I don't recall the business and financial aspects of Bush being involved with the Saudis being all that public back in 2000.
If you had known then would you still have voted for him?
2007-01-21 06:24:13 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
the Saudi Royal Family. nothing happens in the world without their approval.
2007-01-21 06:29:11 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
President Bush was involved with Bin Laden's half brother, Salem Bin Laden. When Salem died, his shares in Arbusto were willed to someone else.
Salem Bin Laden, and every other member of the Bin Laden family, have disowned Osama Bin Laden. He got his inheritance after his father died, went to Afghanistan, and has never been back to Saudi Arabia.
The Saudis revoked his citizenship after 9/11, and Osama Bin Laden Is not allowed to return to Saudi Arabia.
I did know, and yes I voted for him. Big deal. It was also known during his two gubernatorial campaigns and Texans didn't have a problem with it, either.
2007-01-21 06:35:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
The Bush family connections to the al-Saud family are notorious. They were there when Daddy Bush was president, too. Just look at the Carlisle Group, which the Bushes are a part of; it is a great sponsor of the agendas put forth by the al-Sauds, through the use of American finances and infrastructure, and it supports the bin Laden Group as well. They even called the former Saudi ambassador to the United States, Bandar Bush, because he was just like one of the family. Is there any wonder the Saudis have gotten everything they could possibly hope for from two Bush administrations? They got rid of Saddam on their northern border and they got to sell their cheap oil to the United States populous at outrageous profit.
2007-01-21 06:29:38 · answer #3 · answered by Jackson Leslie 5 · 1⤊ 4⤋
You bet. What do you think would have been different with Kerry in office. He is just as tied into big business, either he or his wife are big business. Maybe not the oil but still big business. Any President is going to be soft of the Saudis until we no longer have to rely on oil.
2007-01-21 06:28:20 · answer #4 · answered by 91106 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Y E S!!!Every President that has been in office
has had relationships with Saudi Arabia. Where has the bin Ladens been as far as anything goes???????????????????????????????
2007-01-21 06:28:39 · answer #5 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
very last we heard, his well being become poor. even with if the bastard become lifeless, that they had not in any respect let us know. they want us to keep dropping attempt and money. That become the finished aspect in the back of 9-11 contained in the first position.
2016-12-02 20:36:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, absolutely.
The hysterical conspiracy theories just don't add up.
The one thing that Saudis never wanted was to have U.S. troops on "holy ground", as they consider parts of Iraq. By doing just that, Bush has dispelled any nonsense about his being biased in their favor.
2007-01-21 06:30:54 · answer #7 · answered by jack_98 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Given the choices at the time, absolutely I would have still voted for him. I don't completely agree with his choices right now, but I don't believe I would have wanted Gore or Kerry in that position on 9/11.
2007-01-21 06:28:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Put on your tinfoil hat, and check out my link.
George Soros has more money than brains. Would you atill have voted for Kerry or Gore if you had known they were backed by George Soros?
2007-01-21 06:42:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
No but I'm Canadain.
If I were American, I'd realize pretty quickly that whatever relationship he had with them, it did not involve betraying his country or condoning Islamic extremism. Even Michael Moore would have a hard time establishing that.
2007-01-21 06:28:42 · answer #10 · answered by rostov 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