If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Sharon Rondeau

Valerie Jarrett is said to be the “brain” behind the Obama presidency and to be negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program

(Nov. 5, 2012) — Various reports from news services around the world within the same time frame have reported that Iran has stopped or continues to enrich uranium.  Iran has reportedly denied that it has ceased uranium enrichment, stating that it was “misquoted.”

On October 20, The New York Times reported that the Obama regime had been holding “intense, secret exchanges” with Iranian representatives about holding direct negotiations, something which a National Security spokesman later denied and which Obama denied during the third presidential debate.

The New York Times article was quietly revised without the issuance of a correction or update notice to reflect the White House’s denial of the claim.  On October 30, 2012, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement that continued sanctions and and future “negotiations” “would continue until Iran makes significant concessions over its disputed uranium enrichment activity.”

An Israeli news source, YNet, is reporting today that Senior White House Advisor Valerie Jarrett is actively negotiating with Iran.  Jarrett was born in that country in 1956.  A second Israeli newspaper states that reports that uranium enrichment has ceased are inaccurate.  WorldNetDaily frequently quotes from YNet News.

Jarrett is said to be “the most important person” in the Obama White House and has reportedly promised to carry out retribution against “the ones who opposed us.”  Jarrett has been described as ““the other side of Barack Obama’s brain.”  Obama himself has stated that “Voting is the best revenge” in the last days of the campaign

A photograph which appears to depict Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and others touring a uranium facility appears in articles which both assert that Iran has stopped enrichment and that enrichment is ongoing.

The U.S. and Europe have imposed economic sanctions and helped to launch a virus, information about which was leaked to the press by a source identified as “the White House,” with the purpose to deter Iran’s enrichment of uranium which could lead to the launching of a nuclear weapon.

Sanctions on Iran were strengthened by the United Kingdom after it was discovered that uranium enrichment had been conducted in a “heavily fortified underground site” located in Qom in the country’s northwestern section.

The Fars News Agency has been named as the source of the contention that uranium enrichment continues to occur, and the Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA) is identified as the source of the statement that enrichment has stopped just before the U.S. presidential election.  ISNA was founded in 1999.

The Jerusalem Post reported on November 4 that “Arab sources,” including Al Arabiya cited in this report, citing a member of the Iranian Parliament as having said that enrichment activities had stopped, were not accurate, according to Fars.

The member of Parliament quoted as having said that enrichment had stopped has been contradicted by another member of Parliament.

Is someone in Iran trying to influence the U.S. election?  Ahmadinejad stated in September that he expected talks about his country’s nuclear program with six countries to resume after the U.S. election.

A report in AllVoices, a global newspaper, is entitled “Iran suspends its uranium enrichment, then backtracks (Commentary),” and includes an update from the writer which states, in part

Opinion: In what looks to be the umpteenth time this year, Iran has once again backtracked and returned to its original position of continuing with its 20 percent uranium enrichment program. By now it is quite clear Tehran is not willing to come to the negotiating table with the West and European Union for its very own reasons.

The twin policy of diplomacy teamed with robust sanctions employed by the US might persuade Iran to give up its nuclear weapons, however, the outcome as seen to date has not been satisfactory. Historically speaking too, it has been seen that if a nation is hellbent on acquiring nuclear weapons, then rarely can it be made to change its mind.



Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.