Monday, October 25, 2004


Kerry Lied About Metting With UN Security Council Before Iraq War Vote - Is anyone Surprised?

Security Council members deny meeting Kerry This is really an article for those of you who are still undecided. Those of you who have followed the campaign closesly knows that Kerry and his team will say anything - true or not - to try to win this election. This theme is throughout my blog, that these guys will do whatever it takes and as long as they reach their goals, the ends always justify the means to them. This comes close to the most blatant lie Kerry has told. And compare this lie (saying he met with the security council when he did not), to the left's accusation of Bush's lie (passing on information from credible sources which later turned out to be bad intelligence). If Bush was lying, Kerry is committing a mortal sin.

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.

Perhaps the most insulting of this entire lie is the elitism with which they try to explain the fact that Kerry did not meet with the security council:

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."

Yet the evidence is still damning:

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."

Even Kerry's precious UN can't produce, or even suggest the meeting took place.

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?