many organizations, your position has been made redundant. In reviewing our loose association, it has become clear that our need for leaders, self stylized or otherwise, was overstated. The fact is, every individual 9/11 activist is their own leader, and thoroughly capable of doing their own research, organization, fund raising, lectures, as so forth without direction from solitary bombastic personalities. In fact, "cults of personality" have done our loose organization more harm than good, preventing people from recognizing and learning the organization skills that would make our association more effective. Your engaging and entertaining style will be missed by some, but it has rather outlived it's usefulness.

Then there is a matter of your work performance. In the past you have been a valued asset. But this year we had seen signs of degeneration in the quality of your work. We have been patient and understanding; after all we all go through bad patches. But, at the end of August, with your gross mismanagement of the Kennebunkport Warning fiasco, it became clear your judgment on the job was not what it was.

And you, sir, aggravated matters by not only refusing to take responsibility for your actions and take steps to mitigate their consequences, but, instead, joined in a multi part campaign to hunt down, discredit and attack those justifiably demanding you to take responsibility for you actions.

There is no use denying you have been part of, and intended to benefit from, this attack on 9/11 activists; these outrageous, and in some case outright illegal, antics have been thoroughly documented here:

We also have it on authority that the documented time line of these events is, along with other evidence, such that it leave no doubt in our minds, or that of any solicitor, that you. sir, have conspired with others to undermine the civil rights and threaten activists who have challenged you. These acts are odious and repulsive to 9/11 Truth, the Peace Movement, and any other activism who's goal is true justice and democracy.

These activities were sufficient by themselves to make your position in our association redundant. But it was your latest "stunt" posted on Rense that made our decision to remove you from the 9/11 Truth movement final:

Internet Cointelpro Alert

We will excerpt portions to show how far your position has diverged from, and in many cases, is counter to, the goals of 911 Truth:

It has come to our attention that certain scurrilous, obscene, abusive, harassing, and threatening emails, blog postings, and videos are being fabricated, circulated, sent, and posted on the internet by anonymous provocateurs who are evidently working for the pro-Cheney factions of the US intelligence community.

This is disingenuous, sir, as is is obvious that considering the content and timeline of these blogs and videos, they were made to attack those who you attacked as well. Had you had a serious concern about this malicious media campaign you would have spoken out against it sooner, regardless of whom was the target.

An effort is being made in some quarters to falsely attribute these faked and counterfeit postings, emails, and videos to Webster G. Tarpley, Bruce Marshall, Captain Eric May, and to other persons sympathetic to the Philadelphia Platform and/or the Kennebunkport Warning. Any such attempted attribution is a lie.

Perhaps if you had spoken out against these media in a timely manner, while they were attacking 9/11 activists you disagreed with, this statement would have weight. As it is, the bulk of the documented evidence strongly supports what Mr. Haupt would call a "tandem", thus making your statement another attempt to avoid responsibilities for your actions and support of other peoples unethical actions.

Quote: is in the process of tracking down and analyzing a global pattern of coordinated cointelpro deployments in Australia, Canada, Austria, and Germany, in addition to the United States. calls on all anti-war, impeachment, anti-globalization, 9/11 truth, civil liberties, honest vote count, labor, civil rights, ethnic minority, and other groups and persons of good will everywhere to help identify, denounce, expose, and isolate the anonymous provocateurs who are behind this campaign of falsification and harassment.

This, sir, is another example of your irresponsible judgment. Considering you used the end of your Cooper Union hall speech to attack 9/11 activists as Cointelpro with no evidence worthy of a court of law, this wild call for various groups to "track down" and "isolate" individuals, is likely to result in irresponsible and dangerous witch hunts. Neither you, nor have the faintest understanding of how Cointelpro worked if you believe tracking down individuals you don't is going to stop the actions of a present day reincarnation of the organization. This, sir, is a thinly veiled call to attack persons you and those who support you disagree with. We can no longer be responsible for the out come of these ill conceived words.

Since the Kennebunkport Warning of August 26, we have seen the rogue nuclear B-52 incident of August 29-30, followed this past week by Bush's Hitlerian threat of "world war three" in response to Putin's warning to the US not to attack Iran. Every passing day now brings new incidents which take the world closer to the brink of a colossal tragedy which we can still mobilize to prevent. Nobody should be disoriented for one minute by these transparent internet provocations and dirty tricks.

To be blunt sir, it is your analysis that is transparently manipulating any new alarming event that might fit into your preconceived "Warning" to justify it after the fact. Thus your accusation of "dirty tricks" reeks of projection and hypocrisy, sir.

