John F. Kerry Is A Liar
Published October 25, 2004
From here:
U.N. ambassadors from several nations are disputing assertions by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry that he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq. An investigation by The Washington Times reveals that while the candidate did talk for an unspecified period to at least a few members of the panel, no such meeting, as described by Mr. Kerry on a number of occasions over the past year, ever occurred. At the second presidential debate earlier this month, Mr. Kerry said he was more attuned to international concerns on Iraq than President Bush, citing his meeting with the entire Security Council. "This president hasn't listened. I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them, to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable," Mr. Kerry said of the Iraqi dictator. Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in December 2003, Mr. Kerry explained that he understood the "real readiness" of the United Nations to "take this seriously" because he met "with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein." But of the five ambassadors on the Security Council in 2002 who were reached directly for comment, four said they had never met Mr. Kerry. The four also said that no one who worked for their countries' U.N. missions had met with Mr. Kerry either. The former ambassadors who said on the record they had never met Mr. Kerry included the representatives of Mexico, Colombia and Bulgaria. The ambassador of a fourth country gave a similar account on the condition that his country not be identified.[...]
When reached for comment last week, an official with the Kerry campaign stood by the candidate's previous claims that he had met with the entire Security Council. But after being told late yesterday of the results of The Times investigation, the Kerry campaign issued a statement that read in part, "It was a closed meeting and a private discussion." A Kerry aide refused to identify who participated in the meeting. The statement did not repeat Mr. Kerry's claims of a lengthy meeting with the entire 15-member Security Council, instead saying the candidate "met with a group of representatives of countries sitting on the Security Council." Asked whether the international body had any records of Mr. Kerry sitting down with the whole council, a U.N. spokesman said that "our office does not have any record of this meeting." A U.S. official with intimate knowledge of the Security Council's actions in fall of 2002 said that he was not aware of any meeting Mr. Kerry had with members of the panel. An official at the U.S. mission to the United Nations remarked: "We were as surprised as anyone when Kerry started talking about a meeting with the Security Council." Jean-David Levitte, then France's chief U.N. representative and now his country's ambassador to the United States, said through a spokeswoman that Mr. Kerry did not have a single group meeting as the senator has described, but rather several one-on-one or small-group encounters. He added that Mr. Kerry did not meet with every member of the Security Council, only "some" of them. Mr. Levitte could only name himself and Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock of Britain as the Security Council members with whom Mr. Kerry had met. One diplomat who met with Mr. Kerry in 2002 said on the condition of anonymity that the candidate talked to "a few" ambassadors on the Security Council. The revelation that Mr. Kerry never met with the entire U.N. Security Council could be problematic for the Massachusetts senator, as it clashes with one of his central foreign-policy campaign themes — honesty. At a New Mexico rally last month, Mr. Kerry said Mr. Bush will "do anything he can to cover up the truth." At what campaign aides billed as a major foreign-policy address, Mr. Kerry said at New York University last month that "the first and most fundamental mistake was the president's failure to tell the truth to the American people." In recent months, Mr. Kerry has faced numerous charges of dishonesty from Vietnam veterans over his war record, and his campaign has backtracked before from previous statements about Mr. Kerry's foreign diplomacy. For example, in March, Mr. Kerry told reporters in Florida that he'd met with foreign leaders who privately endorsed him. "I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly," he said. "But, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' " But the senator refused to document his claim and a review by The Times showed that Mr. Kerry had made no official foreign trips since the start of 2002, according to Senate records and his own published schedules. An extensive review of Mr. Kerry's domestic travel schedule revealed only one opportunity for him to have met foreign leaders here. After a week of bad press, Kerry foreign-policy adviser Rand Beers said the candidate "does not seek, and will not accept, any such endorsements." The Democrat has also made his own veracity a centerpiece of his campaign, calling truthfulness "the fundamental test of leadership." Mr. Kerry closed the final debate by recounting what his mother told him from her hospital bed, "Remember: integrity, integrity, integrity." In an interview published in the new issue of Rolling Stone magazine, Mr. Kerry was asked what he would want people to remember about his presidency. He responded, "That it always told the truth to the American people."
- John F. Kerry Is A Liar
- Published: October 25, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Writer: RJ Elliott
- RJ Elliott's BC Writer page
- RJ Elliott's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Now we have to add a mooniebot to the drudgebot we're working on to replace RJ. Now we'll never get it coded in time for the election.
Sorry, "you forgot poland" (or Bulgaria) isn't going to change the dynamics of the race. It's not nearly as important as the failure of the occupying forces to guard 350 tons of high explosives. If this was the "October Surprise", then "Bush by any means" partisans should probably start pinning their hopes on a November Surprise involving voting fraud if they hope to win.
HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA .......
*breathe*
HARHAR HARHAR HARHAR HARH ARHA RHAR HAR ....
*breathe*
Look, RJ...dude...*give it up*.
Pointing out a lie (or mistake?) here or there by Kerry just looks silly and pathetic and desperate given the cornucopia...nay, the veritable avalanche...of lies that gush forth from W & co. day after day after day, year after year.
And not insignificant lies, either, but lies that get people--lots and lots of people--killed, and will continue to do so for decades.
