Mrs. John Kerry -Is this true?

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Mrs. John Kerry -Is this true?
150
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 11:58am
BEWARE

" To mention just a few, they support the "Barrio Warriors," a radical

Hispanic group whose primary goal is to return all of Arizona,

California, New Mexico and Texas to Mexico..." but read on, please!

Following is a brief backround on Mrs. John Kerry . She hates being

called that, by the way:

Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry. Married Senator

Kerry in 1995. She only took his name eighteen months ago and she is an

"interesting" paradox of conflicts.

If you thought John Kerry was scary, he doesn't hold a candle to

his wife! Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry was born in

Mozambique, the daughter of a Portuguese physician, was educated in

Switzerland and South Africa. Fluent in five languages, she was working

as a United Nations interpreter in Geneva in the mid-60's when she met a

"handsome" young American, H. John Heinz, III, who worked at a bank in

Geneva. He told her his family was "in the food business."

They were married in 1966 and returned to Pittsburgh where his

family ran the giant H. J. Heinz food company. He was elected to the US

House of Representatives in 1971, and in 1976 he was elected to the

first of three terms in the United States Senate. A Republican, he wrote

a burning diatribe against some of the causes backed by young House

member John Kerry.)

Several years later, in 1991, he was killed when his plane collided

with a Sun Oil Company helicopter over a Philadelphia suburb. The

senator, his pilot and copilot, and both of Sun's helicopter pilots were

killed. He was survived by his wife, Teresa, and their three young sons.

Four years later, having inherited Heinz's $500 million fortune,

she married Senator John Forbes Kerry, the liberal then-junior senator

from Massachusetts. She became a registered Democrat and the process of

her radicalization was set in motion.

Heinz Kerry is not shy about telling people that she required Kerry

to sign a prenuptial agreement before they were married. John Kerry may

not have check writing privileges on the Heinz catsup and pickle

fortune, but he is certainly a willing and uncomplaining beneficiary of it.

A lot of hard-earned money, made through many years of hawking

catsup, mustard, and pickles has fallen into the hands of two people who

despise successful entrepreneurship and who believe in the confiscatory

redistribution of wealth.

So how does Mrs. Heinz Kerry spend John Heinz's money?

Just one example:

According to the G2 Bulletin, an online intelligence newsletter of

WorldNetDaily, in the years between 1995-2001 she gave more than $4

million to an organization called the Tides Foundation. And what does

the Tides Foundation do with John Heinz's money?

They support numerous antiwar groups, including Ramsey Clark's

International Action Center. Clark has offered to defend Saddam Hussein

when he's tried.

They support the Democratic Justice Fund, a joint venture of the

Tides Foundation and billionaire hate-monger George Soros. The

Democratic Justice Fund seeks to ease restrictions on Muslim immigration

from "terrorist" states.

They support the Council for American-Islamic Relations, whose

leaders are known to have close ties to the terrorist group, Hamas.

They support the National Lawyers Guild, organized as a communist

front during the Cold War era. One of their attorneys, Lynne Stewart,

has been arrested for helping a client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman,

communicate with terror cells in Egypt. He is the convicted mastermind

of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

They support the "Barrio Warriors," a radical Hispanic group whose

primary goal is to return all of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and

Texas to Mexico.

These are but a few of the radical groups that benefit, through the

anonymity provided by the Tides Foundation, from the generosity of our

would-be first lady, the wealthy widow of Republican senator John Heinz,

and now the wife of the Democratic senator who aspires to be the 44th

President of the United States.

Aiding and supporting our enemies is not good for America,

regardless of your political views.

If voters will open their eyes, educate themselves and see the real

Teresa Heinz Kerry, they will not appreciate her position as ultra rich

fairy godmother of the radical left. They will not want to imagine her

laying her head on a pillow each night inches away from the President of

the United States.

Hopefully they love this country enough to decide that the only way

these two will ever be allowed into the White House is with an engraved

invitation in hand.

Instead of deleting this, pass it on. Let everyone know these

people may be unfit to represent this great nation. The uninformed will

never hear the truth from the press, who want Kerry elected!

