Should Kerry come clean about Skull & Bones?

I want to know what the hell its about.

?

On an MTP appearance, Russert asked him about S&B, and he admitted to being a member before merrily brushing off the question. Russert didn't pursue it very hard, either, which tends to suggest that he didn't feel there was any dirt to uncover. Why would Timmy give up the chance to needle Kerry if he had any actual Good Stuff to unload?

Does it matter, and if so, how?

:shrug:

because skull and bones always has been Art Bell style fodder, and a serious canidate should not even meantion the words.

Why wouldn't the police get a search warrant and search the grounds? I would think that would be grounds to at least return the skull to it's proper place. It sounds like promoting grave robbery to me.

it was not against the law to dig an Indian's grave. In 1991, President Bush signed the federal Native American Burial Protection & Repatriation Act. (I co-wrote the "test case" that was heard in NYS Supreme Court in Albany in 1993, to help "put teeth" into the protective part of the law.) In theory, if S&B got any funding through the university, because the school gets federal funding, it could be forced through civil (not criminal) court to return the skull. Fat chance it is going to happen. (There is a dentist in Washington state who had Chief Joseph's skull for an ashtray. We used to say that if you dug a white man's grave, you'd go to jail; but if you dig an Indian's grave, you get a PhD.)

There is no evidence that I am aware of that Kerry took part in grave robbing. S&B is a social (or antisocial) connections type of group. Read K. Phillips' "American Dynasty" for interesting details on it. And remember Kerry's connections were pre-Vietnam; bush is still connected.

"Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee," and how horribly we treated and still treat Indians. It made me embarrassed to be white skinned. Very impressive life H2O Man, thank you for giving me an education on this, it's truly appreciated.

Many people of all the different "racial" or ethnic backgrounds do not understand how wrong it is to have human remains in a "collection." This is true for museums as well as private collections. One day at the Onondaga Longhouse, a PhD was debating the issue with Chief Oren Lyons. He said that a "lot of good scientific information has come from digging graves." Oren agreed, but noted that the Nazis had gotten a lot of scientific information from their "experiments." However, the civilized world agreed that any science based on the denial of a group's human rights was invalid. The PhD said that no one could say for sure who some of the old human remains belonged to. Oren was quick to reply, "True, but we can say who they do NOT belong to --you!" Then Oren's uncle, Chief Paul Waterman, corrected the PhD: "I can say for sure. I can look at those old burials, and say they are my uncles, and they are my aunts, and those very old ones are my ancestors' ancestors'." I worked closely with Paul for 25+ years.

Many people do not understand that in truth, these ancient ones were the first environmentalists. It's not something from a commercial. And it is important to put those human remains and burial goods back in the ground. It is a significant part of cleaning the environment. It goes hand-in-hand with cleaning the water supplies and the ground and air. I could go on and on. (smile) My first book has sold well enough that I'm starting on a second one on Chief Waterman's teachings.

Come clean and clear the air if there is nothing nefarious.

No worse than being a member of a regular fraternity -- they all have secret rituals/histories they're not supposed to talk about with outsiders.

Kerry was, what, 20? Let it go.

Skull and Bones is an elitist organization, and that shows that Kerry has a background based in elitism that I find to be frankly antithetical to democratic values. I find organizations like this highly questionable and unegalitarian. They show a sort of spitefulness to "common" people and democracy. Secrecy and use of secret connections and power-consolidation is not okay. Kerry is wrong for having this secret club of power-players. By the way, he's secretly allied with Bush through this organization. So, the fact that he joined this organization makes me feel that he's a total jerk.

Secret Societies and Elite families run in small ciricle. Theresa Heinz's first husband, also a senator, was also a bonesman. There's no reason in this day and age that there is such a consolidation of money and power in the hands of so few. It's f#cking aristocratic and disgusting. But although I find it sheds light on the kind of decisions John Kerry makes,that it's telling, it is not the most important issue.

Still, I'm more concerned with his most recent decisions -- patriot act, IWR, fast track authority, support of free trade, his courting of McCain for V.P. -- why he choses to have commercials that stress what a "strong military" he wants and why he's posing as a military hawk...these are things that are also telling and of much greater concern.

