Nuclear Talks with Iran were denied by the Obama administration after the New York Times published a story saying that White House officials were preparing for a "last-ditch diplomatic effort" to "avert a military strike on Iran".
The NYT article comes before the third and final presidential debate, which will be focusing on foreign policy. The concern highlighted in the article is that if such talks were to occur, they would only be a ruse from Iran's perspective to "ease international pressure" regarding their nuclear program.
Iran's nuclear program "is the most difficult national security issue facing the United States," said R. Nicholas Burns, who led negotiations with Iran during the Bush administration. Additionally, Harretz reports that France's foreign minister, Laurent Fabius said on Sunday that Iran "appears on track to reach the ability to produce a nuclear weapon by the first half of next year." It seems that everyone is taking Iran's nuclear threat very seriously, with the exception, of course, of Vice President Joe Biden, who referred to concerns as "bluster" and "loose talk".
During the vice-presidential debate, Joe Biden downplayed Iran's nuclear capabilities. He said, in part,
"There is no weapon that the Iranians have at this point. Both the Israelis and we know Â— we'll know if they start the process of building a weapon. So all this bluster I keep hearing, all this loose talk Â— what are they talking about?
The remarks were criticized by Jeffrey Goldberg at Bloomberg, who said:
"Over the past three years, I've been impressed with Obama's seriousness on the issue of Iran's nuclear program, the urgency with which he treats the subject, and the measures he has taken to keep the regime from crossing the atomic threshold. But last week, in the vice-presidential debate, Biden attempted to portray Representative Paul Ryan as a hysteric on the subject, even though Ryan's seriousness on Iran matches the president's."
Watch Uncle Joe downplay Iran's nuclear capabilities here:
The New York Times article has become somewhat of a story in and of itself, as the Daily Caller reports that the article was "quietly" updated to reflect statements made by National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor's statement, "It's not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections..." After the White House complained, the original article also removed a key sentence (without noting the update, as is usual practice), "Even with possible negotiations in the offing, there is no evidence Iran has slowed its fuel production." The question begs to be asked...Why would the NYT edit a story without noting the edits?
The story with these edits is clearly presenting a much more favorable view of the Obama administration, particularly in light of the upcoming debate. It is no wonder, with these types of shenanigans, that the public is weary of the mainstream media, which has been referred to as the "largest single domestic threat to our liberty, our values, and our national and economic security," by an article by IBD. This author agrees. The lack of objectivity and obvious mainstream media bias is reflective of the "dumbing down" of America, also (sadly) apparent in American universities.
Banafsheh Zand is an Iranian political analyst and human rights activist. Her father, Siamak Pourzand, committed suicide in protest against the oppressive Iranian regime. She is warning the world in a brilliant and well-produced new video about Iran's nuclear capabilities and explains the ramifications of a nuclear Iran.
Zand explains that she knows how to stop the Iranian regime.
Watch the important video here:
Iran has also come out saying that they are not engaging in nuclear talks with the United States.
Image Source: Cox&Forcum/Yalibnan.com