An article which appeared in this mornings Jerusalem Post, quoted Israel officials who claim that US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term. The article which was quoting “Army Radio” said that a top official in Jerusalem claimed that a senior member in the entourage of President Bush, who concluded a trip to Israel last week, had said in a closed meeting that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were of the opinion that military action against Iran was called for.
Just a few moments ago, the White House press secretary released the following scathing statement against the Jerusalem Post:
“An article in today’s Jerusalem Post about the President’s position on Iran that quotes unnamed sources — quoting unnamed sources — is not worth the paper it’s written on.
Let me respond by reaffirming the policy of the Administration: We, along with our international allies who want peace in the Middle East, remain opposed to Iran’s ambitions to obtain a nuclear weapon. To that end, we are working to bring tough diplomatic and economic pressure on the Iranians to get them to change their behavior and to halt their uranium enrichment program.
As the President has said, no president of the United States should ever take options off the table, but our preference and our actions for dealing with this matter remain through peaceful diplomatic means. Nothing has changed in that regard.”
It is interesting to note, that the Jerusalem Post has since pulled the original story from their website, and has replaced it with an article titled “White House denies Army Radio report on plan to attack Iran”.
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
11 Responses
Just to be factual, there is a difference between: “Jerusalem Post “Not Worth The Paper It’s Written On”” and “An article in today’s Jerusalem Post…is not worth the paper it’s written on.”
Lkwd188 took the words right out of my mouth. The White House quote by no means talks about the Jerusalem Post not being worth the paper it is written on. What the White House is talking about is the “unnamed sources”. However, lets not rush to conclusions. It still is possible that for other reasons, the Post, is not worth the paper it is written on.
#1, just to factual, the Jerusalem Post is not worth the paper it’s printed on
It irks me how the paper is willing to publish something to gain attention even though it can hurt many lives.
To Lkwd188
Just taking the exact words OUT OF CONTEXT like the rest of the media does.
Lkwd188, that said, any newspaper that would actually quote unnamed Israelis for a matter that significant comes awfully close to not being worth the paper it’s written on.
I don’t have a clue about the veracity of the story, but that is a great picture of Bush. And for those who did not hear his speech in the Knesset, it is worth your while to hear it on the whitehouse.gov website.
What about Rabbi Wein’s column?
I have a feeling there’s some doublespeak going on here. My guess is there’s more truth to the article than anyone in the administration would have us believe.
If it is true, obviously the White House doesn’t want the world to know about it, hence the criticism.
The article may be much more damaging than one would at first believe.
If the story IS true, the publication of the story resulted in a denial, which may now make it much less likely to occur.
So, the idiotic story may have stopped the US attack on Iran, and put the Middle East in danger from Iran.