BIN LADEN-GATE WITNESS DARES DEMS: "DEPOSE ME ON CLINTON 9-11 COVER-UP"

NewsMax (1:38 pm EDT) ^ | 5/17/02 | NewsMax

[ohmage]

I can't imagine how the democrats even think they could impugn President Bush when there is such damaging information floating around out there on sites like Clinton's Mother of All Scandals

[MamaLucci]

Lanny Davis already has started the smear. "I refuse to discuss anything about him." Cited having trouble with him as a source. Wouldn't go into details but it was "something that happened."

I've often heard Davis being referred to as "Pakistani Lanny",
wonder if he and Ijaz have had business dealings that went bad?
Anyone know Lanny's ties to Pakistan, if any?

[freepersup]

look at Daniel's hands...especially the middle fingers...looks like he is flipping them off...giving the bird...could be wishful thinking...reminds me of the photographs of POW's in North Vietnam

[swarthyguy]

Here's my point. If you set up contacts for a person in a hostile country, (This was Pakistan) you do bear some responsibility for the nature of those contacts; Ijaz acknowledges that the people he's setting up contacts with Pearl have a low tolerance for perceived threats; And here's an American Jewish guy who works for the WSJ! All the more reason for Ijaz to have been extra careful or convinced Pearl not to go.

Pearl trusted this guy. What really irks me is that Ijaz absolves himself of any responsibility of convincing Pearl not to go. He knows Pakistan, he's travelled there and knew this was not the time or the place for someone like Daniel Pearl to be going there.

[rwfromkansas]

are you serious? And if so, where the heck did you hear this?

[rwfromkansas]

I must confess I don't know what is so sinister about this guy simply knowing Pearl....the poster would like us to think he murdered him or something.

[rwfromkansas]

Who is Lanny Davis anyway?

[katze]

Yes, he had/has ties to Pakistan as a lobbyist. I'll look to see what I can find, as I'm curious now. Lanny is dirty as Clinton, and has own baggage.

[katze]

The following from a Pakistan News service, written by Bryan McGrory, found doing a google search. Foreign agent, not lobbyist.

Ex-Clinton Chief Spokesman Helps Pakistan

WASHINGTON -- President Clinton's chief spokesman during the campaign finance investigations is now serving as a foreign agent for Pakistan, representing the Islamabad government at a time when White House officials are making key decisions on how to address the threat of a nuclear arms buildup between Pakistan and India.

Lanny Davis, who left as special White House counsel in February to resume his position as a partner with the powerhouse Washington lobbying and law firm of Patton Boggs, also has not registered with the Justice Department as a foreign agent, according to a Globe review of federal records. Davis said yesterday that he believed he had not yet billed his client enough money to require registration but planned to register soon.

[harpo11]

"What does Hillary have to say about this?"

I do not recall (Clinton S.O.P.)

[Trust but Verify]

I think you are reading WAAYY too much into this association between Pearl and Ijaz. Remember who Pearl worked for. The WSJ probably put Pearl onto Ijaz. Ijaz did not seek out Pearl.

What would be so outrageous about a reporter from a MAJOR newspaper seeking out the expertise and contacts from a well-known Pakistani in order to get a story? I suspect this happens all the time. That doesn't make Ijaz responsible for Pearl's death!

[MamaLucci]

Thank you so much for the info.
Davis has always been my choice for lowest of the low lifes that defended the indefensible.
FRegards

[PsyOp]

Who is Lanny Davis anyway?

A former Clinton administration flunky. I don't recall just what her function was, just that she was one of the many spin meisters working up at the big house with the boss. Just another no-talent that erned her kneepads and now get to "consult".

[dokmad]

BUMP!!!

[swarthyguy]

Why is Ijaz coming out now about a 4 year old incident. It was written about in Bodansnky's book. The same time that Pearl's body may have been found, the new arrestees are talking a different story than what the prosecution is asserting, the defense is trying to make a case the first videotape was fake.

And Ijaz, involved in the Pearl affair, is getting everybody juiced up about a four year old story that's relevant to what; that the clintonistas screwed up, covered up lots and lots about terrorist threats and generally ignored it or did not do nearly anywhere as much as they could have. Is that surprising to anyone here?There's nothing new in it. The timing is suspicious.

If he ends up before a Senate committee, I hope someone asks him Pearl.

[Trust but Verify]

Ijaz is being recycled by the media in light of the allegations against the Bush Administration. He was out there MONTHS ago telling this story about Clinton refusing to accept custody of bin Laden from the Sudanese.

I believe it is only coincidental that the Pearl story broke at the same time as the 9/11 story.

[mikeIII]

I watched this guy with O'reilly and he didn't seem very convincing, apart from slamming the Clintoons and patronizing the current administration. IO'reilly didn't seem very impressed either.

He is certainly knowledgable and involved in these affairs - how else could he muster contacts for Pearl, strike deals with Sudan/Al Qaida, discuss peace Kashmir extremists. His father is reported to have been involved in the Pakistani Nukee program.

His only credentials and appeal now seem to be his quick switch to the current administration and slandering the Democrats. I'd watch his charitable organization here closely!

[swarthyguy]

ping

[justshutupandtakeit]

If you tell me that you heard or saw him on tv before Bush (9/11 specifically) I will start to entertain doubts as to your veracity.

[Stultis]

I Most certainly am a cynic. He sets up contacts for Pearl; Pearl goes to Pakistan on the strength of these contacts; Pearl is kidnapped and killed and you tell me i'm a cynic for impugning Ijaz?

You are impugning him without a shred of evidence, on the basis of free floating confabulation. Ijaz is a pro-American, staunch anti-Islamist with knowledge and connections in a region where we especially need good guys like him. He cooperates closely with both reporters and the American government. Why do you attack those helping to fight the common foe WITHOUT EVIDENCE, and in contradiction to Ijaz's record, behavior and words?

Note that Ijaz has and is making a strong effort in the media to clue the public into what Pearl was working on, i.e. the connections between Islamists and terrorists in Pakistan and Western Muslim terrorists like Reid. Would someone on the side of the Islamists (and therefore suspect in setting up Pearl) be harping loudly on such themes? Of course not. Look at the facts, man. The tinfoil has fallen over your eyes.