The Kennedy KGB letter Updated with info about the NIE leak

posted at 10:47 pm on October 20, 2006 by Bryan

So you want answers, eh? Not satisfied with the CNS report?

I’ve got answers.

There’s a new book on Ronald Reagan making the rounds, The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism. Its author, Paul Kengor, unearthed a sensational document from the Soviet archives. That document is a memo regarding an offer made by Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts via former Senator John Tunney, both Democrats, to the General Secretary of the Communist Party, USSR, Yuri Andropov, in 1983. The offer was to help the Soviet leadership, military and civilian, conduct a PR campaign in the United States as President Ronald Reagan sought re-election. The goal of the PR campaign would be to cast President Reagan as a warmonger, the Soviets as willing to peacefully co-exist, and thereby turn the electorate away from Reagan. It was a plan to enlist Soviet help, and use the American press, in unseating an American president.

Think about that.

I received a review copy of The Crusader on Wednesday. The book first references the Kennedy plan on page 206, and includes the complete Soviet memo, dated May 14, 1983, in the Appendix. It’s an eye opener.

If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y. V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interview. Specifically, the board of directors of ABC, Elton Raul and the television columnists Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters could visit Moscow. The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.

Just, not the senator himself. Because collaborating with the leadership of a foreign state to unseat an American president, by whatever means, could be seen by Americans as treasonous. No fingerprints, that’s the rule. Who knew Reagan would win and then defeat the USSR, so this document could see the light of day?

The Kennedy KGB memo runs about four pages. If there’s an honest liberal left in the country, it would be nice to have their take on this revelation.

Update: Hoo-boy. The Congressional staffer who was suspended on suspicion of leaking the NIE has been revealed. He works for Democrat Rep. Jane Harman.

Update: I should clear up a misconception that’s making the rounds, and that’s the authorship of the memo. Ted Kennedy didn’t write the memo. The memo’s author is V. Chebrikov, head of the Committee on State Security of the USSR–the KGB. It seems to have been written as an after-action in response to a meeting with former Sen. John V. Tunney. Tunney had been sent to the USSR to propose the strategy on Kennedy’s behalf to Andropov. The timing of the meeting isn’t immediately clear from the memo, but if the meeting took place it was most likely in late April or early May 1983.

I think the next step here is to nail down the authenticity of the memo. If it’s real, then the story is obviously very significant. If it’s not real, there’s no story here at all.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

So Ted was going to leave his Country at the bottom of the River?

Drtuddle on October 20, 2006 at 10:52 PM

Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2006 at 10:59 PM

Wow. Talk about pissing on your own brother’s anti-communist legacy.

Ted will deliberately drive off a bridge before he cops to this.

infidel4life on October 20, 2006 at 11:03 PM

PROOF, They will stop at nothing.
Lies, deceit, bridge&rivers,CIA leakers, treason, collusion.
UN-Common Criminals.
TREASON is the business of the Dhimmi Democrat Left. It all adds up.

shooter on October 20, 2006 at 11:03 PM

Leaving a lady to drown was not enough. His desperation led him to also consider coliding with foreign forces to commit a heroic act for the democratic party. He must be the best politcal jackass that the world would ever know. AG Gonzales: It is to act.

Ouabam on October 20, 2006 at 11:04 PM

But Ouabam, is it too late? I’m thiniking it may be but that doesn’t mean Kennedy shouldn’t be in jail for a number of offenses. This is just another example of that fine Senator from MA. I don’t really know anyone in MA and wonder why they keep sending him back every 6 years. Does he bring home that much pork or is it just the name I wonder?

Catie96706 on October 20, 2006 at 11:07 PM

Hah! There’s your october surprise.

One napkin: Kennedy writes letter to Soviets, seeking to undermine the US through the media.

Karl Rove, You magnificent bastard!

RiverCocytus on October 20, 2006 at 11:09 PM

Catie –

I live in Mass, and I can’t figure it out either. I think we keep sending him to Washington to keep him off the streets here.

