« | »

NYT: US Stopped Israel Attack On Iran

‘The paper of treason,’ the New York Times, strikes again:

U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site

Published: January 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran’s suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials.

White House officials never conclusively determined whether Israel had decided to go ahead with the strike before the United States protested, or whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was trying to goad the White House into more decisive action before Mr. Bush left office. But the Bush administration was particularly alarmed by an Israeli request to fly over Iraq to reach Iran’s major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country’s only known uranium enrichment plant is located.

The White House denied that request outright, American officials said, and the Israelis backed off their plans, at least temporarily. But the tense exchanges also prompted the White House to step up intelligence-sharing with Israel and brief Israeli officials on new American efforts to subtly sabotage Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, a major covert program that Mr. Bush is about to hand off to President-elect Barack Obama.

This account of the expanded American covert program and the Bush administration’s efforts to dissuade Israel from an aerial attack on Iran emerged in interviews over the past 15 months with current and former American officials, outside experts, international nuclear inspectors and European and Israeli officials. None would speak on the record because of the great secrecy surrounding the intelligence developed on Iran.

Several details of the covert effort have been omitted from this account, at the request of senior United States intelligence and administration officials, to avoid harming continuing operations.

The interviews also suggest that while Mr. Bush was extensively briefed on options for an overt American attack on Iran’s facilities, he never instructed the Pentagon to move beyond contingency planning, even during the final year of his presidency, contrary to what some critics have suggested.

The interviews also indicate that Mr. Bush was convinced by top administration officials, led by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, that any overt attack on Iran would probably prove ineffective, lead to the expulsion of international inspectors and drive Iran’s nuclear effort further out of view. Mr. Bush and his aides also discussed the possibility that an airstrike could ignite a broad Middle East war in which America’s 140,000 troops in Iraq would inevitably become involved.

Instead, Mr. Bush embraced more intensive covert operations actions aimed at Iran, the interviews show, having concluded that the sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies were failing to slow the uranium enrichment efforts. Those covert operations, and the question of whether Israel will settle for something less than a conventional attack on Iran, pose immediate and wrenching decisions for Mr. Obama.

The covert American program, started in early 2008, includes renewed American efforts to penetrate Iran’s nuclear supply chain abroad, along with new efforts, some of them experimental, to undermine electrical systems, computer systems and other networks on which Iran relies. It is aimed at delaying the day that Iran can produce the weapons-grade fuel and designs it needs to produce a workable nuclear weapon.

Knowledge of the program has been closely held, yet inside the Bush administration some officials are skeptical about its chances of success, arguing that past efforts to undermine Iran’s nuclear program have been detected by the Iranians and have only delayed, not derailed, their drive to unlock the secrets of uranium enrichment

While declining to be specific, one American official dismissed the latest covert operations against Iran as “science experiments.” One senior intelligence official argued that as Mr. Bush prepared to leave office, the Iranians were already so close to achieving a weapons capacity that they were unlikely to be stopped…

David E. Sanger is the chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times. Reporting for this article was developed in the course of research for “The Inheritance: The World Obama Confronts and the Challenges to American Power,” to be published Tuesday by Harmony Books.

What a typical piece of “reportage” from the New York Times.

If it is true, which is always a big “if” when it comes to their reporting, it is surely a breach of numerous, highly important national security secrets.

Moreover, it isn’t even clear exactly what they are claiming. For no where does Mr. Sanger directly state that Israel was determined to strike Iran’s nuclear program.

All we have is Mr. Sanger’s word that he cobbled this article together from a number of anonymous sources.

And, by the way, he has a book coming out the day after tomorrow. What a coincidence!

Isn’t “journalism” grand?

(Thanks to Sheehanjihad for the heads up.)

This article was posted by Steve on Sunday, January 11th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

15 Responses to “NYT: US Stopped Israel Attack On Iran”

  1. sheehanjihad says:

    Coming from the NYT, whether it’s believable or not is suspect immediately, but since they are publicizing a possible attack on one of their benefactors, maybe it’s true!

