Replies

"Now, tell me what your source of information is for the FBI "finding no grounds for further investigation." How do you know that?"

2 things; (1) the group VVAW was under FBI surveillence and they took no action back in the 70's, and (2) a dubious source for sure - but there was a little item on CNN.com which included a purported quote from an FBI report (May 1972) "A review of the subject's file (Kerry) reveals nothing whatsoever to link the subject with any violent type activity." This is further questionable since it was supplied by the Kerry campaign, but seems reliable. I'm sure the Bush campaign can do their own checking & raise the issue if they want to.

Good try. You are really great comic relief.

"Now, tell me what your source of information is for the FBI "finding no grounds for further investigation." How do you know that?"

2 things; (1) the group VVAW was under FBI surveillence and they took no action back in the 70's, and (2) a dubious source for sure - but there was a little item on CNN.com which included a purported quote from an FBI report (May 1972) "A review of the subject's file (Kerry) reveals nothing whatsoever to link the subject with any violent type activity." This is further questionable since it was supplied by the Kerry campaign, but seems reliable. I'm sure the Bush campaign can do their own checking & raise the issue if they want to.

++++++

You are a DU troll, but I will address your spin for the record.

The FBI may have had the VVAW under surveillance at the time, but they did not know about this assassination discussion because the VVAW went out of their way to make sure they could not be bugged.

They moved from their original meeting place to another place (a church) then thought that this too was bugged, and then moved to a homeless shelter run by Menonnites.

Only the most trusted members were allowed into the room for the discussion and vote. (This is all from Nicosia's book.)

So it is quite understandable that the FBI would not have learned about this. (And certainly Kerry didn't tell them.)

One is left to wonder about the other things the FBI missed because of such precautions being taken by the VVAW.

BTW, in the last four months of 1971 alone, something like 500 VVAW members were arrested. Camil went on to be indicted along with seven others--for a plot to VIOLENTLY disrupt the GOP convention. There were plenty of other plans for violence. Sometimes the authorities stopped them before they were carried out.

So it is a boldfaced lie to portray the VVAW as a non-violent organization.

Your source (1) is not a source. It's the same unwarranted conclusion you advanced before. Your source (2) is an unverifiable quote offered by the leftist media on behalf of the Kerry campaign. Moreover, it does not address conspiracy, only violent activity itself. Moreover, the quoted snippet is not given in context of the rest of the report from which it was alledgedly extracted. Moreover, you yourself characterize this source as both "dubious for sure" and "questionable," then contradict yourself by saying it "seems reliable." Are you Joe Lieberman?

So your "sources" are your own unwarranted assumptions and a self-serving Kerry campaign snippet parroted by CNN and unconfirmed by anybody in the FBI.

You don't know what the FBI had or has on Kerry. Hillary probably does, but you don't.

I read somewhere, today, that the pages exonerating Kerry were picked from twelve boxes of reports. So, one agent was not convinced that Kerry was a bad guy. What was in the other boxes? Not only that was this agent even present at the meeting, was he even privy to what went on at that meeting. There's a disconnect here somewhere and I think that it's intentional.