Replies

I have serious reservations about his role in the Danny Pearl affair.

He was an investor in the factory in the Sudan bombed by the US.

He was seeking contracts in Sudan at the time of the BinLadin offer to Clinton, authentic IMO, but think Ijaz boosted his role in the affair (i've read Losing Binladin by Richard Miniter)

After 9.11, his analysis always defended the Pakis role in jihad and nukes, and I found that particularly rich when he was claiming objectivity.

Plus, I can't think of much he's said on Fox that's turned out to be accurate. Apart from sociological statements analysing and describing the state of US muslims.

IMO, anybody who claims to be a wheeler dealer in international affairs and is simultaneously such a self booster, when discretion is highly valued in these affairs, is a little suspect to me.

But people swear by him. That's their prerogative.