All the Olds that's fit to print

This story has been making the rounds of the internet since May 24th., having been broken by Steve Clemens, but the New York Times finally gets around to it today and treats it as if it was a totally new revelation made only by the Times. Better late than never, I guess.

WASHINGTON, June 15 — A year after President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced a new strategy toward Iran, a behind-the-scenes debate has broken out within the administration over whether the approach has any hope of reining in Iran’s nuclear program, according to senior administration officials.

The debate has pitted Ms. Rice and her deputies, who appear to be winning so far, against the few remaining hawks inside the administration, especially those in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office who, according to some people familiar with the discussions, are pressing for greater consideration of military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Maybe the Times should change the slogan on its banner to "All the Olds that's fit to Print."

Update:

I note that Glenn Greenwald also comments on this article. He begins by praising the Times:

It is, I believe, a positive development that The New York Times today has a front-page article documenting how active the debate is inside the Bush administration over whether to attack Iran. Perhaps the article will elevate the attention level paid to this very real and very dangerous possibility.

Although it's a mystery why he does so, since from that point on he condemns the article as horribly one-sided, stating as if they were facts all the allegations the Administration has made against Iran while failing to state any countervailing positions or viewpoints or even to attribute these "facts" to the Administration.