Lies, MORE Kerry Lies. Security Council NEVER met with Kerry

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Balanc3
    Platinum Poster
    • Jun 2004
    • 1278

    Lies, MORE Kerry Lies. Security Council NEVER met with Kerry

    If you watched the debates then you saw Kerry name dropping and heard him say he met with UN leaders and they gave him their support. Kerry always wants you to believe the grass is greener on the other side. Well AGAIN he has been caught in a flat out lie. I'd like to see him speak into the camera again.

    Security Council members deny EVER meeting Kerry

    By Joel Mowbray
    SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

    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.

    Ambassador Andres Franco, the permanent deputy representative from Colombia during its Security Council membership from 2001 to 2002, said, "I never heard of anything." Although Mr. Franco was quick to note that Mr. Kerry could have met some members of the panel, he also said that "everything can be heard in the corridors." Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, Mexico's then-ambassador to the United Nations, said: "There was no meeting with John Kerry before Resolution 1441, or at least not in my memory."

    All had vivid recollections of the time frame when Mr. Kerry traveled to New York, as it was shortly before the Nov. 7, 2002, enactment of Resolution 1441, which said Iraq was in "material breach" of earlier disarmament resolutions and warned Baghdad of "serious consequences as a result of its continued violations." Stefan Tafrov, Bulgaria's ambassador at the time, said he remembers the period well because it "was a very contentious time."

    After conversations with ambassadors from five members of the Security Council in 2002 and calls to all the missions of the countries then on the panel, The Times was only able to confirm directly that Mr. Kerry had met with representatives of France, Singapore and Cameroon. In addition, second-hand accounts have Mr. Kerry meeting with representatives of Britain. 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."

    The Washington Times delivers breaking news and commentary on the issues that affect the future of our nation.
    JourneyDeep .into the sound
  • PhAntoM MeNaCe
    Getting warmed up
    • Sep 2004
    • 74

    #2
    WOW! What a surprise??! Balanc your right on point with this one, Kerry once again claims his robust coalition of European nations, and vows that he has fluid dialogue with 'other foreign leaders but can't go out and say publicly'!! I think it should not be a surprise to anyone that Kerry will say absolutely anything for any political gain. He and Edwards are actors, to put it simply, neither are close to the 'real mcCoy'. Kerry is a bonifide aficionados of getting on his knees and chumming the plums of anyone who would support his agenda at the time. What troubles me is that we should not be deciding on whether or not to elect this poser president of the US, we should be deciding what crimes of treason and anti-americanism he should be brought to justice for, for what he did during Vietnam. Go ahead, take a few minutes to watch the documentary 'Stolen Honour', the very video that WAS going to be broadcast on national tv, but could not because of the liberal thugs and far left lawyers for Kerry, it would have been detrimental to his campaign, and for very good reason. KERRY is a traitor!
    "when you go to the dentist to get your wisdom teeth pulled out and you wake up after the operation with your pants unzipped, that means you dont have to pay the bill".

    Comment

    • DJkeithrace
      Fresh Peossy
      • Jun 2004
      • 45

      #3
      How can you possibly rant on and on about Kerry being a traitor?!?!

      Bootonm line...Bush and his family have a documented two decade relationship with not only the Saudi family, but the Bin Ladin family. It's the Saudi's who are financing terorrists that hate America and teach their kids to do the same. The President has his head so far up the Saudi family and friends ASS, he coudn't spot a terrorist if one were sitting right next him.
      You guys can go on and on about how Kerry is a liar..but the fact is, when it comes to important matters that significantly affect U.S. national interest. THERE IS NO BIGGER LIE THAN THE PURPORTED CLAIM BY BUSH AND CHENEY OF AN AL QUEDA/911 CONNECTION!
      ALL OTHER LIES SEEM LIKE A WALK in the park to that one.
      Do yourselves and your Country a favor. Read the 911 report!! Base your support upon facts-not conjecture or rhetoric.
      I promise you today, if you make the mistake of voting for Bush, you're children will read history 20 years from now and ask you how you could have been so stupid!!!!!!l

      Comment

      • DJkeithrace
        Fresh Peossy
        • Jun 2004
        • 45

        #4
        By the way, Kerry has been a U.S. Senator for 20 years and has far more experience in Govt. than Bush had when he came to office. ALL of your points are baseless and subjective opinions. find and use the FACTS FACTS FACTS FACTS!!!!!

