Wash Times: Security Council members deny meeting Kerry (Oct Surprise)

[Dickie Flatt]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041024-110609-9428r.htm

According to Kos, this is the October surprise. Unfortunately, again from Kos, the story is wrong.

Possible point of error in the story, thanks to Atrios: "Most likely what he meant was that he met with the permanent Security Council, plus who knows who else. Permanent SC=US+French, British, Russians, China."

My advice? Ignore this unless it becomes absolutely necessary to do otherwise. Push the missing explosives story; it has real impact on our national security and this crap deserves no attention whatsoever.

Nevertheless, here it is, folks, the October Surprise:

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. ...

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.

[Cha]

1. So I guess Kerry knows about this and is ready

with rapid response.

[gmoney]

2. Yawn...

this will go nowhere...

Now, if they had a photo of Kerry in a silly hat, then THAT would be news

[CookieD]

34. Don't say yawn!

Every time one of us says "yawn" and predicts an anti-Kerry story will go nowhere, the exact opposite occurs. The media salivates like Pavlov's dog and the story grows legs like, well, Pavlov's dog.

First it'll be the story. Then it'll be the story about the story - as in, "did this latest revelation about U.N. meetings knock Senator Kerry 'off message.' Is it too late for him to recover?"

Never, ever underestimate the whoreishness of the Bush-boosting media.

[kwyjibo]

3. And Bush saw the first plane hit the WTC

big deal.

[detroit]

4. Seems pretty technical to me

Kerry met with some of them, but not all of them. So... Kerry didn't take attendance. So what? When he said "I talked to all of them about" wouldn't the "all" refer to all the people he met with? Sheesh.

[juliagoolia]

5. Ah Phooey.. betcha its a blown up.... not true etc.. eom

I don't believe that Kerry Lies.. I really do NOT believe that.
I think that he will turn the tables on these scum and will be proven correct.

Regardless if this is the story its not much of a story... Bush lied so many times they have commissions on them.

[Unstuck In Time]

6. How many members of the Security Council are there? n/t

[burrowowl]

28. 15

Five permanent: U$, Britain, France, Russia, China: these five have veto power
The other 10 are rotated.

[ruggerson]

7. This is worse than Bush's denial of his "Bin Laden" remark?

Which later turned out to be a big, fat lie?

[mzmolly]

8. Grasping at straws ...

What a relief, this is ALL they got?! :eyes:

[Teaser]

9. L-izz-ame!

truly lame.

[KittyWampus]

10. So Which Members Were Absent? Poland?

:D

[paper chase guy]

23. Damn, you beat me.

:(

[unfrigginreal]

11. Devastating!

:wow:

[desiindian]

12. Non-story. Even Sludge is not touching it. Go Cheney yourself Joe Mowgli..

[maddezmom]

13. who gives a crap??? let's talk the cover-up of 380 tons of explosives

nah, the WashTimes doesn't think it's an important story. :eyes:

[ranosgol]

14. who gives a $%$%^ freaking moonie paper....will not matter..n

no minds wil change over this who gives a crap.

[agingdem]

15. And Cheney never met John Edwards before the VP debate, right?

Didn't Rove pull this crap in 2000 when Gore said he met with the director of FEMA? Sorry, Karl, no one is buying the garbage you're selling!

[Ediacara]

16. What a terrifically dumb story.....

The Washington Times quotes Kerry as saying:

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.

Then the article goes on to IMPLY that Kerry says he had a single meeting with all 15 (actually 14 stupid Washington Times.....) ambassadors all at once. The Times can't even cobble together a selective quotation that says that but they imply, imply imply....

The thing that makes this article completely silly is this: The Security Counsel is made up of 5 permanent members: the US (which is why Kerry would have only had a 14 member meeting....), the UK, France, China and Russia; and 10 rotating members. All 15 members vote, but just one of the five permanent seats can veto ANYTHING that comes before the Security Counsel, so the 10 rotating seats are really in effect window dressing. I don't view the Security Counsel as functionally anything more than the 5 permanent members, and I am sure most people hold the same opinion.

The two ambassadors that are permanent members that the Moonie Times could get ahold of (France and the UK), say they DID talk with Kerry! As for Russia and China, I'm sure they'll keep their ambassadorial mouths shut...

[Dickie Flatt]

17. Atrios explains

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004/10/he-forgot-bulgaria.html

What Kerry said was:
---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.

Most likely what he meant was that he met with the permanent Security Council, plus who knows who else. Permanent SC=US+French, British, Russians, China.

[sandnsea]

20. Yes, he met with foreign leaders

Just like he said he did and just like he was bashed for early in the year. He was willing to take the bashing rather than name names. THAT is integrity, diplomatic and says everything about his character.

