I'll bet Ailes thought it confusing too. He has been livin' the lie for so long he believes his own hyperbole. Same goes for Murderoch

Can they not air an ad because it is too "confusing?" Because I find a lot of the programming "confusing" on fox "news" as it seems to be full of misinformation and untruths making me confused.

Fox has a copyright on Fear. This ad infringes on that copyright.

Iran is not our enemy. i hate fox as much as the next normal person but come on. These Green Vets couldn't find a pix of Osama?

We have Iran surrounded and we are spreading lies exactly like we did before we illeagally invaded Iraq. This ad sucks. Not a word about global warming?

Seems like Mossad psy-op disinfo.

I've been calling it Faux Noise for years. It's a fear factory that pollutes the airwaves to conceal actual issues and poison the democratic discourse.

Its especialy curious that an ad with an arguably patriotic theme (improve national security by curtailing imports of oil from countries that are opposed to our interests) would be rejected by a network that parrots the line of a party that claims national security as its hallmark. Mindblowing!

I remember now (somewhat), Wasn't it Arianna Huffington that was skewered a few years back by the right wing media for calling Hummer and SUV drivers out for supporting terrorism? Maybe they're still afraid to admit it? or their oil co masters told them to not air it.

Is that the "confusing" message?

Lets repackage that headline to read

Fox Owners and staff imply Fox viewers are not as intelligent as those view MSNBC and CNN.

See? The truth is so much easier!

Brad- yer the greatest, don't get me wrong- this ad is really horrifying. Why is Iran our enemy? Because they want nuclear power, or nuclear weapons like Israel? don't you see it is really a pro-war ad,conditioning us to create another enemy- Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan now Iran? It's a horrible, stupid ad. CNN is the pro war network I guess. Not that Fox news isn't asinine and even more pro war. guess they missed an opportunity to further hypnotize the masses.

I do not like FOX news or any of the TV stations for that matter.

Actually if you look at the science of Global Warming you find that the IPCC report is lacking.
Spencer: strong negative feedback found in radiation budget
http://wattsupwiththat.c...und-in-radiation-budget/

What makes this important is that this is measured with satellites not ground based flawed stations.

Odd sites
http://www.surfacestations.org/odd_sites.htm

I do not like the oil companies or big government.

The technology exists to power our planet without oil. Steorn.com

Really, Brant, you tools of the climate change denial industry really oughtta find SOME talking points that haven't already been thoroughly demolished and debunked:

NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center Q&A: “Is the U.S. Temperature Record Reliable?” (Warning: read only if you retain the ability to think critically and ojectively using actual data)

[F]or detecting climate change, the concern is not the absolute temperature – whether a station is reading warmer or cooler than a nearby station over grass – but how that temperature changes over time.

You'll have to read the whole report to get the full explanation of why Watts is so terribly, embarrassingly wrong.

Here's a more technical, science-y debunking (I know that whole science-evidence-data part is hard)-- FROM THREE YEARS AGO, Brant! Do try to keep up:

Surface Stations:
Never mind that taking pictures isn’t really a good way to investigate the quality of the data, or that 200 is only a small fraction of the USHCN stations, or that the U.S. is only about 1.5 % of the surface area of the globe, or that many other evidences (including glacial retreat, ocean warming, species migration, sea level rise, sea ice extent, and satellite estimates of lower-troposphere temperature) corroborate global warming over the last 30 years. Never mind that the good people at NASA GISS have worked very hard to identify any problems that exist in the source data, so that they can be corrected when possible and discarded when not. The surfacestations.org people are clearly convinced that the evidence for global warming can’t be trusted, and that the warming in the surface temperature record from thermometers is mainly due to bad siting of surface stations.

Here's a fun video that makes it a little easier for you to understand just how embarrassingly wrong Watts has been:
Debunking Another Climate Change Crock: What's Up with Anthony Watts? [video]

You climate change denier tools really need to find more updated sources. Although we warn you in advance that the science is already way ahead of you.

Remember FoxNews viewers and most conservatives have to have video evidence when things happen. That way they can digest it. Sort of like the regurgitation that Mama bird does for her young hatchlings. Hannity, Beck, and others use chalkboards and white boards to break these complicated world matters into small sound bites and videos so they can be easily digested by the average FoxNews viewer. To display a commercial like that would actually have had to have a well known figure, like Limbaugh, Beck Hannity, etc. to interpret what it meant to avoid the Fox viewers from getting confused. So that's why Fox couldn't show the video. (Fox PR dept. Do I get the job?)