For instance, what the hell is it with Kerry doing wanting to "stay the course" in Iraq? What's that about? And what has happened (because of Kerry's commitment to "stay the course") to the anti-war movement? Those are more important issues. No, I don't buy the ever-so-retrospective "pragmatic" excuse for this war...I find it more likely that there are big oil, corporate and military contract issues at stake. What's up with that?

is this a form of bonding? :-)

and he seemed to think the S&B connection was a very big, very bad deal, that it meant Kerry was just as bad as the other guys and in the pocket of big business/repubs, etc.

I had no idea, still don't know what to think. Is S&B the big nefarious thing he thinks? Judging by what I'm seeing here so far, no. He's convinced though.

Sunday, JUN-13-2004 1920 PDT

interesting stuff - in my opinion,

d

I'm doooooooomed,

d

a child of 20 is still a child in my eyes.
S&B can't be used against Kerry politically, because of Bush's association. The men, Kerry and Bush, are total opposites.

I grade Kerry by the man he has become. What he has fought for and believes in. Basically I believe the man to be a genuinely good person. Who may have a past, may not. It doesn't really matter now.

As I used to say to people when Clinton got drug thru the mire in front of me. "The first person not human, please step up to the plate, we need to analyzed you because you are obviously perfect."

Bush on the other hand is cold to the core. Then and now.
That is the real issue.

a man of 20 is a child? That just sounds a bit absurd to me...but if you say so....

By the way,

Was Kerry a "man" when he voted for the IWR, for the Patriot Act, for Fast Track authority for Bush, when he is thinking of builiding up the army with 40,000 more troops, when he wants to "stay the course" in Iraq? Or are these just other little childish indiscretions on his part? Why are these "cold" actions if Bush, but not if Kerry? It doesn't add up. Emotional reaction aside, what is the difference ESPECIALLY when it comes to the war in Iraq and American imperialism?

Actions speak louder than words...they say. Why is Kerry right with Bush on so many issues concerning free trade and American imperialism?

Kerry voted for the UN to continue inspections in Iraq and not go in unilaterally the way Bush did. If Kerry were president at the time, we would not be in Iraq; perhaps we'd be working with the UN and a multinational force to enforce UN resolutions. He is not for "staying the course". He has never said that and he has never implied that with any statements, so it's a bit deceitful to say he has.

He voted for the Patriot Act at that time but with many sunset laws attached to it (which expire 1/1/05).

He tried to get the Kerry amendment passed for Fast Track. Here's a snip on that:

"The Kerry Amendment would have restricted such investment protection actions to only those cases where government action causes a physical invasion of property or denies all economic or productive use of that property. In doing so, the amendment would have instructed U.S. trade negotiators to ensure that future investor provisions do not grant foreign investors rights beyond what the U.S. Constitution provides."
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1115

Kerry is for amending NAFTA and WTO agreements. Even Democracy Now's Amy Goodman says that those laws are not going away anytime soon.

Surely if you look at nearly any of the other positions that Kerry has, you'd know that they are much different than Bush's.

To think that Bush and Kerry are the same on those issues is not truly looking at the differences.

I don't give a shit if it's unilateral or not -- its still wrong. This war is WRONG! this unilateral crap don't make it any prettier, and it's sick and disgusting that people buy into that garbage, anyways. The only difference is what corporations from which countries get the loot. It's STILL an egregious war BASED IN LIES -- and Kerry should have done his fucking research in the first place.
Kerry is always "changing" his mind when it is just a little "too late." Just like the free trade agreements, huh? Well, i'm frankly sick and tired with the guy getting away with his "in retrospect" excuses and bullshit. He still fucked up, no matter how you spin it.

If he isn't responsible enough to make responsiblie votes -- then he shouldn't be running for the fucking presidency of the United States. Also, How do you KNOW if KERRY (or Gore) were president, we would NOT be at war? Gore, btw, had a bunch of creepy shit going down in Columbia, so who KNOWS what he would have done? Clinton, btw, carried on egregious bombing campaigns of and deplorable trade sanctions in IRAQ -- which are things that are done in PREPARATION for war. Clinton basically continued the Iraq war between the two bushes, to keep Iraq ready for a major attack. Democrats easily think so fondly of Democrats that they fail to find any fault with imperialistic wrongdoing when it comes from their own president. That's irresponsible and wrong.

Besides Kerry said, basically that now that we ARE AT WAR and it's too late that we should STAY THE COURSE. I'm quite sure of that. Honestly, its a bunch of bullshit excuses. I don't see how anyone can believe him anymore.

