Kerry can't recall being at '71 parley (Boston Globe tackles assassin plot - new info)

Boston Globe ^ | April 1st, 2004 | Michael Kranish

[Sabertooth]

Senator John F. Kerry said through a spokesman this week that he has no recollection of attending a November 1971 meeting of Vietnam Veterans Against the War at which some activists discussed a plot to kill some US senators who backed the war.

[teletech]

I guess since the documents were stolen, he feels safe to deny ever attending that 1971 meeting. This man sits at the pinnacle of EVIL right next to the Clintons.

[Sabertooth]

So the memory of a meeting discussing the assassination of US Senators is not something that one would carry to the grave? Now, either Kerry is in advanced Alzheimer’s or he is lying through he teeth. I don't think he is in advanced Alzheimer’s.

Botox to the forehead. Smoothed his whole brain over.

[samtheman]

Let's find out if he was there or not and make an issue of it. In the meantime, let's see that Dick Cavett debate between Kerry and O'Neill played over and over again. That debate shows what a commie Kerry really is.

[Texasforever]

He isn't that sure of himself yet. He just "can't recall". If he had it covered he would just deny it. This guy is dangerous.

[dpwiener]

Even the people who have stated that JK was at the KC meeting have said that he argued (apparently successfully) against the assassination plan. That's why I think this issue is a non-starter.

This is about as lame an issue as I can imagine. Even if Kerry attended this meeting, he opposed any assassination plan and he then resigned from the organization. Which was the correct thing to do.

It's really, really reaching to argue that Kerry should have contacted authorities. As long as he thought the assassination plan was dead, there was nothing to report.

Anyone trying to make this into an attack on Kerry should be thoroughly embarrassed. It's so pathetic that it makes Kerry look good, since it implies that there are no better issues to go after him on. It's exactly the kind of reflexive and sophomoric attack which Bush-haters like to unleash on the President.

[teletech]

He isn't that sure of himself yet. He just "can't recall". If he had it covered he would just deny it. This guy is dangerous.

ALL DemocRATS are dangerous. Some much more than others.

[Fedora]

Thanks.

[jennyp]

Botox to the forehead. Smoothed his whole brain over.

LOL!

Anyway, back to the article...

Moreover, Nicosia has made public only about 50 of the 20,000 pages of FBI files as a result of an 11-year effort under the Freedom of Information Act. The FBI has not authorized a separate release of the files, although it is studying pending requests.

I wonder how soon the FBI will release more copies of what it already released to Nicosia? If some of the pages were stolen, then the FBI should just release all 20,000 pages again, just to be sure.

[Texasforever]

It's really, really reaching to argue that Kerry should have contacted authorities. As long as he thought the assassination plan was dead, there was nothing to report

Not true. Just because it was "voted" down the entire meeting was a criminal conspiracy. You do not get together and vote on whether US Senators are to be killed. Everyone at that meeting should be coming up for their first parole hearings about now.

[chuckles]

Who ya gonna believe, the FBI or Kerry? Same thing with the Photoshop pic of Kerry and Jane Fondue. They deny that pic, but he was at several demonstrations with her, probably provided the matches for burning the flag.

It make me sick to think that even 48% of America could vote for the scumbag. I just can't believe it won't be a blowout like Dukakis or Mondale was. Even the union goons need to re-think their loyalties. Some of them wore the uniform too.

If Kerry is over 30% by the convention, I give up on this place. The dumbing down of America is complete.

[dpwiener]

Just because it was "voted" down the entire meeting was a criminal conspiracy. You do not get together and vote on whether US Senators are to be killed.

That's ridiculous. If you go to an Elks Club meeting, and someone stands up and proposes that the club members go out and kill their US Senator, and you and the other club members say that it's a stupid idea and it shouldn't be done, how does that make you part of a criminal conspiracy? You said "NO". If you had supported the plan, then you would be part of a criminal conspiracy.

It is so pathetic to attempt to claim Kerry was involved in a criminal conspiracy after he opposed a plan which was then voted down by the group and never carried out.

Attack Kerry on the issues. Attack Kerry on his voting record. Attack Kerry on his flip-flops.

But if you persist in inventing non-existent criminal conspiracies and attacking Kerry over his involvement in those imaginary conspiracies, then don't be surprised when Kerry is inaugurated next January as the next President of the United States.

[Texasforever]

That's ridiculous. If you go to an Elks Club meeting, and someone stands up and proposes that the club members go out and kill their US Senator, and you and the other club members say that it's a stupid idea and it shouldn't be done, how does that make you part of a criminal conspiracy?

Simple. It is against federal law NOT to report a threat against a Federal official. This is not rocket science.

[isthisnickcool]

But if you persist in inventing non-existent criminal conspiracies and attacking Kerry over his involvement in those imaginary conspiracies, then don't be surprised when Kerry is inaugurated next January as the next President of the United States.

If they had a meeting and in that meeting they discussed MURDER and actually voted "yes/no" on it as if it was a viable option that's shocking to me. I'd like to know if that actually happened. If it did and Kerry was there and he participated in such a vote that's stunning. It's something a terror group would do.

[dpwiener]

It is against federal law NOT to report a threat against a Federal official.

I strongly doubt that there is any legal obligation to report a threat if the attack is not expected to take place. If someone says "I'm so angry at my Congressman that I'd like to kill him" do you have to report that "threat"? Perhaps you do if you think the person will actually carry out the threat, but not if you believe he won't. In the latter case both his and your First Amendment rights would be violated by such a legal requirement.

If you can point me to this mythical federal law which really requires all "threats" to be reported, I'll concede I'm wrong. I don't believe that such a law exists. Any federal law you can find regarding threats to federal officials is certain to be limited and circumscribed. Because if it did exist in the form you describe, it would long ago have been ruled unconstitutional.

[wingman1]

You may be right, but I keep coming back to Kerry's claim that he quit VVAW at the STL meeting. There has to be a reason why and that is, he is aware of the dangers posed by being placed at the KC meeting where conspiracy to commit murder was discussed.

Also Kerry quitting the group did not remove the threat of a plan still being carried out. If anything, one less moderating voice would increase the likelihood of the group going off the deep end.

It is also important to recall the times we lived in back then - when several assassinations took place, as well as violent protests and bombings.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

This is as much as saying he was there and got caught lying.

[NYCVirago]

Nicosia says some of the (stolen) files were "explosive". Interesting choice of words....

But Nicosia had said earlier he didn't know what was in those files, as he hadn't gone through all of them yet. Something's very fishy here.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Actually, Kerry's pretty hardboiled. He made an assassination joke about Dan Quail. It could be that talk of killing people is common with Kerry & Friends, which doesn't surprise me after seeing so many possible victims of the Arkansas Flu.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

You are likely correct about the legal points. Then there is the ethical side. Someone in that group did later commit a political assassination. It was low level, a superintendent of schools I think it was. Kerry might have been able to prevent that. And, as I said before, Kerry also made a public joke about assassinating Dan Quail. That was back in the late 80s or early 90s. There you have it. Kerry is clearly an immoral person with a jaded sense of humor and pent up frustrations that would make him a danger to anyone who crossed him if he had executive power. This is also backed up by his temper tantrums. Hitler had a comparable temper. Anger is ok if one knows how to vent it properly. Making public assassination jokes about a vice president is not a good way to vent anger.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

A member of that group later did commit a political assassination. And, Kerry later made a public assassination joke about a vice president. You might want to factor those points in. How does all of that added in make this issue turn out?