Report: Bush Rejected Israeli Plea to Raid Iran

[livvy]

Report: Bush Rejected Israeli Plea to Raid Iran

The Associated Press
Posted : Sunday Jan 11, 2009 8:47:35 EST

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.

The covert efforts, which began in early 2008, involved plans to penetrate Iran’s nuclear supply chain abroad and undermine electrical systems and other networks on which Iran relies, the Times said, citing interviews with current and former U.S. officials, outside experts and international nuclear inspectors who spoke on condition of anonymity. The covert program will be handed off to President-elect Barack Obama, who will deciding whether to continue it.

According to the Times, Bush decided against an overt attack based on input from top administration officials such as Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who believed that doing so would likely prove ineffective and could ignite a broader Middle East war.

Israel made the push for permission to fly over Iraq for an attack on Iran following its anger over a U.S. intelligence assessment in late 2007 that concluded Iran had effectively suspended its development of nuclear weapons four years earlier. Israel sought to rebut the report, providing evidence to U.S. intelligence officials that they said indicated the Iranians were still working on a weapon.

more...


http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/01/ap_iran_israel_011109/%2e

[leveymg]

1. KNR. EVERYONE should know about this. Frontpage this story.

Thank God for Gates and the other adults. Olmert almost talked Bush into starting WWIII.

[Peace Patriot]

2. I think this article may have a grain of truth, but is otherwise a pack of lies, disinformation,

spin, and psyops. It is very curious, indeed, to see an ON-GOING U.S. COVERT operation exposed by the New York Times, and promulgated by the Associated Pukes, in, of all places, the Navy Times.

Take a look at this sentence: "...citing interviews with current and former U.S. officials, outside experts and international nuclear inspectors who spoke on condition of anonymity."

What on earth is going on with this? WHO, among CURRENT U.S. officials, is disclosing a covert program--and WHY?

It's bad enough that FORMER U.S. officials are disclosing an ON-GOING program. Or "outside experts." Or "international nuclear inspectors." All anonymously. But CURRENT officials?! And it's bad enough for such people to disclose even a RECENT covert operation, endangering everybody involved, especially contacts/agents in foreign countries (--one of the worst aspects of the Plame outing). But this is astonishing.

You know, I'm just reading James Douglass' "JFK and the Unspeakable," and I'm with JFK: we should smash these secret organizations into a thousand pieces. But until we do, and as long as we have secret organizations and covert ops, and people risking their lives to obtain intelligence, or to prevent some threat--and with the given that the operations are legitimate, and not, for instance, assassinating the president--it is treasonous to expose them, or even to hint at the existence of a covert op, let alone reveal details like this does.

There is something going on here that I don't understand. I don't really have a clue what the purpose of this could be. The only thing that springs to mind is a treasonous exposure of an on-going covert operation merely to start white-washing Bush. He refused to nuke Iran? I think that is bullshit. The grain of truth may be that he spoke the words. But the real situation, and the real "deciders," is almost entirely occulted. I have my theory about this, which I won't go into here. I just want to urge people to beware of this article, to read it carefully, and to think it through. WHY has this been published?

[livvy]

3. It is a tad fishy, isn't it.

I wondered about it also. I remember a while back there was something about the lying weasel not agreeing with Darth about Iran, but it didn't make much news. So why is it resurfacing now?

Considering this admin.'s obsessiveness with secrecy, one would think they would be besides themselves with a leak of any kind. A nonchalant attitude by both the admin. and the press is odd at best.

It could be a part of the legacy building. Makes him sound like he actually might think beyond where to put his next foot while crossing the room. Of course we know he does not even do that reasonably well.

It is impossible to know what is truth and what is fiction with these criminals. They have lied about almost everything since day 1, and the media has been complicit in almost every tall tale told. The betrayal of trust is enormous in scope.

I cannot wait for them to be booted out of DC. It would be even more gratifying to see them prosecuted and convicted for the crimes they have committed. That would be a proper ending to the nightmare of the last 8 years.

[merh]

4. And did you know that Iraq had WMDs

:sarcasm:

This story is part of the bush legacy project.

I mean, come on, the guy has on his record 9/11, the worst economy evah, a deficit my greatgreatgrandchildrens' grandchildren won't be able to repay; 2 ongoing wars; Katrina; Ike (that will come out soon how they's messed that one up) and now, the renewed fighting between Gaza/Israel. They had to come up with something - he didn't attack Iran, ain't that nice.