Newspaper Casts Doubt on Kerry's Talks with UN Security Council (or...Kerry LIED)

CNSNEWS.com ^ | 10/25/04 | Susan Jones

[kattracks]

(CNSNews.com) - Sen. John F. Kerry says he met at length with all the members of the U.N. Security Council the week before he voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq. But did he?

According to a Washington Times investigation, Kerry talked to at least a few members of the panel -- but "no such meeting, as described by Mr. Kerry on a number of occasions over the past year, ever occurred," the newspaper said.

"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," the article said.

Kerry repeatedly has emphasized his willingness to listen to other nations. "This president hasn't listened," Kerry said in the second presidential debate.

"I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted (on authorizing the use of force in Iraq). "I went to New York. I talked to all of them [members of the U.N. Security Council] to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable," the Washington Times quoted Kerry as saying in the second debate.

The newspaper also refers to the following exchange at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in December 2003:

ANDY NAGORSKI (Newsweek): Senator, it's one thing to say that diplomacy on Iraq was bad. It's another to suggest that good diplomacy could have brought everybody along, as you seem to do. Do you think you really could have brought the Germans, the French along in a commitment to use force, if necessary, if you had been president?

KERRY: Yes. (Laughter, applause.)

NAGORSKI: Would you care to explain how, especially given --

KERRY: Absolutely. Absolutely and unequivocally.

NAGORSKI: If --

KERRY: I will explain. Let me explain to you very specifically. Thanks to some friends in New York, I was invited to come up and meet with the Security Council in the week prior to the vote, and I wanted to do that, because I valued my vote. And I wanted to know what the real readiness and willingness of our partners was to take this seriously. So I sat with the French and British, Germans, 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 reached directly for comment by the Washington Times, 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 newspaper reported.

[lsee]

Mwah-hahahahaha...

[international american]

Kerry lied?? Oh come now....ROTF!

[airborne]

Pathological!

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Well, he did talk to them before he decided not to.

[ClearCase_guy]

Better headline: "More lies from Kerry, as Dem Desperation grows"

Next to: "Cheering throngs greet Bush at campaign stop"

[tomnbeverly]

America should question Kerry's truthfullness.

Well I actually did go to meet them before I actually met them which I never really did.

I might make a mistake about how I talk about meeting with leaders but at least I didn't actually go to the UN and present a case to the Leaders. Which is worse?

Is Kerry INSANE?

[yoe]

Mr. Kerry is less than trueful about 95% of what he says...as is the MSM...

[mewzilla]

I'll point this out on one more thread, and then I'll shut up :)

Kerry has been talking about his contacts with the Axis of Weasels for months, bragging about his access and his ties. The Weasels don't gainsay him until now? And they seem to be denying meetings. How about any other kinds of contacts?

What if, for once, Kerry wasn't lying? Whay could Kerry have done for the Weasels that makes it preferable to be labeled a liar?

I say more investigation needs to be done. We shouldn't take Kerry's, or the Weasels', word for jack!

[FreePaul]

...as it clashes with one of his central foreign-policy campaign themes -- honesty," the article said.

Honesty has never been a consideration in any of Kerry's actions. He has made a career of lying whenever he thought that it would serve his purpose.

[sodpoodle]

"So I sat with the French and British, Germans, 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".

Let's hear more Senator Kerry! Who were these people? What did they actually say to you and did the French explain they had too many productive deals with Saddam that they intended to support him?

Is there video of this interview?

[Jose Roberto]

The lies keep on coming. I am not surprised by this, the libs don't even care, they take Kerry and Michael Moore at face value, what can you say?

[ServesURight]

[sweetiepiezer]

Kerry Lied Good Men Died!!!!!!!!!

[mewzilla]

Here's another question: Why was the Axis Of Weasels so convinced they could keep us from invading Iraq? Inquiring minds want to know...

[JustaCowgirl]

It isn't just the fact that he's a serial liar. The amazing thing is that in this instance he told an absolute whopper several times about something that would be easily checked and found to be false! The only surprising thing to me is that it took this long. I knew that was a lie the minute it came out of his mouth.

Is Kerry so out of touch with reality that he didn't think someone would check the story and find it false? Or is this a symptom of extreme narcissism (which has got to be a form of insanity). Or does he just believe the media are so in the tank for him that he can say anything and get away with it? Unfortunately, he probably will get away with it, because the leftist media will refuse to cover it.

[badpacifist]

Both "bombshells" are duds really. The Ny Times will get more MSM airtime and already is. The difference is that one is our militarys fault and Kerry's exploitation of that can be turned back on him. Also security council issue shows Kerry is lying, but that isn't news.

[EdReform]

Ping

[new cruelty]

It is highly doubtful that the msm will even mention this story.

[Arnold Zephel]

Johnny Nuance will come up with some elaborate semantical ballet to explain this obvious untruth. Something to the effect of "It was an unofficial meeting, so there were no records of the meeting kept."

The people that want to believe him will believe him. If this is the "October Surprise" we have been anticipating, it is a pretty pathetic one. Most reasonable people already know that Kerry is a pathological liar. But, it seems that roughly 45% of Americans, aided by a venal partisan press, want to believe his lies, so they will no matter the evidence the contrary.