Farmer_Joe on October 20, 2006 at 11:12 PM

Why is this not treason? Conspiring with a foreign gov’t to influence the outcome of a presidential election isn’t treason?

Bad Penny on October 20, 2006 at 11:12 PM

Instead of “Bush lied people died.” How about “Kennedy drank and people sank.”

Mojave Mark on October 20, 2006 at 11:13 PM

i had a very short list of people who should be prosecuted and hung for treason: ramsey clarke, clark kissenger, maybe a couple others allong those lines. i never in my wildest dreams would have considered that ted kennedy would have a clear, unambiguuss position on that list. and yet, there you have it.

jummy on October 20, 2006 at 11:15 PM

An interesting matter. Catie96706. As the messaih of the democratic party, it is imperative to vote for him. About this case. What should we do? Forget about it. Cast it out as some conspiracy theory. In fact, I must be dumb posting comments.

Ouabam on October 20, 2006 at 11:16 PM

Good one Farmer Joe, I never thought of it that way!

Catie96706 on October 20, 2006 at 11:17 PM

Stupid Teddy. All it would have taken was one phone call to Sandy Burglar, and before you could say KGB those documents would have vanished into his boxer shorts thin air.

fogw on October 20, 2006 at 11:22 PM

As for Sandy, he used those document as tissue and masturbated his shit in it. It was redenered too clintinique for evidence. Who knows what is going to happen to this document.

Ouabam on October 20, 2006 at 11:29 PM

What a fat, drunk, bloviating traitor.

Yes, I said it. TRAITOR. If his actions aren’t traitorous, then the definition of that word should be retired.

Also, the manslauthger and such. Teddy’s proud legacy to the country and to the Democrat party.

Good Lt on October 20, 2006 at 11:29 PM

It is going to be HI-larious watching the MSM scampering around to protect Kennedy after this. First, they’ll ignore it, and then it will be “Swift-Boat” time. Should be very amusing, but best of all instructional for all of us; seeing who will be doing the biggest “duck and cover” dance. Like cockroaches scurrying from the light.

MikeHu on October 20, 2006 at 11:32 PM

Since this story involves a powerful Democrat and does NOT involve an underage page, I’m guessing this will not be on the front page of the NYT anytime soon.

Oh, and it is election season, which automatically makes anything of this nature suspect, not that I’m defending Unca Ted. He’s scum. This is the very definition of treason, in my book.

lordsquirrel on October 20, 2006 at 11:39 PM

I think I can guess what the “honest liberals” will say:

Ronald Reagon was a dangerous warmonger who was endangering the future of our great country with his cowboy antics. This communique was just a good faith effort on the part of Teddy to inlist the the Soviets to help the well meaning Democrats convince the American people that the Soviet Union was peaceful and meant them no harm. That’s all.

Now my had hurts from thinking like a liberal.

Nice Deb on October 20, 2006 at 11:41 PM

Maybe Ted will go the sympathy route and don that horse-collar again. Or he could go with the diversion of choice for Kennedy’s Gone Wild ….. alcoholic rehab.

Of all the Kennedy’s, why is this one still above ground?

fogw on October 20, 2006 at 11:44 PM

I question the timing.

EFG on October 20, 2006 at 11:48 PM

Providing information, aid, and comfort to our nation’s enemies is par for the course for the cream of the crop of Socialist Democrats these days.

John Kerry went to Paris as a private citizen to hold his very own peace talks with the N. Vietnamese which led to the baldfaced lie that was his Winter Soldier project. Kennedy wanted to sell us out to the Soviets. Clinton and Gore traded nuclear secrets to China for campaign contributions and I’m sure that somewhere down the line we’ll find out that our military secrets we’re given to the Islamofascists by some Democrat to cause our defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Buzzy on October 20, 2006 at 11:53 PM

IM sure this will be on the fromt page of the NY Times.
NOT

Tom N on October 20, 2006 at 11:54 PM

I’m just shocked.

