Depends on which Saudis we're talking about. Shoebat claims the Saudi 9/11 exodus included at least one prince who was allegedly involved in financing 9/11. The argument is not a truther argument, but a failure of duty argument. If true, the release of a culpable party, whether out of negligence or perceived political expediency, is a failure of the system to serve it's prime directive, to ensure the well being of the American people.
So let's play with your analogy a bit. Shoebat suggests that significant numbers of Saudi royalty are up to their eyeballs in Wahhabism, the Islamic fundamentalist ideology that drove the 9/11 attackers. So lets it's NY, during WWII, and Uncle Woofie is not just a German, but a known Nazi symathizer. While many Germans are fine people, we know that Nazism is bad. So Uncle Woofie blows up NY. Do we rush his relatives back to Germany? Even the professing Nazis? With like a two minute interview at the airport, as Shoebat alleges? Wouldn't that be criminally negligent at best?
The reason this stuff slides so easily into Truther territory is that you have a lot of rumors, half truths and half stories ....innuendo etc.
I doubt we know what really happened and I can think of a lot of legal reasons for a lot to happen Innuendo from the left is the Saudis were his friends...(more BS)
Bush showed more determination in stopping terrorists, disrupting their networks and carrying out a policy intended to eradicate them It is a substantial record that is good or better record than anyone I can think of...
It lasted 7 years.
The left castigated him because he waited 8 minutes or something like that when he was in a Florida class room and received the news on 9 11. This is supposed evidence to them that he wasn’t serious.This BS about the Saudis is in the same vein ...
We heard Bush let it happen and also Bush tortured people.
He was too weak He was a war monger.
I think he got it about right and he surrounded himself with very good people ...If you buy into the lefts anti Bush BS you are lost as far as I am concerned
Thank you. The Bushies are Saudi apologists from way back, and W’s ‘religion of peace’ defending of a religion of war was inexcusable. Simply look at the number of sympathizers, unindicted co-conspirators and the like that he hosted at the WH post-911.
Barry really just picked up where W left off—e.g., Barry may have bowed, but W walked around holding hands.