October 20, 2012
NY Times: US To Hold One on One Talks With The Mad Mullahs
White House: We Didn't Say That, Honest
الأحد - ۹ رمضان المبارک ۱۴۳۳ هـ@ تهران؛ حسینیه امام خمینی instagr.am/p/NrFOjfrVaD/— khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) July 29, 2012
Some lulz for the night
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Saturday denied a New York Times report that said the United States and Iran had agreed for the first time to one-on-one negotiations on Iran's nuclear program, saying it remained committed to working with major powers to resolve the standoff.Talks were to happen after the election. I suppose the Mad Mullahs are praying that Obama wins. Think: Jimmah Carter, Ronald Reagan and the Iranian hostage crisis..
The Times, quoting unnamed Obama administration officials, said earlier on Saturday the two sides had agreed to bilateral talks after secret exchanges between U.S. and Iranian officials. Iran had insisted the talks not begin until after the November 6 U.S. election because they want to know which U.S. president they would be negotiating with, the newspaper said.
The White House moved quickly to deny the report, which came two days before President Barack Obama is due to face his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, in a debate focused on foreign policy.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Update and well worth the read: NYT and AP at Odds (For Now) on Whether Obama Admin Is 'Nearing a Diplomatic Breakthrough' With Iran
Seventeen days before Election Day and 45 months after Barack Obama's inauguration following a presidential campaign during which he expressed his eagerness to meet enemy leaders "without preconditions" (Obama responded "yes" to a 2008 presidential debate question containing those words), the New York Times is reporting that the U.S. and Iran "have agreed in principle for the first time to one-on-one negotiations," despite the fact that the White House has "denied that a final agreement (to negotiate) had been reached," and despite a reactive AP report (saved here for future reference, fair use and discussion purposes) claiming that while "The White House says it is prepared to talk one-on-one ... there's no agreement now to meet."[...]
In a piece that's supposed to be about a supposedly important international development, Cooper and Landler predictably blow through quite a bit of ink and bandwidth trying to paint this development as a problem for Obama's GOP opponent Mitt Romney (bolds are mine):