And Kennedy’s don’t shock me easily.

This man should spend his last breath behind bars. If the Bush White House doesn’t prosecute him, then he’s too weak for the job.

This is unreal. The U.S.A. and my country, for fuck sakes, were always within 30-minutes or less of Soviet nuclear warheads raining down on us. It wasn’t called the cold war for nothing.

And they were trying to defeat this president as Mary Katherine Ham so rightly pointed out.

I despised this man before and I despise him more now.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 12:01 AM

no, the progressives response will be something more like “pfft. ‘treason’ is so 18th century.”

we must insist that this traitor be impeached and then prosecuted.

not just for the sake of this instance either. treason is the only crime specificly addressed in our constitution. yet here we are decades since jane fonda undertook multiple travels to adhere to and aid the north vietnamese enemy, returning to suffer only the fortunes of an exersize tape fortune.

jummy on October 21, 2006 at 12:04 AM

I’d like to see this letter.

But let’s face it. Even if that letter says Kennedy was offering to spy for them, trade secrets for money, what does it prove? If you wave that letter in front of Kennedy’s face, first he’ll just deny it. Or say it is a forgery.

Later, he may change his tune and say that “well, I did speak with him, but it wasn’t to undermine Reagan, it was to help defuse tensions.”

Then he’ll point to that same letter and say it just shows what a patriot he was. After all, a true patriot is willing to go the extra mile, to ensure peace. He did it for America. After all, it was Reagan who escalated the cold war just to scare the American people so he could get elected.

And then it will turn into “HOW DARE YOU QUESTION MY PATRIOTISM!!??”

Anyway, if he did this, prison is too good for him.

EFG on October 21, 2006 at 12:10 AM

He shouldn’t spend his last breaths behind bars. His last moments should be breathless because of the rope around his fat, frakin’ neck.

urbancenturion on October 21, 2006 at 12:17 AM

Didn’t this or something just like it actually come out a few years ago? I could *swear* I heard this before.

Laura on October 21, 2006 at 12:19 AM

Nearly half of the American people actually voted for another known commie collaborator, John Kerry, in the 2004 election. Either they don’t care (pffft), or they don’t believe it.

And don’t expect the MSM to jump all over this especially now, so close to the election. I hope I’m wrong, but I think it’s gonna be *crickets* on this one. The consevative talk shows will be another matter. But so what? Preaching to the choir.

Treason? Only mouth breathing troglodytes use that word anymore. Democrats can say and do whatever they please. And don’t you dare question their patriotism.

This story put me in one hell of a mood.

Nice Deb on October 21, 2006 at 12:27 AM

I don’t know, I’ve been over the Constitution and it’s ammendments, and I just can’t find anything that indicates Democrat politicans and staffers are above the law.

I also live in MA, and it’s sad that we (they?) keep sending him back. You can thank the union mobsters leaders and their minions, the generous welfare, the liberal college students who can vote in local elections (am I the only one bothered by this?), the hack jobs… did I mention the unions? The name is just part of it, we keep sending back Kerry, Neal and so on…

reaganaut on October 21, 2006 at 12:28 AM

If there’s an honest liberal left in the country…

You can’t be serious.

RightWinged on October 21, 2006 at 12:36 AM

Darn, my first post and I made a typo!

