October Surprise: Direct Talks with Iran?

[American_Jihad]

October Surprise: Direct Talks with Iran?

October 22, 2012
By Joseph Klein

On the eve of the third and final presidential debate, which deals with foreign policy, the New York Times ran a lead story, citing unnamed Obama administration officials, that the United States and Iran have agreed in principle for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. Iran reportedly has insisted that its direct talks with Washington should not begin until after the U.S. presidential election on November 6 and wants to broaden the scope of the discussions beyond just the nuclear enrichment issues.

Denials from both sides quickly followed.

“It’s not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections,” U.S. National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor said in a statement quoted by Reuters.

---
October Surprise: Direct Talks with Iran?

 

[OKTexas]

Yep, circulate the story, then deny it after it's been published. Pure propaganda, commiecrats are good at it.

 

[Oldguy]

What are you talking about? Obama denied it straight up in last nights debate.

 

[American_Jihad]

Media, "will do or say anything for the great liberal messiah"​

 

[American_Jihad]

The October Surprise Has Arrived

By James Simpson
10/24/12


The administration is reeling from the still-unfolding story about its missteps and deceptions over the Benghazi attacks, in which four American officials died. Although intelligence reports from the first day indicating a planned military attack and were backed up by both drone footage and corroborating statements from Libyan authorities, the administration insisted for weeks that it was a spontaneous protest inspired by a cheap internet trailer. Compounding the offense, President Obama has referred to these horrendous 9-11 attacks as "bumps in the road" and the deaths as "not optimal."

Enter The New York Times, which has now reported that the U.S. and Iran have agreed to face-to-face talks on Iran's nuclear enrichment program. The Obama administration almost immediately issued adamant denials that any agreement had been reached, and The New York Times quickly edited its report to put the administration's efforts in a better light.

---

In other words, without even having an agreement, Obama has already been trying to give away the store. What kind of message is he telegraphing with that? The Iranians have already been told by this administration that they can do what they want, so why sign an agreement that makes things more difficult? Any agreement will surely be big on symbolism but, given Obama's feckless track record in facing down our enemies, short on results.

What a train wreck!

---


Read more: Articles: The October Surprise Has Arrived

 

[High_Gravity]

What will direct talks with Iran achieve?

 

[American_Jihad]

What will direct talks with Iran achieve?

More Time for Iran​

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy0fIyongdI]Needtobreathe- More Time - YouTube[/ame]