Did Kerry Lie about Attending the Signing of the Gulf-War Ceasefire

O'Reilly Factor ^ | 24 Sept 2004 | Rokke

[Rokke]

I just watched the rerun of O'Reilly's 2001 interview with Kerry discussing the need to invade Iraq. In that interview, Kerry said the following: "I mean, I was in Safwan. I went there when the signing of the armistice took place at the end of the war." I've watched the video of the cease-fire signing at Safwan. It was still in a combat zone. I don't remember seeing anyone but military officers. Can anyone provide additional insight, or has Kerry lied again.

[KneelBeforeZod]

He didn't say he was at the peace signing.

he said he was in the town.

[texastoo]

He may have been with the UN delegation. Wouldn't doubt it. The UN signing was April 8, 1991.

[JesseJane]

ROFL...MEEP MEEP! Coming through...

[JesseJane]

Wouldn't there be some kind of Congressional travel records on this??

[EaglesUpForever]

Well, that's proof then. He's not a flip-flopping liar, he's a time-traveling astronaut!

[Mad Dog Charlie]

In March 1991, following the victory of U.S. forces in the Gulf War, Cox leads a delegation to Kuwait to offer Orange County's assistance in the effort to reconstruct war-torn Kuwait.

http://cox.house.gov/html/accomplishments.cfm?id=197

[ArmstedFragg]

The UN signing was April 8, 1991

That'll make an interesting search. Senator Heinz's funeral was on the 10th.

[js1138]

A delegation of senators yesterday told US soldiers massed on the Iraqi border that it is unlikely US forces will intervene in Iraq's civil war and predicted that the soldiers will return home soon to a hero's welcome. The delegation swooped down in glistening helicopters on the border outpost of Safwan, Iraq, to meet with the US Army's 1st Armored Division, which helped spearhead the allied ground offensive against Iraq and tangled with the Republican Click for complete article (649 words)

This is a pretty interesting find. If Kerry was part of this delegation he might not want to take credit for it. Recall that this was the beginning of the betrayal of the Shiites (...it is unlikely US forces will intervene in Iraq's civil war ...).

[The Bandit]

I just saw it again and picked up some more of what Kerry said:

"I mean, I was in Safwan. I went there when the signing of the armistice took place at the end of the war...and I remember seeing the land there..."

So clearly he is claiming he was physically there seeing the land. Has anyone come up with anything that suggests he was EVER there ar ANY time?

[HannaUSA]

Actually I suspect he WAS part of that delegation, based on the criteria of my search, however, I just heard him again on O'Reilly and he said "I was AT...." and March 17 is a long way from March 3 and the border in Kuwait is a long way from where the signing was, but this is how he works.......he uses just enough truth that he can fall back on it if people that don't really want the truth out ask the questions.

[Jet Jaguar]

Saw it as well. He didn't say Kuwait or Saudi Arabia, he said Safwan.

[js1138]

We know some senators visited after the war, but not for the signing.

This is interesting. Kerry can't even be Forrest Gump or tourist guy.

[HannaUSA]

I wonder, if we started looking into some old speeches or the goofball if we can find more claims of grandeur to shove up his nose.......or elsewhere? Might be an interesting mission. Care to join me anyone?

[texastoo]

LOL!

I have read since that the date was April 18, 1991.

[texastoo]

These should be travel records. I have even tried junkets.

[HannaUSA]

There is no other result between March 1 and May 1 for both Kerry and Safwan at the Boston Globe and had Kerry been involved, they would have reported it.

[DC Bound]

If our speculation is true, which is likely, it isn't going to be big enough to make a splash. The right will hear about it, but the left is like the old soviet union. They have an Iron Curtain that prevents truth from getting in. A person who only goes to DU and CBS news online, and follows their links, will never realize there is truth right around the corner. Most of the people voting for Kerry are either already dead, scared of losing their social security, or communists. None of them are very internet savvy, and none will ever even hear about this.

The only way this makes a dent in Kerry is if he wasn't there that year. This lie is just too susceptible to spin.

[DC Bound]

Have you searched with other key words like delegation, senators, saudi arabia, etc? Another poster suggested the delegation didn't go to Safwan.

[Free2BeMe]

I researched Kerry's congressional records and couldn't find anything for March 17 1991 but he addressed congress on March 19 1991...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r102:43:./temp/~r102zIRGxW:e138362:

---

THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display

---

DIRE EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS (Senate - March 19, 1991)

---

[Page: S3513]
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, H.R. 1281, the dire emergency supplemental appropriations bill for fiscal year 1991 , as reported by the Appropriations Committee on Thursday, March 14, appropriates a total of $1,569,300,000 in new budget authority and $68,622,000 in outlays for program activities under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Rural Development and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

The largest item, and probably the most critical item in the agriculture chapter, is the supplemental appropriation of $1.3 billion to meet the needs of the Food Stamp Program. Participation and benefit costs continue to grow, and that is the current estimated amount based on recent trends and historical participation patterns. The committee recognizes the need to protect the benefits of low-income Americans.

