Group that helped sell Iran nuke deal also funded media

Somebody has uncovered a possible conspiracy that looks like a private fund actually paid money to media to "report" the favorable sides of the Iran Nuke deal.

One of the media outlets was the highly respected NPR organization.

A $100,000 payment was apparently paid for good news reports.

And of course, the Obama Administration was involved somehow.


Group that helped sell Iran nuke deal also funded media

A group the White House recently identified as a key surrogate in selling the Iran nuclear deal gave National Public Radio $100,000 last year to help it report on the pact and related issues, according to the group's annual report. It also funded reporters and partnerships with other news outlets.

The Ploughshares Fund's mission is to "build a safe, secure world by developing and investing in initiatives to reduce and ultimately eliminate the world's nuclear stockpiles," one that dovetails with President Barack Obama's arms control efforts. But its behind-the-scenes role advocating for the Iran agreement got more attention this month after a candid profile of Ben Rhodes, one of the president's top foreign policy aides.

In The New York Times Magazine article, Rhodes explained how the administration worked with nongovernmental organizations, proliferation experts and even friendly reporters to build support for the seven-nation accord that curtailed Iran's nuclear activity and softened international financial penalties on Tehran.

2nd opinion story ...
Breaking: NPR Funded by White House Surrogate Pushing Iran Deal

Who's selling what ?

There never was any "Iran Nuke Deal". Iran never agreed to anything if US didn't remove sanctions.

The talks became spun into a deal. They should know better to sit across the table with the likes of Kerry.

Edit: The US doesn't 'talk', it makes a lot of demands to control other nations internal affairs. The Iranians are still laughing.

I’m still waiting for these mystical Iranian Nukes.....weren’t they meant to appear like 6 months ago?

a reply to: crazyewok

They've been 6 months from having nukes for 25 years now.

Iran will get Nukes when Iceland invades Turkey and the US moves it's Capital to Kiev.....

Right people Iran 'doesn't' have nukes!


Iran reveals huge underground missile base with broadcast on state TV

NPR sure broadcasts some weird stuff.

All in favor of the highest bidder.

a reply to: neo96

How many misses bases does the USA have again?

Plus missile base does not = Nukes.

And is they do have secret nukes? So what? They are not using or even testing them in fact they are so not in use no one knows they are even there! So if they are just sitting on these magical nukes then so what? Long as they are not using them.
Or does it shatter your little neocon dreams of a easy invasion?

I would worry more about the Saudi Hidden nukes.

originally posted by: xuenchen
NPR sure broadcasts some weird stuff.

All in favor of the highest bidder.

NPR is also funded by tax pay money which comes from the state.

Only natural they would broadcast propaganda.

Taxpayers Provide More Than 25 Percent of NPR's Funding, Analyst Says

a reply to: crazyewok

How many misses bases does the USA have again?

Irrelevant.

Besides the US is not a religious theocracy hell bent on world domination after they kill off the evil sunnis. To usher in the Mahdi.

Plus missile base does not = Nukes.

One missle base= more missile bases. Relative easy to replace those warheads with NUKES.

MIRV warheads are not very big. In fact those are tactical weapon systems where they can target Israel their mortal enemy, and Saudi Arabia ya know them evil Sunnis.

GOD's 'chosen' people is the Shia.

I would worry more about the Saudi Hidden nukes.

The last thing the world needs is a nuclear arms race between the Sunni and the Shia.

For effs sake for the last 8 years they have pretty much dragged every country in to their millennia old Hatfield and McCoy blood feud.

Have you guys also researched this? It's not an Obama/US deal. There were many other countries and world leaders involved. There would have been some kind of international deal, even without us involvement.

a reply to: amazing

So that takes NPR off the hook for taking a bribe?

originally posted by: neo96

One missle base= more missile bases. Relative easy to replace those warheads with NUKES.

MIRV warheads are not very big. In fact those are tactical weapon systems where they can target Israel their mortal enemy, and Saudi Arabia ya know them evil Sunnis.

So where are Iran meant to store their conventional missiles?
If Iran have conventional missiles then it going to store them in missles bases.
So your going to have to prove they are nukes!
Or is Iran meant to just completely stand down all its military and forego any right to self-defence?

Which brings me on to your above point.

originally posted by: neo96


Irrelevant.

No its not.

You have carrier groups circling there borders and bases surrounding the state and you wonder WHY they have missiles bases?


If the Chinese and Russians had carrier fleets based of the shores of Mainland USA would you want the USA to give up ALL its missiles? Conventional AND Nuclear?

originally posted by: amazing
Have you guys also researched this? It's not an Obama/US deal. There were many other countries and world leaders involved. There would have been some kind of international deal, even without us involvement.

Because Europe gets it's oil from there.

What do people really think all the SNIP is about over there?

Persian Pipeline

Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline

Terrorists of the Sunni and Shia kind is basically Saudi Arabia and Irans version of 'blackwater'.

They both want the EU market.

In order of prominence, they are Saudi Aramco , Russia's Gazprom, CNPC of China, NIOC of Iran, Venezuela's PDVSA, Brazil's Petrobras and Petronas of Malaysia.

seekingalpha.com...

Russia,China,Venezula,Brazil back the Shia play. See Syria.

And of course throw in some religion(Islamic justice) to justify their crusade.

a reply to: xuenchen

You could right now give a large donation or grant to NPR and ask them to focus on a topic with that money. What that doesn't mean is they give you the story the way you want it.

I listen to NPR. They were reporting about the iran deal for ages and had plenty of people from both sides trying to get the word out about the deal.

I guess this is just a piece of "NEWS" for people that already hate NPR because they feel its left-wing propaganda?

a reply to: Pyle

I know most of those stories were subtlety slanted.

People hear what they want to hear.

And the professional writers and talkers know all the tricks and tactics.

NPR is very good at it too.