Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (5720)	3/20/2004 5:42:56 PM
From: E	Respond to of 90947

Thanks for that post. I was just PMing with someone about that, and I'd like to add what I said to that person, who asked me what I'd have done had I been at a meeting where somebody suggested something that I thought might result in an assassination later by some hotheads, even though the group shot it down (I know the FBI report didn't say that, but for the sake of argument...). This was my PM: Saturday, March 20, 2004 5:36 PM ET To: _________________ From: E According to Mr. Nicosia, the FBI documents and other records do not include any direct reference to the assassination plot. However, Mr. Nicosia said some informants who attended the Kansas City meeting warned the FBI of a “drastic move toward more violent actions.” Don't you think that if the life of the president was being threatened by someone it would rise to an importance level sufficient to cause the FBI to bother to make note of it? And you have no idea what Kerry did after he argued against a (purported) suggestion to get violent, voted against it, resigned and went home... you do not know what happened at that meeting, and even more, what Kerry did after he left it. The phone number of the local FBI office is in the phonebook, and people call it all the time. What would YOU do? Assuming that I believed someone's life was in danger, I"d do exactly what Kerry did at the meeting, then go home and call 555 1234 and tell them I had reason to believe that Bill, Fred and Alice were going to do something illegal and possibly violent. I'd bet my house that if the situation was like that, he'd do exactly that. It's not only natural, it's self-preservative. Going to a birthday party in an hour, have to get dressed up a little.

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (5720)	3/20/2004 8:48:12 PM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 90947

Scott Camil,“proposed the assassination of the most hard-core conservative members of Congress,as well as any other powerful, intractable opponents of the antiwar movement.”The book reports on the Kansas City meeting at which Mr.Camil’s plan was debated and then voted down. daily.nysun.com If that was indeed the story, then there is more than just some nut and his passing interest. and to boot, is Camil working for Kerry even now? In a phone interview with the Sun this week, Mr. Camil did not dispute either the account in the Nicosia book or in the oral history.He said he plans to accept an offer by the Florida Kerry organization to become active in Mr. Kerry’s presidential campaign. Campaign aides to Mr. Kerry invited Mr.Camil to a meeting for the senator in Orlando last week, but they did not meet directly. Mr. Camil was known to colleagues in the anti-war movement as “Scott the Assassin.” Mr. Camil told The New York Sun he got the name in Vietnam for “sneaking down to the Vietnamese villages at night and killing people.” if this man is known as Scott the assassin why would a few more notches bother him,.... all for the sake of the cause, of course and Kerry does nothing????? BULLSQUAT

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (5720)	3/21/2004 12:24:54 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

OMD, my problem is that if true, conspiracy to commit murder may have happened whether or not it was voted down. That is, as long as at least two folks were in favor of doing it - that's all that is needed to conspire to commit murder. It seems to me from what has been reported that there were far more than two in favor - who's to say they wouldn't have gone off on their own & try it anyway? As far as I'm concerned, the fact that Kerry was against it is moot. He did nothing when it became more than obvious that his VVAW peers had become more than a bunch of radicals. They had become lawless radicals, some with the intent to assassinate US Senators (again if this turns out to be true). Considering the acts committed by these VVAW folks, we were lucky that it didn't happen IMO. Kerry remaining silent about this is not the proper reaction of a responsible person, let alone one who had political aspirations both then & now to become President. This is no different than his false testimony to the SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE where he lied about war crimes that were, "not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command...." He never repudiated it, nor did he ever take any action to see to it that this was properly & fully investigated. That speaks volumes to me about the lack of character, morals & ethics necessary to become President of the USA.