In order to avoid furlough of Federal and county Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service [ASCS] employees, an additional $46.9 million is provided. These funds are required because of major increases in workload areas and program changes related to the 1990 FACT Act.

A supplemental appropriation of $80 million will enable the Food Safety and Inspection Service to provide full mandatory inspection services to the meat and poultry food industry for the remainder of fiscal year 1991 . This funding is needed to cover the January, 1991 pay raise, the recently enacted 8-percent differential for Federal employees in three major metropolitan areas, and the assumption of the Maryland State Inspection Program.

In addition, this bill includes language which removes the $425 million limitation on Export Enhancement Program [EEP] bonuses that can be awarded during fiscal year 1991 . Current estimates of bonus requirements support a $900 million level. Enactment of this provision will maximize U.S. exports, support farm prices and income, and further U.S. trade policy objectives.

Another important item in the agriculture chapter of the bill allows the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [APHIS] access to the agricultural quarantine inspection account from Treasury. The fees collected will permit APHIS to continue inspection activities at port and airports outside of normal duty hours after the April 1, 1991 , implementation of user fees.

Also, language was included in the report of the supplemental appropriations bill directing the Farmers Home Administration to administer the Emergency Disaster Loan Program in a more effective manner and to utilize task forces to expedite completion and consideration of applications for emergency disaster loans. Only a small amount of this loan authority has been obligated this year, and we believe every effort should be made to accommodate those farmers and producers who have suffered major losses.

Mr. President, I support the agriculture chapter and the appropriations bill as reported by the committee. I commend the chairman of the Committee, Senator Byrd, and the ranking member, Senator Hatfield, for their dedicated efforts and work in bringing this bill to the floor. I recommend it to my colleagues.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I would like to express my support for the Leahy amendment. I support the measure because it is designed to address the crisis facing our Nation's dairy farmers. It is a timely response, and one that attempts to address the difficulties faced by producers of both grade A and grade B milk. If Congress fails to act now, both the producer and the consumer will feel the undesirable effects. Large numbers of producers will be forced out of business, which will eventually result in higher prices for consumers.

I remind my colleagues that this amendment is designed to offer a short-term response to the dairy situation. It will offer relief now, in an effort to ensure that dairy farmers have a chance to survive until Congress can finish work on meaningful reform of the dairy program In the coming months, this body will be taking up the issue of long-term supply management for the dairy industry. I hope that a long-term program, that is designed to offer the producer a fair price while offering the consumer a dependable supply, will be the result. In the meantime, the Leahy amendment is needed to avoid extreme hardship in the U.S. dairy industry.

Mr. KERRY . Madam President, today I am voting in support of Senator Leahy's amendment to provide emergency relief to the Nation's dairy farmers.

I have never been one to favor increased agricultural price supports and, in fact, tried repeatedly to diminish such programs in last year's farm bill. Today, however, I was persuaded by some particularly convincing arguments. First, I have been assured that the situation is indeed critical. In Massachusetts, the average full-time family farm made $35,000 to $40,000 in profits last year. This year, they will only see profits of $10,000. That is well below the poverty line.

Clearly this is an emergency situation for these families. And it occurs at a time when the economy is down and unemployment is high--nearly 10 percent for the Commonwealth as a whole. We don't need yet another sector of our State economy to go into bankruptcy.

Second, I was persuaded by the temporary nature of this amendment and by the fact that the dairy program was not dealth with last year. The 1990 farm bill asked only that the Agriculture Secretary make recommendations to Congress for overhauling this program.

Had Congress debated this last year, I would say we should stick to those agreements. I would not agree to changes for those commodity programs that were discussed last year. And had the dairy farmers been suffering when we were debating the farm bill, I would say that that was the time for this discussion. But last year, dairy farmers were stable and Congress left the program to be dealth with this year. Now we must support these farmers while we take the time to consider their situation and devise a long-term program that is fair to farmers and consumers alike.

I am optimistic that dairy program revisions will be debated by Congress this year and that new management, distribution, and pricing systems will be in place by early next year. I'd like to make it clear that my support of this amendment is predicated on these changes occurring.

Finally, I want to point out that the Weld administration in Massachusetts and the State department of food and agriculture tell me that this measure is needed.

Madam President, more than one-third of dairy farms in Massachusetts have failed in the past 3 years. I would like to see the remaining 435 farms in my State stay in business, at least for the next year while the dairy program is revised.

[js1138]

FR is great, but this really requires Lexus Nexus and the resourses of a profesional researcher. Powerline. Little Green Footballs, NRO. Someone with clout needs to pick this up.