Groups and persons of good will are invited to endorse and publicize the Kennebunkport Warning with its key proviso that any terrorist incident (new 9/11 and/or new Gulf of Tonkin incident) occurring anywhere in the world involving weapons of mass destruction in the weeks and months ahead must be considered the responsibility of the Cheney faction and its allies.

We would remind you. sir, that the Kennebunkport Warning was quite clear it warned of an "imminent" attack, supported by "massive evidence". Not an attack "weeks and months" down the road, and certainly not with retroactive evidence. This shows you must have known the dishonestly of how the warning was presented, even apart from the dishonesty of how the alleged signatories were treated.

You may object, "But I didn't write the Internet Cointelpro Allert! did!"

Let's not be coy, sir. A perusal of the site:

..shows an abundance of material supporting a position that you have spearhead and given your full endorsement. If it is indeed true you are not the actual author of this alert, then it is true you except to benefit from it. It would be a show of character to take a sand against this irresponsible document. Unfortunately such a demonstration will come too late to rescind our decision.

You have not been without controversy in your association with us. We have been understanding, perhaps to the point of foolishness, with your tolerance and endorsement of Nico Haupt, James Fetzer, Captain Eric May, Lyndon LaRouche, Bruce Marshall, Craig Hill, Leland Lehman, Jeff Rense and all manner of characters we should have been more proactive about confronting you in the past about. That was our responsibility and our mistake. But it is this last document, this Internet Cointelpro Alert, that is "the last straw":

From the tone and contents of the document it is clear you have no intention of taking responsibility for the damage you have caused 911 Truth.

It is also clear you have no intention of doing anything in your power to mitigate or fix the damage you have caused.

And further, it is clear you have every intention of continuing to cause damage to 9/11 Truth, and it's allies in the Peace movement, in the pursuit of whatever agenda you are pursuing.

And so it is with regret we terminate your position as "leader" and "spokesperson" in the 9/11 Truth Movement. Please refrain from presenting yourself as either in future.

We wish you well in all future endeavors unrelated to 9/11 Truth.


The 9/11 Truth Movement,
an unincorporated international association, with individual signatories below:

(Edit: I'll be adding names as they're posted to the thread--to be clear you want to be added, just write something like "add me". Conversely, if I discover a trouble maker, their name will go.Very Happy )
(2ndEdit: and if you find you don't want your name below--for whatever reason--just tell me and I'll remove it , unlike some people...Wink )

Jenny Sparks; imgstacke; ArtV; Pollyanna; g; Hocus Locus; YT; CV; Arabesque; Petros; Alek Hidell; Visibility 9-11;


Jenny Sparks
- Homepage:


Kennebunkport Warning Controversy

03.11.2007 17:45

The Kennebunkport Warning Controversy Reviewed

On August 29th, 2007, Webster Tarpley issued the Kennebunkport Warning. It claimed "massive evidence" suggested that a US-Sponsored false flag terror attack would be orchestrated in "the coming months". The original document listed signatures by Cindy Sheehan, Ann Wright and others.

Or did it?

At least five anti-war activists including Cindy Sheehan denied signing the document and an ensuing controversy erupted. While those who denied signing the document were civil and cordial, those who created the warning offered insults, accusations, and divisive behavior. Later, those investigating the affair were targeted with accusations and insults along with false allegations that they "opposed" the Kennebunkport warning and "worked for the Ford Foundation". Charges of incivility against the warning promoters remain unacknowledged.

While many offered their take on the controversy, a "9/11 truth leader" responded without naming names or taking sides; giving advice on how to deal with disinformation, infiltration, and agent provocateurs. Jim Hoffman offered his thoughts on Cosmos' radio show:

"It's so clear. What possible motive would there be someone to go making these vicious characterizations of these really well known peace activists like Cindy Sheehan… When people like [Cosmos], Arabesque, and Wolsey report on it, to be viciously attacked by Tarpley with all these ridiculous accusations of COINTELPRO…? Very entertaining to watch, very vivid, just lurid—it's ridiculous... I think it's a really good test of whether people are really in this in the benefit of our movement: are going to tolerate this sort of thing? Where are the voices of the alleged leaders of the 9/11 truth movement about this and similar incidents? I think the silence from some quarters is deafening."

See also:

Arabesque's investigation into Webster Tarpley's Kennebunkport Warning and a summary of the divisive language, accusations, and ad-hominems in the controversy by Webster Tarpley and his supporters against Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war activists, and those investigating the controversy

- Homepage:


Display the following comment

  1. What complete bollocks — dh