FBI surveillance documents on Kerry stolen

[sMiLeYz]

Just when you thought the bar couldn't get any lower :disgust:

Historian: 'Odds are in favor' of political motive in theft
Gerald Nicosia, who spent more than a decade collecting the information, told CNN in a telephone interview that three of 14 boxes of documents plus a number of loose folders -- hundreds of pages -- were stolen Thursday afternoon.

"It was a very clean burglary. They didn't break any glass. They didn't take anything like cameras sitting by. It was a very professional job," Nicosia said.

"Was it a thrill-seeker who wanted a piece of history? It could be," Nicosia said. "You'd think there was a very strong political motivation for taking those files. The odds are in favor of that."

Nicosia reported the theft Friday to the Twin Cities Police Department, which covers Larkspur and Corte Madera in Marin County, where he lives. The police report found no sign of forced entry.

Nicosia, author of "Home At War: A History of the Vietnam Veterans Movement," had obtained about 20,000 pages of FBI documents through Freedom of Information Act requests.

The documents center on FBI surveillance of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), which Kerry represented as national spokesman. In April 1971, the decorated veteran testified in televised hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and led a large protest of veterans in the capital.

Nicosia estimated that 20 percent of his documents are missing.

"It's heartbreaking, after 11 years trying to get them," he said.

Kerry's antiwar efforts drew the attention of President Nixon, as revealed in recordings of White House conversations obtained by CNN from the National Archives, and of J. Edgar Hoover's FBI, as the documents revealed.

"I hadn't gotten a chance to review them all. I am sure there were some things about John Kerry that weren't known," Nicosia said. "These files would also cast a bad light on the ... Republican Party. This surveillance happened under the Nixon White House and Nixon FBI."

Nicosia showed about 50 pages of the documents to CNN last week.

The FBI followed Kerry as he traveled the country, speaking out against the war and raising money for the cause. Kerry, a Navy lieutenant, was honorably discharged upon his return from Vietnam with three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star.

Kerry, who obtained his personal FBI files years ago, knew of the surveillance, but the VVAW files obtained by Nicosia detail more extensive surveillance than the senator from Massachusetts might have realized.

"It is almost surreal to learn the extent to which I was followed by the FBI," Kerry said in a written statement earlier this week. "The experience of having been spied on for the act of engaging in peaceful patriotic protest makes you respect civil rights and the Constitution even more."

Kerry was seen as a tactical "conservative" among the antiwar veterans, the FBI documents say. The 27-year-old typically opposed demonstrations that would lead to arrests.

"A review of the subject's file reveals nothing whatsoever to link the subject with any violent type activity," said a May 1972 FBI memo about Kerry provided by his campaign.

The memo recommended that the surveillance end because Kerry had quit VVAW and was launching a political career.

CNN piece

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

So what is the "political motivation" you think there is?
Who exactly will "benefit" from this?

CkG

 

[Tab]

I don't beileve it would have helpped anyone at all. Must have contained information on Bush's time off you think

 

[glenn1]

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: glenn1

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

exactly

Anyone checked Hillary's library yet?

CkG

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: glenn1

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

My bet is, it was a media lackey looking to make money.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: glenn1

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

My bet is, it was a media lackey looking to make money.

Make money how?

CkG

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: glenn1

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

My bet is, it was a media lackey looking to make money.

Make money how?

CkG

selling a story

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: glenn1

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

My bet is, it was a media lackey looking to make money.

Make money how?

CkG

selling a story

Wouldn't they be nabbed for theft then?

CkG

 

[Siddhartha]

Who would know that the files were there? And if this person could get the information anyone could get it.

 

[conjur]

We will soon see George mimicing Nixon with an "I am not a crook" speech?

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur
We will soon see George mimicing Nixon with an "I am not a crook" speech?

Why would they steal documents that they already have access to? The documents are not sent to people, copies are. The government still has copies.

Just wondering where you came up with the reasoning and evidence that "George" had anything at all to do with this.

You do have that evidence don't you?

 

[Napalm]

etech.

Karl's favorite tactic is to smear someone by saying something over and over again. The only way this can work is if a) it is true; or b) if it can't be disproven. In the first instance, you really don't need to smear - you can simply present the facts and let them speak for you. Karl does not operate this way because this is easy and his job is not to go around doing the easy stuff. The second instance is what Karl does best and it is the best reason why the Republicans would potentially steal these documents. They can now make any accusation about Kerry during this time and claim that if they had the documents, they would certainly show this...

Now - do we know who stole the documents? No. Have I given you a possible motive for their theft for the right-wingers? Yes.

N

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: Napalm
etech.

Karl's favorite tactic is to smear someone by saying something over and over again. The only way this can work is if a) it is true; or b) if it can't be disproven. In the first instance, you really don't need to smear - you can simply present the facts and let them speak for you. Karl does not operate this way because this is easy and his job is not to go around doing the easy stuff. The second instance is what Karl does best and it is the best reason why the Republicans would potentially steal these documents. They can now make any accusation about Kerry during this time and claim that if they had the documents, they would certainly show this...

