NewsAnarchist
The stories buried, spiked, or spun.
BREAKING
Independent investigative news — unfiltered, unspiked. The Buried Week publishes every Friday. Subscribe free for the daily briefing. Tips: zeno@newsanarchist.com or Signal. Independent investigative news — unfiltered, unspiked. The Buried Week publishes every Friday. Subscribe free for the daily briefing. Tips: zeno@newsanarchist.com or Signal.
Government Secrets

US, Israel Planned To Install Hardliner Ahmadinejad As Iran's Leader: Cartoonish NYT Report Says

Share

US, Israel Planned To Install Hardliner Ahmadinejad As Iran's Leader: Cartoonish NYT Report Says

In a revelation that blurs the line between calculated covert strategy and sheer desperation, the deep state's latest regime change playbook for Ira

What the Documents Show

The operational mechanics, as reported, involved an Israeli airstrike on Ahmadinejad's home in Tehran specifically designed to free him from house arrest—a detail that carries its own damning weight. An associate of Ahmadinejad's, cited by the Times, confirmed that the strike occurred on the war's first day. Ahmadinejad survived but was allegedly injured. The plan then allegedly collapsed: disillusioned by the near-miss assassination attempt, Ahmadinejad reportedly abandoned the regime change arrangement. What the mainstream framing obscures is the logical contradiction buried in this narrative.

🔎 Mainstream angle: The corporate press either ignored this story entirely or buried it in a 3-sentence brief. The framing, when it appeared at all, focused on process rather than impact.

Follow the Money

The Times presents this as a coherent intelligence operation, but multiple outlets have correctly labeled it "cartoonish." Consider the mechanics: US and Israeli officials would need to coordinate with a man they'd spent years isolating, convince him to accept installation as a puppet ruler, then execute a surgical airstrike designed to "liberate" him from confinement—all while maintaining operational security among multiple governments and intelligence agencies. The story strains credulity on its face. Yet the reported existence of Operations Roaring Lion and Epic Fury—with specific codenames, tactical details, and corroboration from multiple briefed officials—indicates something real occurred, even if the stated objective sounds implausible. Either US and Israeli planners genuinely entertained this scheme, suggesting a catastrophic failure of strategic judgment at senior levels, or they disseminated false information about it to shape narratives around Iranian regime change efforts. Both interpretations are damning. The first reveals incompetence among decision-makers who control nuclear arsenals.

What Else We Know

The second reveals deliberate information warfare against American and international publics. The names behind these operations remain conspicuously absent from the Times reporting. Which Israeli officials authorized Operation Epic Fury? Which CIA or State Department officials signed off on Roaring Lion? The Times cites only "US officials who were briefed on it"—the institutional passive voice that protects individual actors from accountability. This anonymity is structural: it allows the story to circulate while ensuring no named official faces consequences for either attempting a farcical coup or manufacturing false justifications for military action.

Primary Sources

What are they not saying? Who benefits from this story staying buried? Follow the regulatory filings, the court dockets, and the FOIA releases. The truth is in the paperwork — it always is.

Disclosure: NewsAnarchist aggregates from public records, API feeds (Federal Register, CourtListener, MuckRock, Hacker News), and independent media. AI-assisted synthesis. Always verify primary sources linked above.

Share
Part of our Conflict & Wars coverage
See the full picture on our Conflict & Wars hub — including our ongoing coverage of active conflicts and military escalation.
How We Report Conflict & Wars

This article is produced by NewsAnarchist's AI reporting system, not a human staff reporter. It's built from the primary source cited above (wire-service reporting (Reuters, AP, AFP), an official government or military statement, or a named NGO/UN report) and reports what that source states, attributed to it — casualty and battlefield claims in active conflicts are frequently contested by the parties involved, and we attribute them to whichever source made them rather than presenting them as settled fact. Part of our Conflict & Wars hub. Found an error? Tell us.