Rumors or fact? I honestly don't know.

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:51 am

Is there any truth to the rumor that Kerry is related to a Forbes, who made about 750 million off of contratcs negotiated with the Vietnamese?

Is there any truth to the rumor that Kerrys picture hangs in a Vietnamese memorial as one of the many Antiwar Protestors who aided the NVA in their war?

I've heard both of these, but never seen anything concrete denying or confirming them. i am just curious if it is true, or not.

lorg · Post by **lorg** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:55 am

His mother was Rosemary Forbes (died 2002) so he is a Forbes by blood. Don't know anything about contracts with the Vietnamese, but I doubt he had anything to do with them or could do much about it if it was or is true. After all he was there fighting not signing deals for goods and services.

Don't know anything about the NVA pictures and stuff but it sounds really stupid if you ask me, even if they do hang someplace it is not like he asked for it. Did they hang him next to Jane Fonda to?

edit;
John Kerry - Wikipedia - Biographical information

mrmooky · Post by **mrmooky** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 6:14 pm

Serious Paul wrote:Is there any truth to the rumor that Kerry is related to a Forbes, who made about 750 million off of contratcs negotiated with the Vietnamese?

If it were true, that'd put him on an even footing with Bush, whose grandpappy made millions trading with the Nazis.

Serious Paul wrote:Is there any truth to the rumor that Kerrys picture hangs in a Vietnamese memorial as one of the many Antiwar Protestors who aided the NVA in their war?

Does this one even matter? Both sides had an interest in ending the war. Is it even a remotely bad thing if the enemy recognised Kerry's contribution to an effort that benefited both groups?

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:16 pm

The reason I aksed is becuase I honestly didn't know the answers. So far I am still in the same position I started in-not knowing what's true.

I guess its off to google.

Rev · Post by **Rev** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:54 am

I think what people are saying is: why do you even care if they are true or false? They are quite irellevant either way. Kerry comes from a wealthy politically connected family therefore it is overwhelmingly likely that some of his relatives have been war profiteers and worse. He was a well known vietnam protestor so it is likely that some north vietnamese propaganda guy somewhere used his image as propaganda.

Why not spend your time googling for some usefull information?

Nearly as irrelevant today Putin endorsed Bush, saying that if Bush looses the terrorists win, or something like that. Having your anti-terrorism strategy endorsed by Putin is something like having your economic policy endorsed by Kim Jong Il.

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:01 am

As a citizen I agree.

As a Veteran I DO NOT. I do not claim to have any real logic behind the emotion, and it is emotion. But if its true, as a Veteran I will NOT vote for the man.

lorg · Post by **lorg** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:29 am

Well concider it to be untrue until you know then. On the other hand he (kerry) actually is a veteran unlike the other guy. Does that count for something?

mrmooky · Post by **mrmooky** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:32 pm

Not only is he a Vet, he volunteered for service. Regardless of what Ho Chi Minh thinks, surely that's worth some credit.

TheScamp · Post by **TheScamp** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:49 pm

Is there any truth to the rumor that Kerry is related to a Forbes, who made about 750 million off of contratcs negotiated with the Vietnamese?

Kerry's cousin is C. Stewart Forbes, who is (or was) the CEO of Collier's International, a company that got an infrastructure rebuilding contract in Vietnam in the 90's.

A quick google search shows values of that contract to be from tens of millions to billions, depending on which of the anti-Kerry sites are writing about it. Actually, it's hard to find any info on this subject that's not on a partisan website, so take it with shat salt you will.

Is there any truth to the rumor that Kerrys picture hangs in a Vietnamese memorial as one of the many Antiwar Protestors who aided the NVA in their war?

Now, are you asking if he "aided the NVA" in any other way than protesting when he came home?

Rev · Post by **Rev** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:47 pm

Paul, it has been quite clear for over a year that you are going to vote for Bush. You claim to be undecided, but constantly come up with new straws to grab at so you can vote for him. Get over it. You are decided, for whatever reason that you aparrantly can't even admit to yourself you want to vote for Bush no matter what he is or does.

