Latest Iranian claim: Obama WH assured us of our nuclear rights

posted at 1:21 pm on October 22, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Consider this the bookend to 48 hours of Iranian game-playing before the election.  On Saturday, the New York Times reported that the US and Iran had agreed to direct negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program, purportedly fueled by the sanctions that have Iran on the brink of economic collapse.  The White House vehemently denied this, and the Times began watering down the reporting almost immediately, but Republicans suspected an October surprise on the foreign-policy front just before the foreign-policy debate tonight and the election in two weeks.

If that was an October Surprise for Obama, the mullahs had a less pleasant one as a follow-up (via Weasel Zippers):

Senior Iranian parliamentary sources revealed on Saturday that the Swiss envoy to Tehran has quoted US President Barack Obama as acknowledging Iran’s nuclear rights.

Swiss Ambassador to Tehran Livia Leu Agosti attended a meeting with senior Iranian foreign ministry officials a few days ago to submit a letter from the US president to Tehran leaders.

Vice-Chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Hossein Ebrahimi told FNA that during the meeting, Agosti had told the Iranian officials that President Barack Obama recognizes Iran’s right of access and use of the nuclear technology.

“There are a couple of points with regard to this (US) message (to Iran),” Ebrahimi said and added, “Firstly, during the session to submit the message, the Swiss ambassador to Tehran quoted the US president as saying that ‘we (the US) recognize your nuclear rights’.”

As regards the second issue, the lawmaker said that the Swiss diplomat had also quoted Obama as saying that “I didn’t want to impose sanctions on your central bank but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision.”

This comes from the mullahcracy’s state-run media, so it’s nothing more than a propaganda outfit that passes for a wire service from Tehran.  They don’t report anything that doesn’t serve the interests of the mullahs.  In this case, their key takeaway isn’t the fact that the US acknowledged their nuclear rights; we’ve acknowledged that much all along, as long as Iran works within the Non-Proliferation Treaty and gives full access to the IAEA and its inspectors.  Their key message is in the last paragraph of the excerpt, which paints Obama as weak and inclined to cave on the Iranian nuclear extortion.

Now, we could wave that around to prove that Obama’s weak on Iran, but honestly … no one can run with a quote from Fars with a straight face.  This is the same outfit that a month ago picked up a story from the Onion as legitimate news, reporting that more Americans would vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than Barack Obama for President in the US.  That lack of credibility extends to both stories.

In fact, I’d say that My Cousin Vinnie gives us the best advice possible when it comes to the credibility of the Iranian regime and its mouthpieces (NSFW):


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

transmitted via Vladimir

Jeddite on October 22, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Even if Iran is right, it makes no difference. Soon-to-be President Romney does not believe that Iran should have nuclear “rights” and will stop Iran from getting those “rights.”

milcus on October 22, 2012 at 1:24 PM

This comes from the mullahcracy’s state-run media, so it’s nothing more than a propaganda outfit that passes for a wire service from Tehran. They don’t report anything that doesn’t serve the interests of the mullahs.

Sounds like the misfit Commie and his apparatchiks, to me.

I guess it’s just a wash.

OhEssYouCowboys on October 22, 2012 at 1:26 PM

What happened? Did Obama and Hilary run ads in Iran?

Oil Can on October 22, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Putin, Chavez and Castro will all back The Commie.

So, whatever they say on the issue.

OhEssYouCowboys on October 22, 2012 at 1:27 PM

we (the US) recognize your nuclear rights’

I spoke with an Iranian this weekend who left Iran in 2010, 4-5 mos after Neda got shot. Did you know that very few Iranians know about that incident? The level of news censorship in that country is extraordinary. While I don’t doubt that Obama would say this, I think we should certainly doubt the source–they have zero credibility.

ted c on October 22, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Yes – we all now where obama stands, and who he stands with.

Pork-Chop on October 22, 2012 at 1:28 PM

(fixed)

Yes – we all KNOW where obama stands, and who he stands with.

Pork-Chop on October 22, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Will this statement come up during tonight’s debate?

aunursa on October 22, 2012 at 1:28 PM

“Hey Iamadinnerjacket, I will be more flexible after the election”..

Barry Hussein.

hillsoftx on October 22, 2012 at 1:29 PM

While ‘Killing Bin Laden’ is not a foreign policy, especially when Biden opposed it, and now takes credit, the buffoon, this is. It’s the mullahfication of America. That’s what the Arab ‘Spring’ and Libya are all about.

Wake up America.

Schadenfreude on October 22, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Obama is not pro America. Nor is Hillary.

Nor is Petraeus any longer.

May all 3 go to Hades, along with Rice and Biden.

Schadenfreude on October 22, 2012 at 1:32 PM

I’m guessing that Admininutjob and Obama both would be welcomed at Tufts (because they are Progressives who must despise any threat to their power…….such as from Christian teachings).

Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts has banned a Christian group from campus because the group requires student leaders to adhere to “basic biblical truths of Christianity.” The decision to ban the group, called the Tufts Christian Fellowship, was made by officials from the university’s student government, specifically the Tufts Community Union Judiciary. (They should just ban any and all church or “eeewwww, Christian” activity on campus. Maybe they could get hall monitors to make sure no one is praying).

The ban means the group “will lose the right to use the Tufts name in its title or at any activities, schedule events or reserve university space through the Office for Campus Life,” according to the Tufts Daily. Additionally, Tufts Christian Fellowship will be unable to receive money from a pool that students are required to pay into and that is specifically set aside for student groups.

“TCF is the Tufts chapter of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship/USA, an evangelical Christian mission on college campuses across the country, and also has ties to the university Chaplaincy,” the Tufts Daily reports.

“The group had been operating in a state of suspended recognition after the Judiciary found that the group’s constitution excluded students from applying to leadership positions based on their beliefs. The clauses in question require that anyTCF member who wishes to apply for a leadership role must adhere to a series of tenets called a Basis of Faith, or eight ‘basic Biblical truths of Christianity.’

“The Judiciary last month recommended that TCF move the belief-based leadership requirements from the constitution’s bylaws, which are legally binding, to its mission statement, which is not.

The group is planning to appeal the student board’s decision.

Tolerance has been defined by the left……doesn’t look very tolerant though. mmmmmm.

PappyD61 on October 22, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Play this until Nov. 6.

Romney should not ask Obama a single question tonight. He should just tell him to explain things, like this.

Schadenfreude on October 22, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Yea, it may be the propaganda arm of the Iranian Govt., but that sounds exactly like Obama! Sorry, an Iranian propaganda rag, has more credibility than Obama & his Regime. Don’t get mad at me for stating the obvious truth, when it comes to Obama’s total lack of credibility. I didn’t go out and lie to the American people on a Daily, or actually, hourly basis. the Regime has lied about so many things, they simply have less credibility than a Propaganda rag! They’ve reached that point of no return, where I wouldn’t believe them, if they told me the sky was blue!

http://www.paratisiusa.blogspot.com

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 22, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Obama is not pro America. Nor is Hillary.

Nor is Petraeus any longer.

May all 3 go to Hades, along with Rice and Biden.

Schadenfreude on October 22, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Yep yep.

Mr. Arrogant on October 22, 2012 at 1:35 PM

the mullahs must be tired of wasting all those $199 credit card donations they’re making to OFA and the re-elect. they are obviously cutting out the middle man and running their own super PAC, mullahs for obama. MFO.

t8stlikchkn on October 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM

It does get bad when I tend to believe the little iran worm/team over bho! Both bho/little iran worm lie, just who lies the most?
L

letget on October 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM

This is your House.

Schadenfreude on October 22, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Obozo should wear the same suit that Vinny is wearing……

KMC1 on October 22, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Why do you need Obama’s assurance? Anyone can see we’re broke and close to splintering.

MelonCollie on October 22, 2012 at 1:41 PM

This comes from the mullahcracy’s state-run media, so it’s nothing more than a propaganda outfit that passes for a wire service from Tehran. They don’t report anything that doesn’t serve the interests of the mullahs.

You could’ve just said: The Iranian MSNBC.

mudskipper on October 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Romney should not ask Obama a single question tonight. He should just tell him to explain things, like this.

Schadenfreude on October 22, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Heh. That would be good, especially if it woke up the reporter in Bob Schieffer. Might actually get some follow up questions that Romney would cede time for, until the BS detector goes off.

CitizenEgg on October 22, 2012 at 1:43 PM

I see this as Iran trying to use reverse psychology to sway the vote. The fence sitters will be to dumb to realize it though, not that they’ll even be paying attention to it.

Norky on October 22, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Now, we could wave that around to prove that Obama’s weak on Iran, but honestly … no one can run with a quote from Fars with a straight face.

I think this was a plant by the Romney campaign to undermine the Honey Boo Boo bounce.

Happy Nomad on October 22, 2012 at 1:47 PM

I’ve always had a suspicion that ‘Baraka’ and ‘Dinnerjacket’ had the same goal: Create the situation where the ’12th Imam’ is supposed to climb up out of the well, or out of the outhouse or wherever the muzzies think he is coming from.

LegendHasIt on October 22, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Iran has all the energy they need.

There is no reason, except for nefarious ones (Nuclear weapons), that Iran should require nuclear power.

Watch “The Red Line” video posted on youtube. I don’t have
the link, however, it is narrated by an Iranian woman.