On second thought politican may be better suited for Kennedy, a nice fat blood-sucking tick.

reaganaut on October 21, 2006 at 12:39 AM

A democrat undermining a republican president? Sounds so familiar doesn’t it. How true that history repeats itself. Let’s not forget the “El Presidente” letters “Obie drunk Kennedy” sent to several Central American dictators during this same time frame. Again, conveying to communists that Reagan was a war-monger and that congress had to reel him in. This was the genesis of the Iran-Contra episode. Congress passed the Boland amendment forbidding Reagan from aiding the Contra’s or any other anti-communist forces in Central America. They did this during the height of the Cold War. Here we had democrats demonstrating once again their failure to see threats to our national security. The executive conducts foreign policy, for better or worse that’s the constitution at work. During the 80′s, democrats did everything they could to usurp this power from Reagan. So his administration went around congress and aided the anti-communist movements in Central America. Thank God we had Reagan who understood the stakes and the threats facing our nation. I hope this president will remain strong and keep fighting the battle against the enemy….those Islamo-Fascists and the enemy from within…(see Kennedy and the rest of his merry liberal cabal)..

ritethinker on October 21, 2006 at 12:40 AM

Nearly half of the American people actually voted for another known commie collaborator, John Kerry, in the 2004 election. Either they don’t care (pffft), or they don’t believe it.

Nice Deb on October 21, 2006 at 12:27 AM

And with the facts out there for all to see…

http://www.amazon.com/Unfit-Command-Veterans-Speak-Against/dp/0895260174

infidel4life on October 21, 2006 at 12:41 AM

I don’t think the Dhimmi’s will go with the “Teddy working to save us from Reagan the Warmonger” explanation. They know no one will buy it. Ever since his death, they have had to change their paradigm to “Reagan the pragmatist who often had to reign in the far Right of his party” to they could pretend to honor him.

I think they will just have to punt on this one: It was too long ago – it even predates the Gerry Studds scandal.

Coyote D. on October 21, 2006 at 12:41 AM

Boys and girls I predict that this will not get the time of day.

We get truly reamed by the libs – and no one will even care.

Dr. Gecko on October 21, 2006 at 12:48 AM

Update: Hoo-boy. The Congressional staffer who was suspended on suspicion of leaking the NIE has been revealed. He works for Democrat Rep. Jane Harman.

Whoah! I never saw that coming…

/snark

Spiny Norman on October 21, 2006 at 12:48 AM

Coyote D:

If you’re masochistic enough to wade through the feverswamps of DU or KOS, I’m sure all sorts of interesting explanations will pop up.

Nice Deb on October 21, 2006 at 12:50 AM

Wow, Bryan, great find. Thanks for posting it….
Glad to see it made it over to FR also, Don’t see it on Drudge; it ought to be there.

EVERYONE: Please “Digg” this!!

The sad thing is that I am not a bit surprised at this. There are several other sitting Senators and several Congress-persons that I rather suspect have done similar, and probably even worse things.

I,too, will be very surprised if this gets any MSM mention; probably not even FOX, except for maybe Hannity.

LegendHasIt on October 21, 2006 at 12:51 AM

I read about some of his collaboration with the KGB in “Reckless Disregard” but not in depth like this document reveals. I don’t know what is more disturbing; the fact that this will get no coverage, Mass. Keeps electing him or that he won’t be tried for treason.

Let’s also not forget John Kerry’s 1971 Senate testimony under oath when he admitted to personally meeting with in Paris with representatives from the North Vietnamese to negotiate a private diplomatic solution for American withdrawal. As Buzz Patterson writes in “Reckless Disregard”, under Section 904 Article 104 Kerry could have faced the death sentence for unauthorized contact with the enemy.

And the Republicans, since they lack intellectual balls will never bring this up. The Democrats have to bring up N words from 30 years ago, yet when the Republicans have actual dirt on certain candidates, they fail to use it. Like Rush says, “The Republicans couldn’t smear a bagel”.

V15J on October 21, 2006 at 12:54 AM

There is no revelation of any sort that could shock me about Ted Kennedy.

Beastiality, heroin addiction, necrophilia, cannibalism, treason, devil worship, pulling tags off mattresses, you name it. Nothing would shock me.

The depths of his lack of character appear to be bottomless.