Your straws do seem to be getting thinner lately though. Some months ago it was cheap oil wasn't it? Now its what possible evils Kerry's relatives might have done decades after he was personally killing communist vietnamese soldiers and noticing that the war he was fighting was a total fuckup.

It is quite hilarious to hear you claim that vietnamese communist propaganda will decide your vote for president though!

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:51 pm

I'm glad it amuses you, but whehter you believe it or not I am still torn.

DarkMage · Post by **DarkMage** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:35 am

I don't find hit funny, I do wonder why it matters though? So they NVM used his picture to say "hey he helped us" I've seen pictures of Bush depeicted as Hitler, does that mean he is Hitler?

Crazy Elf · Post by **Crazy Elf** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:46 am

Bush isn't Hitler. Hitler was a great public speaker and smart.

Johnny the Bull · Post by **Johnny the Bull** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:14 am

Crazy Elf wrote:Bush isn't Hitler. Hitler was a great public speaker and smart.

lorg · Post by **lorg** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:01 am

Crazy Elf wrote:Bush isn't Hitler. Hitler was a great public speaker and smart.

Great public speaker, yes. All records appear to point in that direction. But him being smart? Don't know about that, alot of his actions was less then what I would call smart.

crone · Post by **crone** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:13 am

Here's something from about.com

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/b ... kerry2.htm

7. Kerry's cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive for Colliers International, assisted in brokering a $905 million deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam.

True. In 1993, under the direction of CEO C. Stewart Forbes (a relative of Kerry on his mother's side), Boston-based real estate giant Colliers International brokered just such a deal between an Asian subsidiary, Colliers Jardine, and the Vietnamese government to develop the port of Vung Tau.

Elldren · Post by **Elldren** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:36 pm

crone wrote:Here's something from about.com

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/b ... kerry2.htm

7. Kerry's cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive for Colliers International, assisted in brokering a $905 million deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam.

True. In 1993, under the direction of CEO C. Stewart Forbes (a relative of Kerry on his mother's side), Boston-based real estate giant Colliers International brokered just such a deal between an Asian subsidiary, Colliers Jardine, and the Vietnamese government to develop the port of Vung Tau.

I fail to see how this can be construed as a bad thing.

Subversive Agent · Post by **Subversive Agent** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:45 pm

1)"a relative of Kerry on his mother's side"

"I am your sister's mother's brother's father's war profiteer."

2) So he was a war protester. So maybe he doesn't deserve his medals. He still volunteered for Vietnam and risked getting his ass shot off while Bush didn't. Hence "As a veteran" that you are, it makes perfect sense to me why you would vote Bush...

FlameBlade · Post by **FlameBlade** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:58 pm

wow. The funding happened in...say...1993. Not 1960s or 1970s.

That's a sign of time moving on. And also, what happened is in the past. Everything changes in 20 years. We need to focus on now, not in the past...

I swear, politicans are stuck in the past.

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:22 pm

And so was I. But not anymore. After somethings I read last night, some very nicely written serious pieces on the current state of Affairs, John Kerry has earned my vote.

TheScamp · Post by **TheScamp** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:39 pm

Hooray!

FlakJacket · Post by **FlakJacket** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:39 pm

Care to share what it was?

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:45 pm

Two articles in Playboy actually. One was on Religous extrism at home, a comparison between Born again Christians and Muslims. It was well documented, and very well written. The other was an article on Iraq, and what the people there were doing with their new found freedoms.

lorg · Post by **lorg** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:54 am

Dude it's playboy and you read the articles ... there are like naked chicks in there ...

Johnny the Bull · Post by **Johnny the Bull** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:56 am

Serious Paul wrote:Two articles in Playboy actually. One was on Religous extrism at home, a comparison between Born again Christians and Muslims. It was well documented, and very well written. The other was an article on Iraq, and what the people there were doing with their new found freedoms.

The voter that actually considers issues rationally then takes a while to stew over it and make a decision.

More Americans should be like you Paul, regardless as to who they vote for.