[paper chase guy]

22. This is almost like forgetting about Poland...

He forgot about Bulgaria! and Colombia!

Much respect to those nations, buuuut...

[Zero Division]

18. More lies about Kerry from the Moonie Times.

Big surprise there.:eyes:

[sandnsea]

19. So he DID meet with foreign leaders

Just like he said he did. Goes to show you don't have to leave the country to meet with foreign leaders, nice for a few to admit they met with him now.

He met with members of the security council, like he's always said and now we know it's absolutely true. That's the most important thing in this story to me.

[DemFromMem]

21. What he said

"I believe in my heart of hearts and in my gut that this president fails that test in Iraq. And I know this because I, personally, and others were deeply involved in the effort with other countries to bring them to the table. I met with the Security Council of the United Nations in the week preceding the vote in the Senate."

This is from a transcript from a Q & A Kerry did at a campaign event. Go to http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/05/lt.02.html to see it.

First, he did not say he met formally with the Security Council nor did he say he met with all members. He probably meant he consulted with some Security Council members and not necessarily all 15 of them. By the way, note that none of the contacted ambassadors noted seem to be from permanent member countries. One would presume those would be of higher priority since they have veto power.

Second, he did not say who he met with from these countries. It is quite possible he consulted with the Foreign Minister or with that country's ambassador to the US as opposed to their ambassador to the UN. Maybe even the Prime Minister.

Finally, I am sure diplomats would not want to now publicly admit they met with Kerry lest they be appeared to be taking sides in our election.

I suspect that Kerry's response should be that the Washington Times simply has the story wrong and given the track record of the paper, that's not really a surprise.

[timezoned]

24. "Did he forget Poland?"

is definitely the response. It's perfect.

And laugh it off.

BTW the permanent members as a group are commonly referred to as "the security council"

[Robeson]

25. The credibility of our political systems and media....

....should have been questioned, when this Moonie rag was actually given credentials as a "news" source. If the Washington Times can be quoted, and its journalists can be put on political shows, then I want to know why the National Enquirer and Star haven't been given equal time?

[nolabels]

32. ...............just plainly suck to the point of pathetic

http://www.journalism.bsu.edu/classes/pfarmen/ardirec6.html

[debatepro]

26. ITS A COUNTER CURRENT

They want to minimize the impact of the NYT story. The administration was asked questions last week about it. They sat on this non story until it would might get some counter play from a Extremely damaging story.

“…Rice, was informed within the past month that the explosives were missing…American officials have never publicly announced the disappearance, but beginning last week they answered question about it posed by The New York Times and CBS News program 60 Minutes”

So they new it was coming and they save something simple to disseminate to the masses when it broke as a countercurrent.

[sonicx]

27. This story is proof they don't have Bin Laden

If this is the October Surprise, bush might as well back his bags. Too pathetic...

[bling bling]

29. More articles by same author -- consider the source:

Archive of some of the OTHER recent articles by same author (headlines only)

October 15, 2004 Cataloging Kerry’s Canards
October 4, 2004 Kerry’s Vision—Or Lack Thereof
September 30, 2004 Jimmy Carter Goes (Pea)Nutty
September 3, 2004 Cheney Politicizes 9/11: Thank God
August 13, 2004 Kerry: Yep, I’m Back to Pro-War
August 3, 2004 Kerry's Backward Bounce
July 20, 2004 Kerry’s Quandary: Trying to be Both Pro- and Anti-War
July 16, 2004 Exploiting America’s Dead for Political Gain

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/joelmowbray/archive.shtml

[BUSHOUT]

30. Yawn. What a joke! It's so obviously just a Kerry bash piece...

they even had to pull in old innuendo about the foreign leader "endorsements" and make mention that "Vietnam veterans" have made "numerous" charges of dishonesty over his war record.

What a rag hatchet job! I've never seen this paper, is it like a tabloid? I have a hard time seeing any respectable news media pick this story up. It's garbage.

They're making an issue over what they perceived Kerrys words to mean - namely that he had a formal meeting with the whole security council.
If he met with a few members in a non-formal fashion, that would still qualify his words.

Krimey, what a joke!

[Eloriel]

31. This isn't the Oct Surprise

Not even close. This is just the continuation of the smear Kerry campaign.

Any October Surprise (and I pretty much expect there will be one) will be MUCH bigger, badder, more devastating, and occur a little later, probably.

[snippy]

49. Agreed. This lacks the element of slime Bush and Rove are known for. n/t

[_NorCal_D_]

33. Pathetic.

Is this the only 'dirt' that they could conjure up? You are quite right, this is a total non-issue and it should be treated as such.