    Bush reportedly rejected Israeli plea to raid Iran

    WASHINGTON — President George W. Bush rejected a plea from Israel last year to help it raid Iran’s main nuclear complex, opting instead to authorize a new U.S. covert action aimed at sabotaging Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program, The New York Times reported.

    Israel’s request was for specialized bunker-busting bombs that it wanted for an attack that tentatively involved flying over Iraq to reach Iran’s major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country’s only known uranium enrichment plant is located, the Times reported Saturday in its online edition. The White House deflected requests for the bombs and flyover but said it would improve intelligence-sharing with Israel on covert U.S. efforts to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program…


  2. proreason says:

    The author of this piece should be tried and hung.

    • sheehanjihad says:

      I thought the same thing when I posted it this morning in the selected news section. Why on earth can people give up secrets like this, or at least give the impression that Israel was actually going to attack when they have no real solid proof of it? That is treason, and this ______ should be shot.

  3. Confucius says:

    He should be air-dropped into Iran wearing a T-shirt saying “I Love Bush!”

  4. River says:

    This was widely reported on the news, and I believe it was Drudge who posted it first. It wasn’t a “secret request”! This bullcrap is the reason people aren’t buying the Times – or a lot of other papers – these days. They think, and may be right, that a lot of the public has such a short memory or attention span that they can recycle old stories without anyone noticing.

  5. wardmama4 says:

    Ok this has 3 purposes – the so-called economic disaster has to be dropped in preparation of The One’s ™ ascension to the Throne of Power (and subsequent ‘magical’ repair of the economy), to prevent evilbushitlerburtonco from actually approving and/or dropping said bombs upon Iran on January 19th to ruin aforementioned ascention and of course, finally and always to remind the stupid masses (like any masses read the NYTs) that GWBush is violent, evil and always, always wrong.

    And perhaps to give Iran a heads up on who is preparing to attack them.

  6. Liberals Demise says:

    Iran knows it is coming…..just when is the question! The Times is the enemies tabloid of choice. Can’t wait to find out when Michele is going to have a (illegal) Aliens baby or if Oprah is meeting President Hambone on the side. This rag would sooner see the fall of America and the rise of Communism. All for a buck in the plus column. I might pick up my neighbors’ dog crap with the Times but I would never wrap a fish in it. That…..would make it not worth eating and stink up the neighborhood!! BTW……I could talk about the logistics of such a operation…..but that would tip the hands of balance. Unlike the Times, I Love America!!

  7. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    Remember all the hype about Geraldo (sp?) giving away troop positions. But I’m sure that was only because he was reporting for FoxNews.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      No….he is a blooming, frigging idiot!! The troops should have fragged him instead of letting him leave them on the “pinpointed” battlefield. Talk about luck. He wouldn’t have done that to me and my Marines!!
      Grrrrrrr…..I loathe lawyers!!

    • BannedbytheTaliban says:

      He is an idiot. I was focusing more on how the MSM had their panties in a wad and the double standard of liberal “reporting” and “conservative” “reports.” It is freedom of press to sell the country out as long as it is in the name of liberalism. I wouldn’t have fragged him though. I would of just barried him neck deep in the desert.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Ok…I understand the MSM bias stuff, and I understand the not fragging him part but couldn’ t we smear his head with a jelly pack? At least it would give the ants a bad taste in their mouths! (you aren’t a lawyer are you?) Haaaaa

  8. artpa says:

    I think this is much more revealing of how partisan the CIA has become, they need to clean house of all the Carter and Clinton people who call the times (notice they don’t call the post) whenever they hear something that could be damaging to our nation or a president with an R after his name.

  9. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    Jelly ok, but I’d rather leave him for the camel spiders than the ants. And to quote the Eagles “old Billy was right, lets kill all the lawyers and kill them tonight!”

    Ahh, what a world we could have without lawyers, you know, people like John Edwards.

  10. Eagle334th says:

    The timing could not be more perfect.

    Line up the haters of Israel..

« Front Page | To Top
« | »