October 25, 2004
WASN'T IT JUST A GENERIC POINT ABOUT HIM BEING A U.N. MAN?:
Security Council members deny meeting Kerry (Joel Mowbray, 10/24/04, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)
U.N. ambassadors from several nations are disputing assertions by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry that he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq.An investigation by The Washington Times reveals that while the candidate did talk for an unspecified period to at least a few members of the panel, no such meeting, as described by Mr. Kerry on a number of occasions over the past year, ever occurred. [...]
"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.
In all fairness to the Senator, no one thought he meant it when he said these things, did they? It was just good, old-fashioned hyperbole. The surprise here isn't that he didn't meet with all but that he met with any. Posted by Orrin Judd at October 25, 2004 9:17 AM
Kerry is proving to be more of a fabulist than any of his media cheerleaders. And they don't seem to know what to do about it. Perhaps they should just form a chorus line, and high-kick to all the places Kerry has been: Cambodia, the Security Council chambers, Safwan, and so on.
Posted by: jim hamlen at October 25, 2004 9:51 AMOrrin, seems we're sinking to new depths (as if that were possible).
I mean, who are you choosing to believe here? John F. Kerry or UN Security Council ambassadors?
Posted by: Barry Meislin at October 25, 2004 10:07 AMI haven't been paying much attention to Kerry's stump vaporizing, and I'm glad, lest I should have heard the man say something like this:
"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."
I'm not appalled that he appears to have lied -- on some level you can admire a lying scoundrel (i.e., Bill Clinton) over an utter fool. Passages like Kerry's above would seem to reveal the mindset of an utter fool -- not only did he lie, but he lied hoping that the image of a harmonious international "united front", willing & able to deal with Saddam, sounded like a compelling reason to take him seriously.
Posted by: Twn at October 25, 2004 10:32 AMDidn't we used to have something called the Logan Act about not engaging in private diplomacy?
Posted by: Bart at October 25, 2004 11:19 AMJohn Kerry: Ignoring the Logan Act since 1970!
Posted by: PapayaSF at October 25, 2004 12:46 PMOrrin:
You are being too charitable to Mr. Kerry. After the pedantic raving of the DailyKos trolls last week about your use of the word "any" in describing the casualties in Iraq, turn around is fair play. In this case it is not a single word, but several complete and unambiguous sentences.
It wouldn't surprise me if the serial-prevaricator met with the French Ambassador and thought this qualified as a meeting with the entire Security Council.
Posted by: jd watson at October 25, 2004 12:47 PMThey thought he was one of the hangers on of the French delegation.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at October 25, 2004 1:13 PMI remember his statement during the debate and thinking to myself: "What the hell is he talking about." Unfortunately, as with most listening, I just assumed he wouldn't tell one that verifyable by the MSM. Well ... I know people who admit voting for Clinton ... twice. As P.T. Barnum said: "You can fool[...] some of the people all of the time."
Posted by: genecis at October 25, 2004 2:43 PMWhy does Kerry lie about something normal Americans would be reluctant to admit?
Posted by: carter at October 25, 2004 3:26 PM