I see this fairly often over the past few years, from sources supportive of Israel like CNN's editors:
"You should make it clear that what is your aim of negotiations, friendship or hostility? Do you want to follow logic or law or issue resolution and make threat?" the semi-official Iran Student's News Agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. He added that Western powers should also pressure Israel over its undeclared but widely-suspected nuclear capability, ISNA said.
Of course Ahmadinejad didn't speak of Israel's "nuclear capability", nor did he describe it as "undeclared but widely suspected".
We're observing a deliberate attempt to blur the distinction between "nuclear weapon" and "nuclear capability". It is a form of lying, as it is deliberately deceptive.
It is also easy to counter in contexts where there is an opportunity to respond. The question that would defeat the attempted lie would be "are you claiming Israel is widely suspected of having the capability to make a weapon, which is what Japan and Brazil have, or is Israel widely suspected of having weapons, like what the US and Pakistan have?"
This question: "do you mean capability, like Canada and Romania, or do you mean weapon, like India and the China?" can and probably should be asked every time a Western source attempts to confuse the two concepts, which is very often - more directly concerning Iran's program than as here when referring to Israel's program.
Israel is widely suspected of having weapons. The US, including the Barack Obama administration has decided that they oppose Iran having capability - having what Japan and Brazil have. They are different concepts, as different as the nuclear programs of Japan and Pakistan. They have different moral and legal ramifications. Conflating the two disinforms rather than informs, but I see this fairly often recently.
It is a petty lie. It is an insult to the intelligence of its readers, and it is taking advantage of the naivete and ignorance of readers who do not follow the subject closely.
We should not expect more. There are people willing to die for the proposition that there must be a Jewish state, including a former US President. How much less to ask a supporter of Israel to confuse CNN's readers on help prevent Iran from getting legal capabilities that would reduce Israel's regional advantage? Those who care about accurately reporting the truth will have to be vigilant.