Purple Avenger on October 21, 2006 at 12:57 AM

Hmmm. Treason. Indeed. Can we add CNN?

the-gunslinger on October 21, 2006 at 1:03 AM

Let’s face it: nothing will come of this story. Complain, scream, post, all you like,but
nothing will come of it
the only effect that we can have is to ensure a Republican majority in both Houses of Congress.
Keep K. and Co. as far away from power as possible.
Is this a blatantly partisan appeal?
yes it is.

billy on October 21, 2006 at 1:05 AM

Yeah, Bryan, I second LegendHasit. This is a must read post and a great find.

As in it’s sickining and not nearly as surprising as it should be considering Ted Kennedy is the manslaughter and lying son-of-a-bitch he is.

His brother was a war hero and courageous president, whatever personal flaws he is alleged to have had (I simply don’t know enough about his personal life to comment: I’m only aware of his WW2 and public service including the moral clarity of his speeches, which were commendable); Ted Kennedy isn’t fit to sit at the same dinner table as his patriotic brother.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 1:08 AM

Here is some collaboration. Unfortunately it appears Teddy has had plenty of time to come up with an explanation.

B Moe on October 21, 2006 at 1:14 AM

i have to agree with V15J. if the Republicans don’t go down to the level of the liberal democrats when they have a oppurtunity to like this & those political ads that have Democrats appeasing our enemies, then they deserve to lose on Novemember 7th.

Starblazer on October 21, 2006 at 1:19 AM

Flopping Aces’ post is a must read analysis. Here’s a taste.

Kennedy needs to resign NOW! This is treason folks.

Article III, Section 3, Paragraph 1, of the Constitution of the United States:
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
The “aid and comfort” prong of treason has been interpreted by SCOTUS as requiring proof of four elements:
1. an intent to betray the United States (which can be inferred from);
2. an overt act;
3. witnessed by two people; and
4. that provides aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 1:26 AM

And the Republicans, since they lack intellectual balls will never bring this up.

Surely not?

This is huge, isn’t it? Some of these reactions seem a bit muted to me. I’m with Christoph:

This man should spend his last breath behind bars. If the Bush White House doesn’t prosecute him, then he’s too weak for the job.

This is unreal. The U.S.A. and my country, for fuck sakes, were always within 30-minutes or less of Soviet nuclear warheads raining down on us. It wasn’t called the cold war for nothing.

Axe on October 21, 2006 at 1:28 AM

Axe, check out Flopping Aces’ post.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 1:34 AM

This is huge, isn’t it? Some of these reactions seem a bit muted to me. I’m with Christoph:

Axe on October 21, 2006 at 1:28 AM

As am I, but as much of a revelation as this may be, it’s somehow just not that surprising coming from the looney left. Treason to them is like cheating on a midterm essay: Eh? what the hell, if I can get away with it… These people have no integrity beyond their own self-interest.

infidel4life on October 21, 2006 at 1:37 AM

There will be no end of conspiracy theorys now.

Is the guilt driving him to the drink, or the other way around?

htom on October 21, 2006 at 1:45 AM

But don’t question their patriotism.

rockdalian on October 21, 2006 at 1:46 AM

This is a post of personal thoughts. Something I have just come to realize in the past hour or so.

After sitting and not understand why the democratic party has switched from supporting the WOT to attacking it as 9/11 fades I was constantly perplexed.

At a time when we should be united. At at time when enemies are getting stronger it seems the democratic party has chosen a strategy of scorched earth.

While I know they feel they have a reason because of Clinton’s impeachment to attack Republicans I didnt realize until and hour ago why the attacks are so personal. And so devoid of facts.

Then I remembered what the entire existance of the democratic party is built around.

Victimization.

Democrats exist to play the defenders of victims or victims themselves.

If its Affirmative action or womens rights or gay rights dems rise up to assume their great posture as defenders of the victims.

Or if its to defend workers from corporations or the poor from the rich or the earth from global warming. Its all the role created by victimization.

Therefor there has always been this tendancy in the democratic party to create a victim to be pitied and used to gain power off of. The champions of victimization can not gain power unless they can find a victim to gain power off of.