Besides, mendacity-wise, it's just not fair to compare Kerry with W; Kerry's an amateur, but W's a pro...a world-class prevaricater.
this brings up an interesting point: what is the equivalent of the Washington Times on the left? How reliable is that source? Should everything that comes from that source be dismissed out of hand? Just asking.
Um... stick with your priest if you don't want lies. Even that is not guaranteed these days.
Matthew Yglesias says it best:
So the big scoop is that Kerry didn't meet with the UN ambassadors of Colombia, Mexico, and Bulgaria. Stop the freakin' presses! LOL.
He met with the *permanent* members of the Security Council. That was an omission, not a lie.
Eric, are you hallucinating? There is no equivalent to a 'newspaper' owned by the Moonies, edited by neo-Confederates, and used as a source by Gene Expression* participant RJ on the Left. The Washington Times has some unique characteristics.
John Kerry's integrity will withstand an attack by the Moonie Times. Most people know who to believe.
*A weblog that promotes the claim women and minorities are genetically inferior. They loathe liberals, too.
It's comforting to know that with this election we'll be able to look at the Bush voters and realize, 'THAT'S WHERE ALL THE FOOLS ARE!" Makes it so much easier to find the idiots responsible for numerous problems in the country... "Oh! These are the people that keep insisting that nothing is wrong with our health care system!" "AH! these are the folk that continue to expect us to believe that be making sure the rich pay NO TAXES it'll make life so much better for the rest of us!"
"So these are the folks that would have us roll back the minimum wage to the 1950 hourly wage level - because it is good for business!"
Thanks RJ for doing your part!
"Gene Expression* participant RJ Elliott"
Why am I not surprised that you're lying again?
I would suggest that The Washington Times has vastly more credibility than, say, anything MD types.
Eric: Which news sources get trusted and rejected out of hand says a lot more about the respondant than about the source. It's also more of a continuum than a flag. I reject Lyndon LaRouche's "New Federalist" as a source out of hand, Drudge I wait for it to hit a "reputable source", the Washington Times, it depends on how outrageous the claim is, Fox News I actively look for corroboration, but I assmue it may be true but spun, etc.
I think it's possible to find sources that are similar to the Washington Times on any side of the political divide, but the Times is significantly more successful and influential than source I consider similar to it.
What Michael said, with an addendum. People will trot out Indymedia. But, Indymedia is a grass roots effort. It does not have the millions of dollars behind it that the Moonie Times and UPI, do. At best, it is a crazy quilt of amateur reportage. I don't take it seriously. I don't believe most people do, either.
RJ, you have previously admitted being a participant in Gene Expression. If you had any credibility, you would be underminding it by lying now.
No, my little anonymous serial-liar, I have never, EVER, claimed to have been a "participant" on Gene Expression.
Perhaps I should ask for a citation every time you make a baseless and false claim? But I won't hold my breath waiting for one...
Aren't a few rightwing bloggers the only people who take Indymedia seriously? Those who continually use the site as an example of why the left is eeeevil?
I can't wait for RJ to rip the lid off the G. Washington cherry tree scandal.
Give it up dude, stick with the track record of the administration, the success with the economy, and the relentless march of freedom on a human face forever.
After all, if Shrub is so great, why do you need to make up baseless crap about Pepsi, when Coke is a beverage?
Kerry is such a liar, he Knows the truth about these weopons and now he is distorted the facts, he has stooped to a new level, I can't stand kerry!
hey-he has a picture of the american flag upside down on an impossible to find book-and there are pictures of him with a vietnamese flag in the background-if thats not presidential material-what is?
Hey alathino59,
I find it interesting that a Kerry supporter would have the gawl to point fingers and use names like fools and idiots, when referring to "W" supporters doing their civic duty by going to the polls. When the Kerry supporters/campaign are worried that their voter "base", as a whole, are to ignorant to find a polling place, or they are convicted felons and have had the right to vote revoked. That's why P. Puff Diddy Combs has been shaking the tree's trying to drum up every non felon in the cities wastelands to get out and frudulantly vote as many times as they think they can get away with it. Or your parties people are out on street corners giving cigarettes to the homeless to get them to register and vote as many times as possible. Not only is your candidate a lying fecal factory, but his supporters are of equal moral character. Healthcare costs are what they are because of all the indigents of the nation, people who "deserve treatment", but can't or won't pay(yet another gift from your party). You people, want us people, to pay for everything that those people, won't pay or work for. Your war chests come from unions, they want everyone to be paid equally for a day's work, well you know what, not everyone works as hard as the next guy. That's what a merit raise is, you earn it, not a hand out, or a gift. Show some integrity, vote for a candidate that demands every man woman and child is accountable for their own actions, and that no one deserves a free ride. We're in the state we are as a nation because everybody has their hand out, to get something for nothing. Earn it and quit your bitchin.
Thank God that pinko commie fag Kerry has lost.
Hopefully finishing his term in the senate will
be the last we ever see of his sorry lying ass,
the yellow pinko commie faggot son-of-a-bitch.
"Whenever they can't continue a substative debate, they always resort to name-calling."
- Rush Limbaugh, describing liberals
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/21374)
Is he George Bush?
No.
That's good enough for me.