Now - do we know who stole the documents? No. Have I given you a possible motive for their theft for the right-wingers? Yes.

N

Napalm, the documents can be accessed by anyone that wants to get a copy. Your post makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[teiresias]

If you're going to attribute this theft to a political leaning, the only logical solution is to attribute it to the Republican's or at least some extremely radical right. The reason for it is this:

Anyone can get these documents. The person they were stolen from obtained them under the freedom of information act. It's not like these are originals or anything. There would be no reason for anyone on the left to steal them, doing so would not prevent anyone that wants them from getting them. However, if someone wants the information but doesn't want it on the record that they made a request for the documents the best way to get them would be to steal them rather than make an official request for the information.

However, I suppose there is a pre-emptive reason the left might steal them, in order to prevent the right from stealing them, hence forcing the right to make an official request for the information - seems like a rather roundabout strategy though.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Anyone checked Hillary's library yet?

CkG

..or the basement of the Whitehouse; this is usually where hundreds (400+?) of FBI files end up...damn bar bouncers.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: glenn1

Hmmmmm... who would have the most to gain from acquiring FBI surveillance on John Kerry's activity as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War? Which side? Doesn't take a genius to figure the obvious...

Could be either side. Possibly the (R)'s in an offensive mode, hoping to dig up some dirt. Only problem with that is that with the documents gone, it's going to be hard to prove any accusations even if they're in there. Could be the (D)'s in a defensive mode, trying to permanently dispose of any embarassing moments from the past. Also to a lesser extent, they might hope that folks might be suspicious that the Bush administration did it, and score some cheap political points.

My bet is, it was a media lackey looking to make money.

Make money how?

CkG

selling a story

Wouldn't they be nabbed for theft then?

CkG

no
the media never reveals its sources

 

[heartsurgeon]

Nicosia, author of "Home At War: A History of the Vietnam Veterans Movement," had obtained about 20,000 pages of FBI documents through Freedom of Information Act requests.

so let me get this straight...you "Bush-Haters" believe that Bush is somehow responsible for this "alleged" theft of copies of goverment documents that apparently anyone can get through the Freedom of Information Act?

Don't you think it's more likely this dude is making this up to get gobs of free publicity for a book he has written about what's in all these papers?

the only one that benefits from any of this is the guy claiming his papers where stolen...he gets national press coverage which promotes his book!!!

come on wake up!!!!this is basic press manipulation 101..

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: Napalm
etech.

Karl's favorite tactic is to smear someone by saying something over and over again. The only way this can work is if a) it is true; or b) if it can't be disproven. In the first instance, you really don't need to smear - you can simply present the facts and let them speak for you. Karl does not operate this way because this is easy and his job is not to go around doing the easy stuff. The second instance is what Karl does best and it is the best reason why the Republicans would potentially steal these documents. They can now make any accusation about Kerry during this time and claim that if they had the documents, they would certainly show this...

Now - do we know who stole the documents? No. Have I given you a possible motive for their theft for the right-wingers? Yes.

N

Napalm, the documents can be accessed by anyone that wants to get a copy. Your post makes absolutely no sense at all.

The point I believe he was making is.. now they CAN'T because they are no longer available.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: Napalm
etech.

Karl's favorite tactic is to smear someone by saying something over and over again. The only way this can work is if a) it is true; or b) if it can't be disproven. In the first instance, you really don't need to smear - you can simply present the facts and let them speak for you. Karl does not operate this way because this is easy and his job is not to go around doing the easy stuff. The second instance is what Karl does best and it is the best reason why the Republicans would potentially steal these documents. They can now make any accusation about Kerry during this time and claim that if they had the documents, they would certainly show this...

Now - do we know who stole the documents? No. Have I given you a possible motive for their theft for the right-wingers? Yes.

N

Napalm, the documents can be accessed by anyone that wants to get a copy. Your post makes absolutely no sense at all.

The point I believe he was making is.. now they CAN'T because they are no longer available.

uhh yes, they are. Reread the entire thread. Let me know if you still need it explained to you.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

Nicosia, author of "Home At War: A History of the Vietnam Veterans Movement," had obtained about 20,000 pages of FBI documents through Freedom of Information Act requests.

so let me get this straight...you "Bush-Haters" believe that Bush is somehow responsible for this "alleged" theft of copies of goverment documents that apparently anyone can get through the Freedom of Information Act?

Don't you think it's more likely this dude is making this up to get gobs of free publicity for a book he has written about what's in all these papers?

the only one that benefits from any of this is the guy claiming his papers where stolen...he gets national press coverage which promotes his book!!!

come on wake up!!!!this is basic press manipulation 101..

Is everything in it unaltered form available via the freedom of information act? No permanent marker wiping out portions??