And so it is also in the WOT.

And this time the poor victims are either terrorists at gitmo or the american people who they feel would be better off under their “control”

So they start the politics of victimization.

They rail against the prisioners at gitmo and decry the treatment of them. They denounce “torture” and automatically assume that it is taking place.

In the wiretaps debate they stand up for the “Victims” who supposedly are being tracked by the US goverment. They claim this is all done to “Protect”people

When hundreds of Iraqis are being killed terrorists in Iraq they step up to defend iraqis “Victims” by attacking…… US Service personell. They seekd justice for the “Victims” not of terrorism but by attacking the only group of people they themselves can victimize that being the US military.

SO I came to realize that the Democratic party plays the politics of vicitimization. To win any debate they must first create a victim to then rush to the defense of said victims.

And I have come to realize the way to defeat the democrats is to prevent them from creating victims to exploit. We as Republicans must fight the politics of victimication to win.

William Amos on October 21, 2006 at 1:59 AM

A commentator at Ace of Spades HQ has something to say:

OK, who wants to join me in creating a Ted Kennedy Memorial. A large reflecting pool with a bronze cast of a Delta 88 nose first in the pool, and a stationary statue of Ted himself doing the backstroke in the pool, water spouting from his mouth. Put it in the center of Boston, so those assholes can revel in the legacy of the murdering shitbag they elected for decades on their daily commute.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 2:01 AM

This isn’t that isolated a development. In his 2002 book titled “Reagan’s War”, former Peter Schweizer, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, wrote:

On repeated occasions, according to numerous Soviet accounts, Carter encouraged Moscow to influence American politics for his benefit or for the detriment of his enemies. Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin recounts in his memoirs how, in the waning days of the 1980 campaign, the Carter White House dispatched Armand Hammer to the Soviet embassy. Explaining to the Soviet Ambassador that Carter was “clearly alarmed” at the prospect of losing to Reagan, Hammer asked for help: Could the Kremlin expand Jewish emigration to bolster Carter’s standing in the polls? “Carter won’t forget that service if he is elected,” Hammer told Dobrynin.

According to Georgii Kornienko, first deputy foreign minister at the time, something similar took place in 1976, when Carter sent Averell Harriman to Moscow. Harriman sought to assure the Soviets that Carter would be easier to deal with than Ford, clearly inviting Moscow to do what it could through public diplomacy to help his campaign.

Even when he was out of office, Carter still tried bitterly to encourage Moscow to do damage to his enemies during an election. As Dobrynin recounts, in January 1984 the former president dropped by his residence for a private meeting. Carter was concerned about Reagan’s defense build-up and went on to explain that Moscow would be better off with someone else in the White House. If Reagan won, he warned, “There would not be a single agreement on arms control, especially on nuclear arms, as long as Reagan remained in power.”

Ed Driscoll on October 21, 2006 at 2:02 AM

“…..prison is too good for him.”

Hmmmm … I can see it now. Two prisoners talking about the newbie arriving.

“Hey Bubba. Think the new guy’ll be wife material?”

“Dunno, ain’t seen her, er, him, yet…”

“Hey, the door’s opening…”

“Aaaauuuggghhhhhh!!!!! … Me making that fat old shit my wife? There’re some things even a prisoner won’t do!!!”

Yup. Prison’s too good for him now. He won’t get the special warm welcome…. The time to have sent him would have been right after the Oldsmobile did the half-gainer off the bridge, when he could still bend over at the waist….

SEgerton on October 21, 2006 at 2:05 AM

It’ll go nowhere. Americans don’t care about traitors. We’re not supposed to judge, remember?

Lazarus on October 21, 2006 at 2:09 AM

Here is some collaboration. Unfortunately it appears Teddy has had plenty of time to come up with an explanation.

