Did Bush had anything to do with the recent win by London hosting the 2012 Olympics?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:48 AM
link   
its kinda like giving award to the Brits for their support in the Iraq invasion, and to get back at the French. im sure i heard in the NPR radio where some French muttered that Bush had something to do with this since Paris was considered the number one favorite to host the 2012 Olympics.




posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Sorry im lost there lol.

But really how could bush have anything to do with the bid?

Bush was not the one giving out the award,

But an interesting twist ill give you that



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Never mind the Olympics. The Eurovision song contest is where you know how popular a country is politically. We'll need to wait till then to see if Britain is forgiven by Europe.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 09:36 AM
link   
I highly,highly,highly doubt it..

The olympic board picks the venue not a world leader.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 09:38 AM
link   
they voted 5 times. 104 representatives vote. madrid actually won the second round. London won 54-50 in the fifth round. There are 2 finns that vote, maybe chirac blew it with the comments this week about finnish food ?



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Did Bush had anything to do with the recent win by London hosting the 2012 Olympics?

Umm, dunno, but maybe someone might want to ask Chirac....






seekerof



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 09:49 AM
link   
If anything, I think we should be looking to Karl Rove. After all, he is the master of the universe, and probably fired his mind bullets into 54 voters causing them to vote London. After all, why on earth would the Olympics be held in London, with their terrible food, unless Karl Rove deemed it appropriate?



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
you read this......there is a blackhole that just destroyed some solar system............and it's all Bush's fault. Ah-Duh...........

//scarcasm 110%



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   
The Nation awarded with hosting the 2012 games was decided weeks ago leading up to this farce, why do you think Chirac lashed out against British cuisine etc.


The Bilderbergs and following G8 summit meetings dictated who gets to host the games, the voting aspect is nothing but a game of shirades to smoke screen non-UN nations.

Jacques Chirac pre-emtively knew his nation was up for a loss to the UK before the vote even took place.
hence all the recent resentment.

The puppet, George W. Bush ultimately had nothing to do with it...

[edit on 6-7-2005 by syntaxer]



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by syntaxer
The Nation awarded with hosting the 2012 games was decided weeks ago leading up to this farce, why do you think Chirac lashed out against British cuisine etc.


The Bilderbergs and following G8 summit meetings dictated who gets to host the games, the voting aspect is nothing but a game of shirades to smoke screen non-UN nations.

Jacques Chirac pre-emtively knew his nation was up for a loss to the UK before the vote even took place.
hence all the recent resentment.

The puppet, George W. Bush ultimately had nothing to do with it...

[edit on 6-7-2005 by syntaxer]



so how did the ruskies and the USA get snubbed ?



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

so how did the ruskies and the USA get snubbed ?


I'm not sure how to answer that, but I'll give it a shot based on my own conspiracy theory.

The US was awarded the 2002 Winter games in Salt Lake City correct? The decision to award Salt Lake during the 90's falls into the "recovery plan" revitalizing America's tourism after the NWO self-inflicted 9/11 job.

If 9/11 was an inside job, what better way to recover from "another Pearl Harbor" than to host the following Olympic games?
Simply review footage from those 2002 games and take notice at the pro-American, 9/11 sympathy spewing from the commentators mouths at the time. Gain sympathy and support and one might be able to get away with murder (Iraq).

As for Russia, well they're still being snubbed for the fun of it I'd say! Smirinov anyone?



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
There are 2 finns that vote, maybe chirac blew it with the comments this week about finnish food ?


probably, but im not mocking the french (i would never do that
)

But its true, everyone prefers the Brits to the French


plus, knowing the French, if they got the Olympics, they would go on struck during the games or something...

[edit on 6-7-2005 by infinite]



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   


But its true, everyone prefers the Brits to the French


I would have to strenuously disagree, even though, I have a strong feeling of schadenfreude. Thats my new favourite word


There is an alternate theory though, that Chirac didn't want the Olympics to start with, read more here



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Bush, Rove, and let's not forget...

DIEBOLD!





posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Considering that historically the Olympic members have been corrupted and bribed during the voting process for YEARS, it wouldn't suprise me.

But wouldn't Bush have supported the New York entry first?

Nothing that happens in the opympic commitee gives me any faith in objective fair voting. Its a gravy train.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
But wouldn't Bush have supported the New York entry first?




Common sense sometimes enters the discussion tarred and feathered.

The smell and aura of Bush around an Olympic bid could be a deterrent and not a supporting factor. Ask the voting delegates.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I think the architect of London's win was Chirac's highly diplomatic statements made public by the press in the last few days.

Savor the flavor of it my British brethren!


[edit on 7/6/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
But wouldn't Bush have supported the New York entry first?


It depends on what he and Tony were chatting about on that day.

I thought there was a huge security risk involved with hosting the olympics these days.

Honestly, why would anyone want to deal with that?



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Eh who cares, isn't the world spose to end in 2012 anyways? Personally I was hoping San Francisco would have been picked.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I'd think if Bush had anything at all to do with it, which he didn't, he would have had New York win. The Olympics bring billions into the economy of the country hosting them.

The US gov could have taken the money and gave Haliburton some more billion dollar contracts.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join