Rev · Post by **Rev** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:35 pm

Well here I am looking like a dumbass again.

I have heard that they actually have very good articles. Something about having gobs of money and lots of time to research and write stories... but somehow I never get to reading them. Last time I looked at playboy it was all about the naked olympic pole-vaulters.

Serious Paul · Post by **Serious Paul** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:06 am

I know that feeling. Man the things I would do to Brooke Burke are barely legal in any sense of the word sodomy....

Salvation122 · Post by **Salvation122** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:14 am

Elldren wrote:
crone wrote:Here's something from about.com

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/b ... kerry2.htm

7. Kerry's cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive for Colliers International, assisted in brokering a $905 million deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam.

True. In 1993, under the direction of CEO C. Stewart Forbes (a relative of Kerry on his mother's side), Boston-based real estate giant Colliers International brokered just such a deal between an Asian subsidiary, Colliers Jardine, and the Vietnamese government to develop the port of Vung Tau.
I fail to see how this can be construed as a bad thing.

Kerry pushes to normalize relations with Vietnam. His cousin then makes a shit-ton of money based on that action. If you buy into the Haliburton bullshit, you had better buy into this bullshit as well.

Elldren · Post by **Elldren** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:04 am

Salvation122 wrote:Kerry pushes to normalize relations with Vietnam. His cousin then makes a shit-ton of money based on that action. If you buy into the Haliburton bullshit, you had better buy into this bullshit as well.

Well, sure, but then I don't see the Halliburton bullshit as a bad thing either.

Johnny the Bull · Post by **Johnny the Bull** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:09 am

Salvation122 wrote:
Elldren wrote:
crone wrote:Here's something from about.com

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/b ... kerry2.htm

I fail to see how this can be construed as a bad thing.
Kerry pushes to normalize relations with Vietnam. His cousin then makes a shit-ton of money based on that action. If you buy into the Haliburton bullshit, you had better buy into this bullshit as well.

Didn't they have to tender a bid for that project Sal?

mrmooky · Post by **mrmooky** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:18 am

Salvation122 wrote:If you buy into the Haliburton bullshit, you had better buy into this bullshit as well.

Yeah, but you don't have to make the same judgement. I mean, improving relations between the US and Vietnam can only be a good thing, whereas the jury's still out on the merit of invading Iraq.

Salvation122 · Post by **Salvation122** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:10 pm

Johnny the Bull wrote:Didn't they have to tender a bid for that project Sal?

You'd have to ask the Vietnamese, since it was their government who handled it.

Johnny the Bull · Post by **Johnny the Bull** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 11:26 pm

Salvation122 wrote:
Johnny the Bull wrote:Didn't they have to tender a bid for that project Sal?
You'd have to ask the Vietnamese, since it was their government who handled it.

If there was no tender then the comparison is valid. If there was a bidding process for the contract, then your comparison to Haliburton is not valid.

lorg · Post by **lorg** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:41 am

Bush - Kerry related - graphics

Uhhh the horror! Some genealogist have managed to dig up that Bush and Kerry are related if you go back several generations to the late 1500's or early 1600's. Hardly surprising since if you go back enough generations it usually turns out most people are related to most people in one way or another.

So worst for whom? Kerry being related to the rightwing nut job or Bush to the liberal weiner?

MooCow · Post by **MooCow** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 10:15 am

Not only is he a Vet, he volunteered for service. Regardless of what Ho Chi Minh thinks, surely that's worth some credit.

Well no, in and of it's self it isn't. At least, not for a politician. For normal people, you don't have to question their motives. However, it is entirely possible, and it's been said by several right wing sources, that Kerry volunteered for the express purpose of getting political credit. It's also been claimed that he had contacts that were able to ensure he wasn't ever in the "really bad" parts of the conflict.

When your motives are selfish you don't get any credit for acts of nobility.

Elldren · Post by **Elldren** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:07 pm

MooCow wrote:It's also been claimed that he had contacts that were able to ensure he wasn't ever in the "really bad" parts of the conflict.