B Moe on October 21, 2006 at 1:14 AM

*2nd paragraph of first topic ‘Capital Coverups’

Wow. This was public information in 1992? And it has been ignored by the MSM all this time… figures. Perhaps the book will put it into the proper context, and refresh some old memories.

SilverStar830 on October 21, 2006 at 2:09 AM

The Dems and the MSM conspired to commit treason then, they do it now. Nothings changed.

p0s3r on October 21, 2006 at 2:12 AM

File a treason charge against him. Get his bloated self OUT of this country he apparently hates so much.

Neo on October 21, 2006 at 2:53 AM

Bush will show how compassionate he is by not prosecuting and leaving the traitor in a position to do further damage to the United States.

Perchant on October 21, 2006 at 2:53 AM

To allow a traitor to undermine the country, war effort and it’s leadership can not be ignored! With evidence, this should/will be prosecuted! If Pres. Bush does nothing and it’s pushed aside…ARG! I have a sickening feeling that Perchant maybe right…but something this big can’t be ignored. BTW, how’s that ‘Able Danger’ investigation working out?

Wedge Plissken on October 21, 2006 at 3:21 AM

I’m not sure why, and I’m not sure I care why… but I feel compelled to post this OT link.

Read between the lines and form your own conclusion.

Ugly on October 21, 2006 at 3:21 AM

Well, it looks like Wikipedia has its first entry on this story. I predict it lasts for 18 minutes:

The KGB Letter and Allegations of Treason

A blog, Hot Air, among others reported on October 20, 2006 that in 1983 Kennedy (along with former Senator John Tunney, both Democrats) wrote a memo to former KGB Chairman and then current General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Yuri Andropov. This memo offered to collaborate with the USSR’s political and military leadership to conduct a public relations campaign campaign to oust Ronald Reagan as President of the United States during the 1984 general election. [1]

At that time the Soviet Union was engaged in cold war with the United States and was widely considered to be the USA’s main enemy and rival for power in the world. Each country was also in possession of a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons and other weapon systems such as surface naval ships, ballistic missile submarines, strategic nuclear bombers, land based atomic canons, and cruise missiles.

In the event of a hot war, initial nuclear warheads would have landed on U.S. soil within 5-minutes of hostilities from Soviet SLBM submarines and in large numbers from ICBMs within 30-minutes. Opposing the Soviet Union and attempting to defeat Soviet Communism, which Ronald Reagan helped accomplished in his subsequent presidential term, was official U.S. foreign policy.

Because of this, several bloggers and commentators consider Ted Kennedy’s actions to be treason.

Article III, Section 3, Paragraph 1, of the Constitution of the United States: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” The “aid and comfort” prong of treason has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States as requiring proof of four elements: 1) an intent to betray the United States (which can be inferred from); 2) an overt act; 3) witnessed by two people; and 4) that provides aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States.

However, not everyone shares the belief that Kennedy should be held criminally responsible for this act.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 3:23 AM

Wikipedia has its first entry on this story. I predict it lasts for 18 minutes

Wikipedia has zero credibility.

Ugly on October 21, 2006 at 3:27 AM

It didn’t even last 18 minutes.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 3:30 AM

Aside from the common knowledge that Wikipedia is as credible as my dog, I’m largely ignorant as to how it works at a practical level. What set of steps would someone have taken to kill the story? Is there an audit trail to show who spiked it, or does Wikipedia do so in-house?

Patton on October 21, 2006 at 3:43 AM

Patton,

Well, this time another editor removed my edit because I used Hot Air as a source and “blogs are not a reliable source” so I *resourced* it using Cybercast News Service.

Now, what’s supposed to happen is people search out new information, add theirs, make edits to mine, etc., not remove it outright.

So by all means use this as a learning opportunity to follow the editing and see how one-sided and biased most editors there are!