[Tight_rope]

35. Nothing to see here...Moving along!

[krkaufman]

36. Countries are "Mexico, Colombia and Bulgaria (and unnamed)"

Ah, that 'splains it. Gotta wonder is Atrios isn't on the right track.

[George_S]

37. Joel Mowbray wouldn't exactly want the WHOLE truth

And undoubtedly only wrote the negative. This one will probably backfire too and will look like desperation.

How do I know? Because they are desperate!

[Zorra]

38. References to the UN Security Council are usually only about 5 permanent

members: China, France, Russia, UK, US.

Apparently, the Washington Times is so internationally unrecognized as a legitimate news source that its reporters are "out of the loop" in international affairs. This is really not surprising.

None of the permanent members of the UN Security Council have disputed John Kerry's statement.

This article by Reverend Tsung Myung Moon's right wing propaganda "newspaper" is nothing more than a pathetic, bizarre, and desperate attempt to offset the impending Kerry landslide vicory in the upcoming election.

What could we expect from a "newspaper" that is owned by the self-proclaimed "messiah", Reverend Moon?

Bwaaahaaaahaaaahaaahaaahaaahaaa.

Republicans really need to get a life. This is pitiful.

[w4rma]

42. wtf? lmao! Bulgaria! They forgot Poland!!!! LOL! This is a dud.

I agree, btw, it's the 5 PERMANENT members of the security council that folks talk in this context. Not Bulgaria.

No offence to Bulgaria or Bulgarians, of course. :)

[progressivebydesign]

39. Joel Mowbray.. the guy who has MICHELLE MALKIN review his BOOKS!

Now THAT is a JOURNALIST! NOT. More smearing bullshit. The comment by one Ambassador that.. "the meeting didn't happen, AT LEAST NOT TO MY RECOLLECTION". (not to my recollection.. ah, the qualifiyer!).

Such bullshit. We forgot Poland.

[Nicholas_J]

40. Notice that so far, only the Washington Times,The Bush Mouthpiece

Has broken the story, and in fact, only paid members of the "Coalition of the Willing: are stating that they "do not remember" such a meeting. The nations that voted against Bush's Iraq plans who were on the S.C. remeber meeting with Kerry. Kerry's earliest claims were to have met with the Security Council Members, mentioning nothing about a grand panel of the entire SC meeting at once. Even during the debates, Kerry says he met with members of the Security Council, not a panel of the entire council all at once. In fact, in looking at articles so far, all I can locate Kerry saying is that I met with the Security Council a week before the resolution was signed.

This was Kerry's las mention of meeting with the Security Council:

And I came away absolutely convinced. I spent two hours with the Security Council — the
French, the German, the British, and so forth. And I came away convinced that if we did our
diplomacy correctly, if we took the time to show the world we were legitimate, if we went
through the process, they’d have to enforce those (inspections), they’d have to for the sake of
U.N.’s credibility in the world.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/oct04/268903.asp


All other articles in which Kerry mentions meeting with the SC are in the same vein. There is no mention that I can find of his meeting with a grand session with the entire S.C. present at the same time.

[truthisfreedom]

41. hmm. here's a freeper-style site i wasn't aware of until i did a search

on news.google.com for "security council Kerry":


http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=178437

seems they're just as harsh as the freepers. the link on news.google.com said that it's out of Taiwan? weird.

[Judi Lynn]

45. Oh, gosh! Lucianne Goldberg is Linda Tripp's publisher pal

who conspired with her on the right way for Tripp to trap Lewinsky. She was also the one who went along on campaign trips in the 1960's as a supporter with McGovern, or Muskie. Good grief.



What a colossal battle axe,
gas bag, misanthrope.
Lucianne, my sweet!



Lucianne lookalike
Erneset Borgnine

[Carolab]

43. If the squawking heads talk about this

instead of the stolen explosives cover-up, let's PELT THEM WITH ROCKS

[maddezmom]

46. Faux News' Molly some blond anchor...just did

they will use this to combat the weapons story...don't think it'll work anywhere but FAUX.

[ThoughtCriminal]

44. Reminds me of the Gore-FEMA story

The one where they screamed that Gore lied about visiting Texas fires with FEMA director Witt (It was actually one of Witt's deputies).

Pretty lame - really embarrassing.

[Evergreen Emerald]

47. Just think...

..if the Times had spent as much time on whether or not there were WMD or on the yellow cake story, or on the aluminum tube story. Perhaps 1,100 of our citizens would be alive today.

[MrBenchley]

48. He forgot Bulgaria!

Wow...how pathetic is that?