Those who buy the Kerry facade, beware of what you vote for - - - you

may regret what you get!

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2004
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 3:47pm
It has been investigated and is false. http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/tides.asp

"The charge does not stand up to objective scrutiny. Four facts undercut it completely. First, by legally binding contract, every penny of Heinz’s support to Tides has been explicitly directed to specific projects in Pennsylvania. It cannot legally be redirected and is the exact opposite of fungible.

Second, the Tides Center is a provider of management and administrative services, and we have used it only for those services, not to advance Tides’ grantmaking agenda. Foundations from all across the country-many, like Heinz, with strong centrist agendas-use these services to incubate an array of nonprofit programs. So does the federal government. It is no more accurate to suggest that Heinz supports every one of these programs than it is to suggest that someone who contributes to a specific group through the United Way supports the agenda of every other United Way beneficiary.

Third, the projects we have supported through Tides speak for themselves. They include programs to test the career readiness of area high school students, protect Pittsburgh’s environment and retain young people in our region-hardly an extremist agenda.

Fourth and finally, information about every one of our Tides-related grants is and always has been readily available in our public filings, annual reports and here on our web site. Far from being secretive, we have been consistently open in detailing the nature of our grants to Tides and every other organization we fund."

And for some additional rumors going around about Teresa and comparison to the facts, you can look here:

http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp-q=teresa+heinz&sp-a=00062d45-sp00000000&sp-advanced=1&sp-p=all&sp-w-control=1&sp-w=alike&sp-date-range=-1&sp-x=any&sp-c=100&sp-m=1&sp-s=0

Glassy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 3:49pm
In the 1970's I was a huge supporter of Barbara Jordan... in my opinion her health robbed this country of someone who would have been a truly great leader. Few knew until her death that she was a lesbian, leaving a partner of 25 years.
Avatar for mrsed4
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-22-2003
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 3:53pm
I admired her too. I had not heard about the partner of 25 years, that's so sad (and sad in a romantic sort of way) when someone loses the love of their lives after a quarter of a century.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 3:53pm
Kerry on the war in Iraq from the Larry King interview. I'm tired of the flip flop nonsense too. Here are his words explaining his point of view and that includes his supposed "flip flops" that the other side is so willing to harp on without including the reasons behind them:

"KING: We're back.

Senator Lieberman was on this program the other night, and he ardently supports your ticket. And he said that you and Senator Edwards both support President Bush in Iraq. He supports President Bush in Iraq. He thinks Iraq is going to turn out very well. And the reason for his ardent support is on domestic issues, in which he finds you clearly in his corner. But he says in Iraq there ain't any difference, is there?

KERRY: I would disagree, Joe. Yes, there is a difference. And it's a very profound difference in terms of the cost to the American people and the risks to our soldiers because from day one -- day one -- way before we went in, I urged this president to do what was necessary diplomatically to build the international support that would have been at our side.

From day one I urged the president to exhaust the remedies available to us so that we didn't rush to war. I wanted this president to give meaning to the words "go to war as a last resort". I don't believe he did, Larry. It's just very simple. He didn't, and the facts show it.

We're paying an unbelievable price in the treasure of our young, and in the costs in billions of dollars to the American people, because this president miscalculated.

KING: If that's a given, do you...

(CROSSTALK)

KERRY: Yes, even now. Again, I have urged the president to show the broad engaged proactive, deep statesmanship necessary to be willing to bring other countries to the table sufficiently...

KING: You don't think he's trying to do that?

KERRY: I think he's tried somewhat, Larry, but I think it is possible that he has burned the bridges so badly, and that the credibility of this administration is so low, that they have great difficulty bringing other leaders now to the table. That's number one. Number two, they have never really been willing to transfer the kind of authority and decision-making and shared responsibility for reconstruction and for the transformation of the government so that you actually invite people to the table. I think the absence of those two ingredients has made it far more dangerous and costly for the American people.

KING: Why did you vote against the additional financial support?

KERRY: I voted against that support at that time as a statement that we should get the policy right. And because they were unwilling to fund it in an appropriate way.