Nontheless, if the mainstream media pick it up, and I can’t see why they wouldn’t, there will eventually be a whitewashed semi-section there about this treasonous insident.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 3:48 AM

c

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 3:49 AM

Just so you see how ridiculous and Stalinistic it really is, Patton, a Wikipedia editor just reverted my post to this:

Paul Kengor, a political science professor at Grove City College, has alleged that in 1983 Kennedy (along with former Senator John Tunney, wrote a memo to Yuri Andropov, the leader of the Soviet Union, offering public relations advice. [1]

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 4:00 AM

Which… is E X A C T L Y what I said would happen now isn’t it?

;-)

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 4:02 AM

This is incredible!!!

Egfrow on October 21, 2006 at 4:14 AM

The repeated spiking of the story is blatant beyond my ability to comprehend such, well, blatancy.

What, if any, dispute resolution process exists? Why, in other words, can another editor simply trample all over an entry you’ve made?

Patton on October 21, 2006 at 4:19 AM

Jane Harman is a good lady. I love her. She did the wrong thing. I wish that she could hear my voice.

Ouabam on October 21, 2006 at 4:21 AM

Patton,

Because the owner is a cult-like leftist figure “Jimbo” who edits his own Wikipedia entry to remove evidence of his previous business in Internet pornography.

It’s now a white-washed version of its former self, just like the above.

80% of the editors and 97% of the mods they have are hard left defenders of free speech.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 4:26 AM

That’s a slight exageration, but only slight. You see the evidence before your own eyes.

Christoph on October 21, 2006 at 4:30 AM

Put a Fox News microphone in Teddy’s face and listen: Umm UHH mmmm well. etc.

hillbillyjim on October 21, 2006 at 5:14 AM

The repeated spiking of the story is blatant beyond my ability to comprehend such, well, blatancy..

Patton on October 21, 2006 at 4:19 AM

I have to admit… that went over way over my head.

I like pretty ladies and suits.

Ugly on October 21, 2006 at 5:22 AM

As a Massachussetts resident… nothing this A$$HAT does would ever surprise me, and dont think for one minute that given the opportunity his protege the Ketchup King wouldnt do exactly the same, I believe in the past they called this treason, but weve come so far and now political correctness doesnt allow us to use that description for fat traitorous bastards anymore, we simply call them Democrats.

Viper1 on October 21, 2006 at 5:27 AM

In Kennedy’s view, the main reason for the antagonism between the United States and the Soviet Union in the 1980s was Reagan’s unwillingness to yield on plans to deploy middle-range nuclear missiles in Western Europe, the KGB chief wrote in his letter.

“Kennedy was afraid that Reagan was leading the world into a nuclear war,” Kengor said. “He hoped to counter Reagan’s polices, and by extension hurt his re-election prospects.”

Sound familiar at all? That first paragraph sounds like the equivalent of the modern “President Bush’s policies have made the world less safe…”

By the way, I’m sure I’m not the first too mention this, but I’m already pissed that the media won’t cover this, even though they’ve yet to have the chance. That’s how confident I am in the liberal media. I’d be happy to be proven wrong, but unless this leads to many more explosive and “shocking” discoveries, it won’t get the time of day. That sound you’re hearing is the editors of the NY Times simultaneously crumpling a printout of that CNS story and tossing it in their trash. The other sound is all the major networks feeding it threw shredders, spilling the shreds on the ground and literally sweeping it under the rug. The last sound is Hannity making repeated brief mentions of it on H&C that will go ignored when liberal guests just do the usual divert and dodge.

RightWinged on October 21, 2006 at 5:44 AM

I think we’re all missing something here. We can’t get pissed about this, he’s a Democrat and more importantly, a Kennedy. ‘Nough said. They are above criticism, so just drop it neocons.

RightWinged on October 21, 2006 at 5:46 AM

Listen up, folks. Don’t fall for the media-promoted BS that we’re gonna stay at home on election day. They wish. Stand up and be counted; it’s the only way we can win in this very important debate. Go and vote! Believe me, it’s THAT important. Thank you for your attention.

hillbillyjim on October 21, 2006 at 6:17 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3