Faux strikes again. Lies and the lying liars......

[Dover]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97063,00.html

Watch Special Report With Brit Hume weeknights at 6 p.m. ET

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOWARD DEAN, DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9-11.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH, D-OHIO, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.

SENATOR BOB GRAHAM, D-FLA, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: President knew or should have known that there was no relationship between 9-11. There was no relationship between Usama Been Forgotten and Saddam Hussein.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIT HUME, HOST: It's an applause line. And in that case, a laughter line for the Democrats in their presidential debates. There you heard it from Howard Dean (search), from Dennis Kucinich (search) and finally, there from Senator Bob Graham (search) of Florida, the flat out statement…definitive statement, no connection between 9-11 and Iraq.

Well, certainly the administration has never claimed a connection, but is it that clear that it is definite there was not? For more on this, we turn now to FOX News foreign affairs analyst, Mansoor Ijaz, who joins us now from Berlin; the man with the best sources we know of anybody on these kinds of issues.

Mansoor, welcome. And tell us, first of all, your sense about whether it is…whether it can be definitively stated as a fact that there was no…9-11 connection to Iraq.

MANSOOR IJAZ, FOX NEWS FOREIGN AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, Brit, I'll first…I'll say to you that with regard to Howard Dean and Congressman Kucinich, you have to forgive them because they don't know any better. But I was surprised to hear Bob Graham say that since he sat in a senior position on the Senate Intelligence Committee during the course of these events.

[LoZoccolo]

1. LIE.

"Well, certainly the administration has never claimed a connection, but is it that clear that it is definite there was not?"

I remember Colin Powell doing so at one point, very close to the beginning of the war before it began.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

2. Lies lies lies lies lies lies lies

"Well, certainly the administration has never claimed a connection..."

Then they go on to say that there's no evidence that there ISN'T a connection. WTF is that? These people are nuts.

[Dover]

3. Wow....an alternate universe! Proof there ARE alternate realities!

It's blowing my mind! I mean, is Brit Hume really a name?
So how do ya change the channel, man? It's really bummin' me out, ya dig? A baaaaad trip.:hippie:

[Doomsayer13]

4. fair and balanced my ass

[Scairp]

5. They must think we are stupid

We have all heard the current adminstration try to make the connection between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, and now Butt Hume has the nerve to sit there and look the American people in the eye and claim the administration has never said that?!? Unbelievable. And of course, we all know the story with good ole Mansoor. I have come to the conclusion that they just can't help it, they are congenital liars.

Here's a link on point about this.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/leopold13.html

This is a good one too.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/7/9/122457.shtml

"Senior Bush administration figures have at times cited meetings Ani had with Atta as evidence of a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda, and perhaps even proof of Saddam Hussein's complicity in the attacks".


But remember, the Bushies NEVER said there was a connection.

[Mountainman]

19. They don't think we are stupid, the think the freeper types are stupid

FOX's major audience are the "tell me what to think" bunch. Those folks who tune into Rush on radio and FOX on TV to find out what to think about stuff each day. They have no critical thinking skills and will swallow anything FOX and Rush say.

[Zo Zig]

6. 20 bucks says

Mansoor Ijaz is CIA, maybe someone will start digging.
The Sudan story has been his well of knowledge, but lets not forget the he is also a CFR member, and has lied on Faux more than once.

[grasswire]

7. here's a little dirt on Monsoor himself

http://www.likelystory.net/archives/000139.html

Monsoor Ijaz is a busy man. You know the guy. Newsmax, Fox News Channel, and the right-wing media have portrayed him as a Clinton “top aide” who negotiated on behalf of the United States with the Sudanese government for the arrest of Osama bin Laden. As the story goes, Ijaz negotiated in 1996 and 1997, winning Sudanese agreement for bin Laden’s arrest, only to have the deal fall through because President Bill Clinton backed out and let bin Laden get away. The Cro-Magnons at Newsmax were so taken with Ijaz’s tale that they devoted much ink to it. It has become a firmly fixed part of the right wing's Clinton-hating lore. The problem is, however, Monsoor Ijaz is a liar.

Lots more at the link above.

[grasswire]

8. more snips

Ijaz has given differing accounts of his involvement to different people. To Newsmax he certainly claimed he had negotiated the deals for bin Laden’s arrest, but if you look up his biographies on the internet, his story begins to collapse. In his bio for the South Asian Journalists Association Ijaz makes only this claim with regard to negotiations with Sudan:

“As a private American citizen, Ijaz negotiated Sudan's counter-terrorism offer to the Clinton administration in April 1997.”
Newsmax claimed Ijaz was a Clinton “top aide” and had “negotiated on behalf of Clinton.” In his SAJA bio Ijaz changes his story, saying he acted “as a private citizen.” Indeed, Ijaz was NEVER an aide in the Clinton administration, "top" or otherwise.