Amjean on October 22, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Paper tiger in chief

cmsinaz on October 22, 2012 at 1:50 PM

But wasn’t ‘barry the idiot’ just bragging about the ‘toughist sanctions’ on Iran?? All the while, apologising for being made to do it by that mean old congress!! What else would you expect from president Bart ‘I didn’t do it’ obama

keithofboston on October 22, 2012 at 1:51 PM

So, Iran is elated that Obama bestows nuclear rights.

1. Obama is the Giver Of Rights. For that assumption alone he should be excommunicated from the WH.

2. What if Obama had said “NFW, Machmoood”. Would have had the same authority over there?

BobMbx on October 22, 2012 at 2:00 PM

“I didn’t want to impose sanctions on your central bank but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision.”

this i totally believe from mr. i’ll have more flexibility after the election

cmsinaz on October 22, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Why not sell Iran Solynda solar panels and other green energy subsidized company products instead of them having nuclear energy?

Oh yeah, we live in a real world….continue on, nothing to see here.

Mo_mac on October 22, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Gotta love how HotGas simply pshaw’s and poo-poo’s all of this — right out the gate. Like it’s a lock. Totally a done deal.

The veracity of Iran’s claims are entirely feasible — nay — likely.

HotAir.com — Guaranteed Soft & Squishy™ Or Your Money Back

FlatFoot on October 22, 2012 at 2:13 PM

“I didn’t want to impose sanctions on your central bank but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision.”

While I don’t believe Obama would ever say that out loud, I do think he was thinking something along those lines in his mind.

ButterflyDragon on October 22, 2012 at 2:23 PM

FlatFoot on October 22, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Who do you think is more believable?

BobMbx on October 22, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Didn’t Obama make a speech in Cairo 2009 saying no nation had the right to tell another nation they couldn’t have nukes?

workingclass artist on October 22, 2012 at 2:25 PM

LegendHasIt on October 22, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Obama has done more to further the reality of a universal Caliphate than Osama Bin Ladin. And we only think of one the two as an enemy to the people of the United States. Go figure.

Happy Nomad on October 22, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Who do you think is more believable?

BobMbx on October 22, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Between Barack Hussein Obama’s administration and FARS news agency — who do I think is “more believable”?

ha.

I really don’t know. Imagine that. In this day and age I don’t know with a certainty if my President or if Iran’s state-news agency is the more trustworthy and ‘believable’ of the two when given a choice. And that’s not just simple partisan BS either. I honestly cannot say without a shadow of a doubt.

That’s pretty sad.

That’s also another reason why pshawing and poo-pooing all of this right out the gate without even so much as a cursory investigation is not only irresponsible — it is reprehensibly soft & squishy to do so.

Who do you think is more believable?

FlatFoot on October 22, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Swiss diplomat had also quoted Obama as saying that “I didn’t want to impose sanctions on your central bank but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision.”

That is all we need to know about Husein’s loyalties.

burrata on October 22, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Whilst the source isn’t credible this definitely passes the smell test given:

a) Barky’s visible antipathy to Israel
b) His strong backing of the Arab Spring Catastrophe
c) His ideas about ‘fairness’

Yeah, you could definitely see him saying ‘course y’all can have nuclear power, just keep it peaceful right (wink-wink)’.

CorporatePiggy on October 22, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that Iran has any rights? They live at our sufferance.

Archivarix on October 22, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Iran’s so called and Obama granted “nuclear rights” have a shelf life of January 21, 2013…

Khun Joe on October 22, 2012 at 3:24 PM

I have no problem believing that Obamuh acknowledged Iran’s nuclear rights behind our backs.

stukinIL4now on October 22, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Iran is a sovereign nation and has every right to pursue both nuclear energy and nuclear weponry. America is not an empire, so we should stop behaving as one.

Dante on October 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Didn’t Obama make a speech in Cairo 2009 saying no nation had the right to tell another nation they couldn’t have nukes?

workingclass artist on October 22, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Of so, he’s right.

Dante on October 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM

It’s sad when propaganda from an enemy of America may be just as reliable as something out of Iran.

slickwillie2001 on October 22, 2012 at 3:36 PM

slickwillie2001 on October 22, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Heh. I see what you did there.

Good one. :-)

LegendHasIt on October 22, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Dante on October 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM

You’re an idiot.

Solaratov on October 22, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Solaratov on October 22, 2012 at 3:57 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ON-gG8hWYs

LegendHasIt on October 22, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Going back to at least 2003 the US made offers to Iran to assure their peaceful use of their nuclear rights. We offered to sell, set up and help maintain nuclear realtors. The Russians did also. The problems are in that Iran chose the path to develop these uses in a secretive and clandestine way with no out side observance.

WHY?

jpcpt03 on October 22, 2012 at 4:30 PM

One thing to keep in mind, is the average low-information voter going to know about this issue to understand the context to “nuclear rights”? Or is he going to see see “nuclear” and immediately conclude Obama is letting Iran have the Islamic-bomb?

Scopper on October 22, 2012 at 4:40 PM