Joe Biden and I offered an amendment and said, "Let's ask all Americans to share in the cost of this war." And rather than have a $690 billion tax cut over the next 10 years, why don't we just settle for a $600 billion tax cut and we can pay without adding to the deficit for this entire war? The Republicans and George Bush rejected that shared sacrifice. And I said that's wrong, and that's why I voted against it.

KING: So, if you took office January, first thing -- and let's say things are as they are, what change would you immediately make?

KERRY: Well, if they are as they are today, we've got serious continuing problems, because the insurgency continues. And I would assume if they are as they are today, after all the efforts of the interim government we're going to have some serious longer-term issues.

I would immediately reach out with personal diplomacy to those countries on the sidelines today. Think about it as a matter of common sense, Arab countries have an enormous interest in the outcome of what happens in Iraq. But are they at the table? Europe has a...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: ...conference?

KERRY: Well, it's not a conference, no, but I would personally use the diplomacy and the president and the power of the presidency ...

KING: You'd go to the middle east?

KERRY: I -- at the right moment I would certainly go to Europe and meet with allies and do the diplomacy necessary to find a way to bring people to the table here.

KING: So you wouldn't bring the boys back?

KERRY: Larry, we have an interest.

(CROSSTALK)

KERRY: No. I think that what we need to do is guarantee that there is a stable, long-term, transformational Iraq in place, but there's a better way to get there.

KING: What do you think of the war in Iraq, Teresa?

HEINZ KERRY: It's a tragedy.

KING: You think it's a mistake?

HEINZ KERRY: I think in terms of diplomacy, it was not diplomatic, meaning we went into it without going all the way to prevent it. And I happen, because I am in the Brookings Board, and the executive committee, of the institution, to have had an all-day briefing on this about six months before. And I heard, you know, very interesting things being said. And I couldn't believe that maybe these things could happen.

KING: In retrospect, would you not go now?

HEINZ KERRY: I would never have gone to war this way. I would have really waited.

And remember, with a vote was to give the administration, and Colin Powell specifically, the mandate, so to speak, to try peace. And they did till the end of February. They actually wanted to go to war in September. So, we were able to maintain peace till then. Why not wait a little longer?

KING: Concerning weapons of mass destruction, do you think they believed it, or do you think you were mislead?

KERRY: Oh, I think many of us believed it based on the information that we were given, Larry, but it's ...

KING: You don't blaming the president for believing it.

KERRY: Here's -- I went to a briefing at the Pentagon where we were shown photographs and we were told, with specificity, what's in the photographs. And when you would try to find -- well what's the source for this? Do we have a -- well, we have you know -- this is from the following sources. We can't share all the sources, and so forth.

The fact is that with their sources, had I been president, would've raised remarkable doubts at that moment. Because when we've learned after the fact who the sources are, many of us knew those sources at that time, and we would have put doubt in them.

In addition to that, and much more importantly -- much more importantly -- they mislead America about certain weapons that were in fact available. Whether it was intentional or not, I can't tell you.

I'll just tell you that the responsibilities were not properly carried out. I think reports have come out publicly that show us that. But what's more important to me -- I mean people can make mistakes on intelligence -- is breaking one's own word as president in the manner in which you actually take your nation to war. When you say you're going to build an international coalition and do the diplomacy, do it. They didn't. When you say you're going to war as a last resort, and it really is the last thing we're going to do, mean it. They didn't. "

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 4:12pm

Not this old canard again.


It's an issue of politics and character, not sex. You won't find any stonger supporters of Margaret Thatcher in Britain then you do in the Republican party.

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 4:14pm
It is... I really admired her and Shirley Chisholm, whom I was fortunate to meet. Shirley is somewhere around 90 now. We could use a lot more like both.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 4:19pm
No one has to declare a party affiliation. If you want to belong to a party, you only have to identify yourself with it. The vast majority of Republicans & Democrats are not registered. In some states, to vote in a primary, you have to declare your party affiliation, but only the most policially active vote in them.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 4:25pm
Yah, thanks for posting that!
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 4:28pm
Thanks Glassy for taking the time to post that info. :)
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Mon, 07-12-2004 - 4:42pm
Whew! Well that's good news.

Pages