[spetznaz]

Actually the Bush family has two major contacts witht he Saudis. One is with a Saudi prince named Prince Alwaleed bin Talal (who by the way is the biggest international investor in the United States, and an extremely wealthy man who took his inherited millions and turned them into $17.2 billion through shrewd investments. He owns a myriad of tech stocks, and many of the big hotels around NYC are at least owned partially by him. He also owns part of News Corp. and a piece of the Dodgers. He also owns a huge portion of Disney, and is a primary holder of up to $2 billion of Apple, Motorolla, AOL and Teledesic). The Bush family have had severla joint ventures with Prince Talal. However the juicest connection is the following.

The Bush family is a major investor/board member/power broker (especially Bush senior) of the Carlyle group, whihc is a member defence contractor for the US military. For example the Crusader advanced artillery system was being backed by them. However one of the major members of the group is the Binladin family. The Binladin family is the family unit that Usama bin Laden belongs to. They changed their name to Binladin to avoid 'negative' associations with their 'acerbic' relative. And due to their immense wealth stemming from the patriach of the family (now deceased) getting into lucrative architecture and building contracts with the former monarchs of Saudi Arabia, they have quite some clout in the Carlyle group.

Now, i want to pint out here i am not saying that these liaisons between the Bushs' and both the Prince, and the Binladin family, are nefarious or evil. I am not saying they are wrong.... it looks that they are just some clever business stratagems.

The reason i posted this is to reply a post you sent to a fellow Freeper that i felt was kind of intimidatory, and thus i had to stand up for my fellow Freeper and post the facts above. The Bush family is in cahoots with a lot of Saudi principals... and it is in a myriad of business investments ranging from investment hedging to military procurements for the US military.

And i know in the next hour or so i will receive several posts 'hotly' demanding 'credence' for my assertions in the form of 'proof.' So my sources are as follows: The Prince Alwaleed bin Talal connection was from Fortune magazine for December 6, 1999. And the Bush connection to the Binladin family was from a C-Span interview with the Carlyle group where they had to disclose the major members of the group, and Bush Sr, was there, as was the binladins and some former members of the government eg Kissinger et al.

And again i emphasize that there is necessarily nothing nefarious about the connections.... i am just defending a fellow Freeper.

Enjoy.

[Howlin]

I know all that. So you, too, are saying that if I invest in, say, a movie, I can say I'm "doing business" with Tom Clancy?

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

And i know in the next hour or so i will receive several posts 'hotly' demanding 'credence' for my assertions in the form of 'proof.'

Not disputing your facts, just your assertion. Why is it that the conspiracy theorists insist on leaping to the conclusion that just because one has business investments/dealings with another that they would automatically be aware of and supportive of everything that the other was doing? That is absurd. Are you (spetz) suggesting that just because the Bush family might have had knowledge of what a member of the bin laden family might have been suspected of plotting would be sufficient reason for recusal from business dealings and investment? Nonsense. These dealings go back before the birth of the black sheep.

[swarthyguy]

Enjoyed your post. Hard to speak about the Bush family without their extensive interchanges and business relationships to the Saudis.

So, would the Saudis be responsible for the cancellation of the Crusader. Rhetorical:)