This is the key paragraph, IMO. From what I've gathered, it is also probably true. 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.
Even if my above paragraph is true, I suppose that if enough noise is made about it, it could be damaging to him. And why not play it that way? It's the way he plays it.
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.
Who other than Kerry's staff people are saying Kerry voted "no"?
I think you're correct that JK was apparently not in favor of the assassination. But he is culpable on several charges which I believe are legitimate. He actually may not have left the organization after this meeting as he said he did. There's some evidence he worked with VVAW on into 1972; therefore, he is lying today about his involvement then. But even more serious to Kerry is the fact that he did not report the threat of assassination to anyone. It seems that the FBI had infiltrated the group and knew about the plan, but Kerry wouldn't have known that. He had already planned at that point to run for Congress, so he should have been public-service minded enough to pass this info along. And there WAS an attempt on Sen. Stennis's life several years later and two of the other reputed targeted legistators later died in plane crashes.