        FACTS

        Comment

        • HoneyBearKelly
          Addiction started
          • Jun 2004
          • 334

          #5
          You get your "facts" from The Washington Times. A rag that's owned by the Reverend Moon.
          No wonder you guys have a serious case of cognitive dissonance.
          Cat formerly known as Cheshire
          *cue imperial death march"

          Comment

          • Balanc3
            Platinum Poster
            • Jun 2004
            • 1278

            #6
            Originally posted by DJkeithrace
            THERE IS NO BIGGER LIE THAN THE PURPORTED CLAIM BY BUSH AND CHENEY OF AN AL QUEDA/911 CONNECTION!
            ALL OTHER LIES SEEM LIKE A WALK in the park to that one.
            Do yourselves and your Country a favor. Read the 911 report!! Base your support upon facts-not conjecture or rhetoric.
            How bout you do yourself a favor and base your facts on something other than Fahrenheit 911! :wink:

            Originally posted by DJkeithrace
            By the way, Kerry has been a U.S. Senator for 20 years and has far more experience in Govt. than Bush had when he came to office. ALL of your points are baseless and subjective opinions. find and use the FACTS FACTS FACTS FACTS!!!!!

            FACTS
            You motherfuckers should be all ashamed of yourselves after viewing Stolen Honour, that is if you actually did. Senator Kerry has been on the wrong side of history, his twenty year record in the senate stands on its own. If you want facts checkout his voting record. If Senator Kerry had his way based on his twenty year voting record, the Soviet Union would still be in power, the Berlin Wall would never have come down, America would be bowing to the Soviets, we would have no weapons to defend our nation, Saddam Hussein would not only have controlled Kuwait, but the entire mid-east, Libia would be a nuclear threat, and thats just on foreign policy issues. For domestic issues personal income taxes would be over 50%, nobody in America would b4e allowed to have guns accept criminals, and 30million babies will killed in the next ten years by partial birth abortion.

            The facts are the facts, and those are the facts of Kerry's record in a nutshell. If you want the real truth then check it out yourself instead of basing your voting decisions on a congressional report. Facts, facts, facts my ass, Democrats only see what they want to see. There is no right or wrong or black or white, it's all a situational ethics to them. Thats why the Democratic party has become the party of the malcontents, the antiamerican crowd, and the secular humanists. The heroes of the Democratic party are not Abraham Lincoln or Thomas Jefferson, its the communists that founded the ACLU, the people who sponsor the right of a teenage girl killing her baby without even telling her parents. The Democrats believe that the Democratic party is the party that represents the average person, it was the lie that was sold to the uneducated, the african american, and the labor unions. The Democratic party is represented by trial lawyers who don't give a damn about the common person.

            JourneyDeep .into the sound

            Comment

            • LobsterClan
              Getting Somewhere
              • Aug 2004
              • 133

              #7
              Originally posted by Balanc3
              You motherfuckers should be all ashamed of yourselves
              You, sir, should be ashamed of yourself. In spite of all your hateful rhetoric towards John Kerry and the Democratic Party, you are employed by a 527 whose sole goal is the election of John Kerry. Principles? You have none.

              Comment

              • Balanc3
                Platinum Poster
                • Jun 2004
                • 1278

                #8
                Principles... money. Fuck principles, behind all the cursing, I have moral unlike your people. And you are a pinko communist sympathizer since you support Kerry. How the hell you know who I really work for? You don't.
                JourneyDeep .into the sound

                Comment

                • asdf_admin
                  i use to be important
                  • Jun 2004
                  • 12798

                  #9
                  lol. Pinko's.
                  dead, yet alive.

                  Comment

                  Working...