Don't tell me about the amendment nonsense. Trust me, I've looked into that. I'm pretty well read up on that stupid fast track and once again -- Kerry always does shit to try to "look" l9ike the good guy but when it comes down to it he's the same kind of asshole politician that Bush is, just dresses it up a bit better. It's almost worse in that its' more dishonest and deceptive.

Kerry might amend NAFTA and the WTO (and believe me, I've researched all his "nuanched" legalistic gobleydegook used to confuse and obfuscate things like the smoke and mirrors tactic that it is) -- and the fact that he won't REPEAL the damn agreements is the REAL problem. Substantially, they are STILL THE SAME and cause the same dmage. I don't trust Amy Goodman, and she's got Soros money coming in, besides.

I've looked at Kerry's positions -- and they ARE like Bushs ESPECIALLY Free Trade and the War which to me are the most important issues. Kerry doesn't even bring up a whole SLEW of issues so as not to offend his corporate sponsors and buddies. He didn't want labeling of genetically modified food, cuz Monsanto got him money.

What about a living wage? fair taxes? an end to the war on drugs? racism in the criminal justice system? equal rights for glbt? the asthma epidemic in our children? corporate corruption in washington? voter disenfranchisement (like the florida voting polls)? Environmental racism? UNIVERSAL health care? corporate crime? Taft-Hartley? The consolidation of corporate media?

Vote for a phony taking money from the GOP.

I've never said Kerry is perfect.

I, for instance, protested the war and even the first Gulf War. I still understand Kerry's position on voting for the UN. Not the war, as so many too lazy to look at the issues tend to say.

He's NOT perfect.

He is NOT God.

He also would probably NOT be in Iraq right now if he were President. He also will not just pull the troops out after the Chimp beheaded the leadership, destroyed the electical, water resources and other infrastructure. He would do his best to get the UN, NATO and anybody else to go in and try to clean up the FUCKING MESS that the Chimp made. He will not cut and run. But he will not "stay the course" as so many too lazy to look at the issues tend to say.

I didn't support NAFTA and don't support the WTO's tactics. But they are enacted now. They can't just be aborted. Oh, unless you want a trade war and see an economic depression ensue while we play the isolationist card that Hoover did in the 1930's. Both need to be amended, not ended. Kerry is not a careless free trader who doesn't care about environmental and human rights issues, as so many too lazy to look at the issues tend to say. Did you read about the Kerry amendment in the previous post concerning NAFTA? Or was it too "nuanced" for you to figure out?

If you think universal healthcare (which I totally support) would be enacted in the next administration, you have absolutely no idea how impossible that would be in the present situation in DC. We need to incrementally change the healthcare situation and get a goal of universal healthcare in a decade or less. Not next year. It ain't gonna happen. Kerry is for drastic healthcare reform, not the same old shit as so many too lazy to look at the issues tend to say.

As far as other issues you mention (GLBT - Kerry has a very high rating with his record; very strong progressive environmental record, fighting corporate crime; remember Kerry and BCCI/Iran-Contra/S&L scandal), dare to compare Kerry's record with Bush and say they are anywhere near the same.

With Bush, you get more of the same and then some. With Kerry, you get a lot of change and an open ear to progressive reform. With Nader, you get pathetic self-absorbed flakiness AND four more years of Bush.

Figure it out.

and my reasons don't really matter.

If you don't agree with Kerry. Vote for whom ever you wish.

Edited by me.

Exactly? The secret plot to take over the world? He can't tell about that! :)

He can't tell about the sophmoric rituals either, that's the rule of fight club, you don't talk about fight club.

It's nothing but a big network for the sons of the privilaged, rich old boys club. Bad enough, but what's to talk about without making trouble for himself?

He was a member of Skull and Bones. Run for your.....LIVES!!!!!

Use UPS!!! What can the brown do for you!!!

I didn't know that, heh.

The tentacles of this conspiracy reach further than I previously suspected!

...he should "come clean" about that first.

Boy, now THAT would be the $1,000,000 picture.

...and during their debates,(S&B was a debate society, right?) Kerry actually participated!!...

...stay posted, for more dark secrets lurk within the hearts of men...(evil laughter)

He needs to attack Bush every way he turns until Election Day.

Why get distracted by tinhattery like S&B?

If Kerry can't be trusted to keep the sexual deviences of his college friends a secret then people will wonder if he can keep state secrets.