Did Clinton Accept $10 Million in Blood Money From the Saudis After 9-11?

Question

Bill Clinton accepted $10 million from his buddies, the Saudis, after 9-11.

Wow. That sure appears to be blood money!

Yep, it's true. Clinton got $10 million from the Saudis for his library.

Tell me. Are the Democrats soooo ashamed of Bill Clinton that they can't fund his library?

Are Dems proud of this?

I love how Libbies on here prove their hatred of anything truth that makes them look bad.

Does any Lib on here have access to the internet? If so, try to use it to educate yourself --- especially before using your usual HATRED to attack other people for speaking the truth.

--->

"This morning, the New York Sun published an article saying that millions of dollars that went to building Bill Clinton's library were from not only the Saudi royal family and wealthy Saudi citizens, ...."

http://www.theright-stuff.com/archives/2004_11.html
Call the New York Sun if you want to triple check it.

Answer 1

Just throwing remarks out there and hoping one sticks? Come on now.....that simply didnt happen. We like to see proof, but in this case there simply isnt any---- because it never happened!

Answer 2

you are able to grant sources for those assertions. If the activities are as you state them... the two journey are diverse and diverse. The 9-11 survivors have prevalent money from different sources and not viewed it as "blood money"... the survivors observed the Saudi grant as blood money... i'm effective that bill Clinton has won investment for his library from many sources... not in basic terms the Saudis.... The Bush family contributors has been "tight" with the Saudis for some years... what does that say concerning the Republicans ?

Answer 3

Old news; the ties to Bush are much more blatant. Since the library's cost is $165M, it was mostly funded by other sources. I don't know why you choose to call this blood money. Do you believe that we are at war with Saudi Arabia (where most of the 9/11 terrorists came from, but not where Bush chose to attack)? Remember, these Saudis were the ones that got to fly right after 9/11 when no one at all was supposed to be flying. If your thesis statement is that ties to the Saudis are bad, your targeting the wrong politician. If you believe that ties to the Saudis aren't bad, then what's your point?

Answer 4

You didn't explain why it's blood money. Bush didn't invade Saudi Arabia in retaliation for 9/11 so apparently he doesn't hold them responsible.
Why is James Baker's law firm representing the Saudi's against the 9/11 victims? This is the same Baker who oversaw the Florida recount for the republicans in Florida in 2000.

Answer 5

Your question leads to a much deeper question,,,,Do we really want the truth or are we so divided that we deny truth if it offends our so called party? Can we really say that any party or man is perfect? Are the Dems really the answer to the threat of nuclear arms, and the war in Iraq? Or, is prophecy really being fulfilled right before our eyes?

Answer 6

Yep after liberals go on and on about how Saudis were part of 9/11 and Bill took money that is OK now with them.

Btw: here is 1 source of information. http://www.nysun.com/article/5137

Answer 7

Yes. I'm not sure if it's 'blood money'.

I am more interested in the money his family members received from family members of multiple cocaine smugglers, around the same time he pardoned those cocaine smugglers.

Answer 8

David - you're way off the mark. The house of Saud has an annex in Crawford, not Little Rock.

Answer 9

Let's see at least two reliable sources supporting this claim.

Answer 10

Any proof or sources on this or are you off your meds today?