BUSH SAYS IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. WHO REPORTS IT?

At a press conference yesterday President of the USA George W Bush was involved in a brief discussion with a reporter regarding Iraq and 9/11. Here is that discussion.

From http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/21/bush-on-911/

BUSH: The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.

QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with it?

BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?

QUESTION: The attack on the World Trade Center.

BUSH: Nothing. Except it’s part of — and nobody has suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody’s ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq.

Bush is in 'full-flow honest Joe' mood, pouring out his heart about not withdrawing troops from Iraq (which I agree with, in fact I think there should be a massive influx of troops into Iraq, but the plan was for Iraq to descend into hell). So when someone asks what Iraq had to do with 9/11 his instant answer is "nothing", but he then realises he might get his little bodkin smacked by Cheney so he tries to spin the statement that Iraq did not order the attack.

So let's see if this is being reported online.

The Washington Post reports on and quotes from the press conference, but does not refer to this statement.
The New York Post does both!

OK. So let's see online which British media (a) publish reports of this press conference, and (b) mention that Bush said Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

BBC. (a) but not (b) (no big surprise there).
Sky News. (a) but not (b) (no big surprise there).
The Independent. Neither.
The Guardian. Neither.
The Times. Neither.
The Daily Telegraph. (a) but not (b).
The Sun. Neither (but at least we learn Jade Goody would like a role in Eastenders!).
The Daily Mirror. Neither.
The Daily Mail. Neither.
The Daily Express. Neither.