Soft on Iran, Hard on Israel

Photo Credit: adam jonesThe New York Times has been quick to gush over the new round of negotiations in Geneva between major world powers and Iran. Reading the Times one would think that Iran suddenly has become quite reasonable about a possible deal to rein in its nuclear ambitions. The pro-Iran slant pops up in both the news pages of the Times and in its editorial page.

Let’s start with Mark Landler’s lengthy report about Iran’s supposedly new and more forthcoming positions in the negotiations, which in his view should hold off a new batch of sanctions on Iran (“White House Weighs Easing Iran Sanctions’ Bite With Slow Release of Assets” page A10, Oct. 18)

According to Landler, there now has been a “promising first round of nuclear diplomacy and the White House quite rightly is weighing ways to “ease the pain of sanctions.” Landler assures Times readers that “Iranian officials were more candid and substantive than in previous diplomatic encounters.” So naturally they deserve to have Congress “hold off on voting on a new bill to strangle Iran’s oil exports further.”

The entire slant of Landler’s piece is to pump up Iran’s new “positive” bona fides while depicting additional sanctions as the worst possible medicine at this juncture.

In short, Landler and the Times are enthralled by Tehran’s charm offensive. Completely overlooked is the fact that there already has been a sharply negative response in Tehran — from the Supreme Leader on down — against any serious compromises or concessions on the nuclear front.

Read more from this story HERE.