×

Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




RUSH: National Intelligence Estimate. ‘British spy chiefs have grave doubts that Iran has mothballed its nuclear weapons programme, as a US intelligence report claimed last week. Analysts believe that Iranian staff, knowing their phones were tapped, deliberately gave misinformation. The timing of the CIA report has also provoked fury in the British Government, where officials believe it has undermined efforts to impose tough new sanctions on Iran and made an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities more likely.’ I have heard some of the wildest theories to explain this NIE and the timing. Now, to set up some of these theories, let’s go back to Friday where we learned that this past June, this past summer, one of the three authors of the key judgment, that being that the Iranians had shut down their program in 2003, Thomas Finger, testified before Congress — this is seven months ago, five months ago, something — ‘Yes, we’re very concerned the Iranian nuclear program prepares unabated, weapons program, they’re enriching uranium,’ and so forth. So now, all of a sudden, a few months ago, ‘Nope, they stopped in 2003.’

Now, we’ve all heard the theories that this is a bunch of rogue intelligence analysts who have an axe to grind, trying to sabotage Bush administration policy. There are also those who think that these intelligence people are simply trying to become policy makers and go beyond their charge as intelligence analysts. But here’s the most interesting theory that I have heard, and it’s just a theory. It’s backed up by a piece of information. I think this was in the Washington Post over the weekend as well. That members of the United States, some intel people or whoever, I forget off the top of my head, met in Iran in 2005 with Hashemi Rafsanjani. Now Hashemi Rafsanjani is one of the wealthiest men in Iran. He was the Ayatollah Khomeini’s right-hand man all during the eighties. It was Hashemi Rafsanjani who persuaded and convinced Khomeini to end the eight year war with Iraq. I mention this only to give you an idea of his influence. He apparently is still very, very powerful in that country, even though he’s not part of the official leadership structure that you would see anywhere.

Apparently some Americans, some people had dinner with Rafsanjani in 2005, he told ’em, ‘Look, we’re not doing a nuclear thing for a nuclear weapon. But we do want to show the world that we could if we had to.’ And apparently that was factored in the NIE, that Hashemi Rafsanjani said, ‘No, you guys have got it all wrong, we’re not trying to build a nuclear weapon, but we want to show the world we can if we have to.’ Hashemi Rafsanjani would be one of the most affected Iranians if sanctions were tightened further. He’s got offshore accounts, and apparently the wealth that he has acquired and accumulated since his days with Khomeini is immense. Now, that backs up another theory. The wildest theory I’ve heard is that this is something the White House has done on purpose, and I’m not going to be able to give you all the information before the break, but basically it is to put pressure on the Israelis and the Saudis to get serious about a Middle East peace deal, the Palestinians, because none of these people in that region want a nuclear Iran whatsoever. So to stop a nuclear Iran — because the Annapolis thing didn’t go well, none of these peace conferences ever do.

We’ll be back. I’ll give you this in more detail. It’s a theory now, keep in mind.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, back to the theory, and it’s sort of off the charts. But folks, it is so odd, you know, people are trying to explain this because I can’t recall ever when a report, an ambiguous bureaucratic report so undercut the strategery of the president in war or peace. I really think every candidate on both sides should be asked how they intend to get control of the shadow governments here that run this country from the state department in the United Spooks of America in the CIA. We should ask Obama and Hillary, ‘Are you gonna negotiate with the United States Department of America, are you going to negotiate with the United Spooks of America?’ Really, this is why people are trying to figure out: What does this really mean? Because this is the only time that this intelligence analysis has been offered, and it’s from four years ago, it’s four years old, and people are saying nothing in Washington is ever as it seems, so what’s really behind this? So I told you this story, Hashemi Rafsanjani, whose full name is Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani Sahib Skyhook. He would be dramatically affected negatively by sanctions. He’s one of the wealthiest men in Iran.

The theory goes that the Middle East peace situation is something crucial; it has to have some movement. The Annapolis conference didn’t do anything, coupled with the fact that the United Arab Emirates, the Saudis, the Israelis, all of the oil states in the Middle East, not one of them wants anything to do with a nuclear Iran. Okay? Then out of the blue, US intelligence says, ‘Hey, guess what? They’re not trying to put together a nuclear weapon. They stopped in 2003.’ And the Saudis say, ‘What? Why, we can’t trust that.’ And the Israelis say, ‘BS. We know this is not true.’ The United Arab Emirates say, ‘Oh, my, oh, gee, we’re trying to build this big palace and vacation resort area over here. What?’ And then of course the guys in Qatar do the same thing. In Britain, and in France, and Germany, they’re saying, ‘What?’ Even the IAEA says, ‘Well, this doesn’t quite jibe with what we have, and we’re not even being allowed to inspect.’

You add to that the fact that the Iranians have not had to demonstrate they got rid of it. We’re just trusting the word of the NIE and whoever told them. So people say, ‘This doesn’t make any sense, it makes no sense whatsoever,’ unless — this is the theory — the United States government wants to pressure Israel and the Saudi Arabians to get serious about peace in the Middle East. The best way to do it is to isolate them and to say, ‘Guess what? Don’t be distracted by Iran. There’s no nuke problem there. You got bigger problems.’ And the Israelis and the Saudis, ‘We can’t trust this.’ The United States could then move in and say, ‘Okay, look, we know you don’t trust it. We’ll help you. We will pledge to defend you. If you guys feel the need ever down the road to launch an attack against the Iranians, we’ll be there to back you up. We’ll help you with the blow back, and we’ll defend you.’

The theory is that this is a strategy to get the Israelis and the Saudis and others in the Middle East to get serious about doing something on peace there. Now, it sounds bizarre, and even if it or elements of it are true, it is really, really dicey. It is dicey as it can be. Because the Israelis, militarily, could launch a strike here or there in areas of Iran, but they couldn’t do it without us because they would need refueling capability — it’s long-distance — they’d need refueling capability, a lot of planes, which they have. But they wouldn’t be able to get back to Israel without refueling. So the intrigue on this is not going away. It is just the exact opposite. I happened to see today — it’s so off the board. I’m not endorsing this; I’m just sharing the theory with you. Then today, right before noon, the AP wire clears a story from the Israeli prime minister Olmert, who says, ‘Okay, we are going to get serious about peace.’

Here it is: ‘Olmert Promises ‘Serious’ Peace Effort,’ and serious is in quotes. Here it is, by Josef Federman. ‘Prime Minister Ehud Olmert promised Monday to ‘forge a historic path’ toward a final settlement with the Palestinians at this week’s first peace talks in nearly seven years.’ Now, I saw that, and I said, ‘Whoa,’ and did a little bit of a double-take. Shortly after the NIE comes out, says that there’s no Iranian nuclear threat, the Israelis, okay, we’re going to get serious about peace here with the Palestinians. Remember the theory is that this is designed to cause just this. I know it’s far out, it’s over the top. But this is what happens when something inexplicable happens, which is what the NIE key judgment is. It’s inexplicable and people are trying to make sense of it.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This