Furthermore, the bio states he did his negotiating in April of 1997. Since bin Laden had been expelled from Sudan on May 18, 1996, Ijaz could not have negotiated with Sudan about his arrest. He was already in Afghanistan.

In the Newsmax stories Ijax claimed to have negotiated with Sudan on behalf of Clinton from 1996 to 1998, but in his SAJA bio he claims only April of 1997. He clearly is exaggerating.

In the bio, Ijaz says he “negotiated Sudan’s counter-terrorism offer to the Clinton administration.” Clearly, in the bio he is claiming to have worked for the Sudanese, and in the Newsmax stories he claims to have worked for the United States. Both cannot be true. It is certain he did not work for the Clinton administration, and he could not have been involved in the Sudanese side since the offer came straight from its foreign minister.

On June 10, 1997, Ijaz testified before congress about terrorism in Sudan without ever once mentioning bin Laden.

Monsoor Ijaz is clearly a liar. What is remarkable is how the wingnuts at Newsmax and Fox News Channel hyped a wild-eyed claim they could have knocked down in a few minutes of Googling. Ijaz is a crackpot who tried to buy influence from the Clinton administration and was bitter when none was offered to him. But he got the wingnuts to run with his story. I don't know if they actually believed it, but they sure ran with it.

[Zhade]

14. I think Ijaz is the guy behind all the emails from Nigeria!

;) NT!

[legin]

10. A member of the neo-cons booking agency too

A short bio:
http://www.benadorassociates.com/ijaz.php

[kayleybeth]

9. This never got any news coverage, but...

The only time I've ever heard shrub asked this question directly, he said he can't make that connection:

President Bush Meets with Prime Minister Blair
Remarks by the President and British Prime Minister Tony Blair
The Cross Hall
January 31, 2003

Q One question for you both. Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?

THE PRESIDENT: I can't make that claim.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030131-23.html
(quote is about 2/3 down the page)

Note this was 3 days after the SOTU speech, where he used the following bit of deliberately deceptive language (note that he mentions 9/11, Saddam, and the highjackers all in the same breath, trying to plant the seed that they are all connected):

"Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein."
SOTU speech
January 28, 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

[KYDEM]

11. Please read

Sen.Dayton gave this speech on the floor of the Senate Sept. 11, 2003.
Hhttp://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r108:15:./temp/~r108MaiLyv::e

[kayleybeth]

12. Here what I got

when I clicked your link

Please resubmit your search

Search results are only retained for a limited amount of time.Your search results have either been deleted, or the file has been updated with new information.

[Zhade]

13. IJAZ?????????

That guy is phonier than *'s "presidency", and has CIA fingerprints all over him!

GOD, we're not THAT stupid!

[knight_of_the_star]

15. Wow

I wonder how Faux is going to do if we take the GOP and Bush out of power in '04. They are REALLY going to look stupid for propping up these lies when they get exposed.

[Borgnine]

16. My guess....

My guess is Fox News will thrive. Remember, Rush Limbaugh was very successful during Clinton's presidency, because it gave morons a place to bask in their extreme hatred for the man. The next Democratic president will probably be demonized even more than Clinton.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. Those guys claim they're "fair and balanced"???

That's more biased than a presidential radio address.

Their view seems to be "the president is the centre of public opinion; if we see someone to the left of him, we'll go to the right to balance it".

It's 4 years since I was living in the USA; I saw Fox News Channel then, and dismissed it along with the fundamentalist Christian channels. I still find it hard to believe that some people think that CNN is liberal - I saw the American version of that this February, and couldn't believe how pro-war it was. There's a classic episode of the British spoof news programme "The Day Today" from the mid 90's, in which the news channel engineers a war between Australia and Hong Kong, because their reporters are all ready. Apart from the US (and UK) government being the cheerleaders for war in reality, it was unbelievable how close CNN was to the spoof. For a transcript, see http://www.koekie.org.uk/funnel/tdt/tdt5.html
(search for 'Australia', but the rest of it is worthwhile too). I hate to think what it would be like to rely on Fox for all your news; a bit like another British spoof, I suppose: one the web called "Daily Mail Island", where a reality show strands people on an island with only the right-wing tabloid "Daily Mail" to read. "Lord of the Files" ensues.

[Enraged American]

18. Mansoor Ijaz LMAO!

I'll bet all the crazy freeping neocons who watch faux will think Ijaz is right and knows more than anyone else because he's an arab.

"oh he's an arab. he must be telling the truth"

Faux is pathetic. There was no connection between Hussein and Bin Laden.

Hussein = isolated secular Arab socialist nationalist
Bin Laden = fanatic who has close ties to the Saudi monarchy and the CIA

Why would Saddam Hussein get his feet wet by selling weapons to Al-Qaeda? That's just illogical. He doesn't need the money.