When you're taking fire, you're in a "really bad" part of the conflict. Being anywhere in the conflict could well be considered "really bad." If his contacts were anywhere near good enough, he would have never left the U.S., which leads me to believe that either A) he didn't have those contacts, B) he had contacts who couldn't find their ass with both hands and a flashlight, or more likely C) he did have such contacts, but he never expressed any interest in being kept out of the conflict.

lorg · Post by **lorg** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:14 pm

Leading to what? Kerry is a war ghoul? An adrenalin junkie that gets of on action?

Elldren · Post by **Elldren** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:18 pm

Or just a guy, like any other guy, who happened to volunteer for the US Navy, for whatever reason. I personally feel that motive matters fuck all, the only time it's really useful is in acting and forensics.

3278 · Post by **3278** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:34 pm

lorg wrote:Hardly surprising since if you go back enough generations it usually turns out most people are related to most people in one way or another.

If you go back enough generations, /everyone/ is /always/ related to /everyone else./ If you go back enough generations, all living things on the planet have a common ancestor. So no, not really surprising; actually, totally inevitable.

Marius · Post by **Marius** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:39 pm

When you're taking fire, you're in a "really bad" part of the conflict. Being anywhere in the conflict could well be considered "really bad." If his contacts were anywhere near good enough, he would have never left the U.S., which leads me to believe that either A) he didn't have those contacts, B) he had contacts who couldn't find their ass with both hands and a flashlight, or more likely C) he did have such contacts, but he never expressed any interest in being kept out of the conflict.

As a matter of fact, they did do a good job, and he did, in so many words, express interest in being kept out of the conflict. Kerry said, in interviews and in books, that the reason he specifically requested duty on the swift boats was that they were - at the time - intended merely for behind-the-lines patrol, far from any combat or danger. It was a change in higher military strategy later in the conflict that used the swift boats differently from their original purpose, and suprised young JFK with duty he hadn't signed up for. He was a bit sore about that later, although luckly he only had to endure it for a ridiculously short period of time.

FlakJacket · Post by **FlakJacket** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:41 pm

That used to be a pretty good dodge at the time- sign up for a tour with the navy and most chances were that you'd wind up on a ship or base somewhere not in Vietnam.

Rev · Post by **Rev** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:34 pm

Kerry was safely stationed on an aircraft carrier tens of miles off the coast of vietnam when he requested a transfer to the swift boat.

If he wanted to be safe he would have just stayed on the carrier. The evidence is that he wanted to see the reality of the war because he was beginning to have questions about it. This was all farily late in the war. His aircraft carrier shipmates thought he was crazy to volunteer for dangerour duty.

JFK may have been suprised to get shot at, but Kerry was expecting it when he transferred.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:34 pm

Rev wrote:JFK may have been suprised to get shot at, but Kerry was expecting it when he transferred.

JFK is John F. Kerry in this case.

Rev · Post by **Rev** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:52 pm

Heh, well anyway Looks like Kennedy went to some fairly extreem lengths to get to fight btw (on a PT boat in ww2). He had back problems and spent five months overcoming them well enough to get into the navy after being rejected by the army.

Anyhow Kerry was safe and sound on his aircraft carrier when he requested a vastly more dangerous assignment where he earned several medals and was (mildly) wounded 3 times. It is quite possible that swift boat duty turned out to be even more dangerous than he expected. The whole "fighting a war" thing certainly turned out to be far more distasteful than he had imagined.

George bush was safe and sound in alabama working on a pro-war congressional candidate's campaign and bragging about his nightly drinking before he went to harvard and skipped out on the remainder of his "military" obligation in violation of a direct order. His imaginations of war remained completely intact, aparrantly right up to today.

Marius · Post by **Marius** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm

The evidence is that he wanted to see the reality of the war because he was beginning to have questions about it.

The evidence - his own words - is that he never intended to see combat.

Rumors or fact? I honestly don't know.

Rumors or fact? I honestly don't know.

Re: Rumors or fact? I honestly don't know.