If a nuclear inspection deal happens, and nobody in the US media hears it...

This isn't getting any play in the US media, for what I would consider to be obvious reasons.

Iran and the UN's nuclear agency say they have made progress in talks on Tehran's nuclear programme.
In July the two sides announced a two-month arrangement aimed at clearing up outstanding questions and giving the agency better access to nuclear sites.

Both now say they have agreed on a timeline for implementation during a fresh round of talks in Tehran [...]

Since July's agreement, Iran has allowed the IAEA's inspectors to visit its heavy water research reactor at Arak, and has been holding talks with a UN technical team on guidelines for inspecting its uranium enrichment plant at Natanz.

BBC Iran analyst Pam O'Toole says that over the past few months, Iran has appeared anxious to demonstrate the transparency of its programme.

One Iranian official recently expressed hope that the West could respond to Iran's co-operation with the IAEA by not pushing for more sanctions.

The US response to this is predictable. Even though the IAEA successfully monitored Iraq's WMD program, even though they were on the way to verifying Saddam's lack of WMD before the Bush Administration kicked them out of Baghdad, they're claiming that Iran is manipulating them and using them as stooges:

A nuclear cooperation pact Iran struck with the International Atomic Energy Agency has "real limitations" and Tehran should stop trying to manipulate the IAEA to dodge harsher U.N. sanctions, a senior U.S. envoy said.

Washington was not impressed by Iran's transparency promise -- hailed as a "milestone" by the IAEA on Tuesday -- to allay suspicions it is secretly seeking atomic bombs, and would still pursue talks on more U.N. sanctions against Tehran, the U.S. envoy to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Gregory Schulte, said.

The IAEA declined comment on Schulte's criticism. A diplomat close to the Vienna-based agency said Schulte's remarks "shows a deliberate campaign to derail this process."

When other countries are resistent to US demands it shows that they must be dealt with. When they reach agreements with international organizations it proves that they're stalling for time and they must be dealt with.

The United States has no interest in resolving this dispute with Iran with anything but military force. And ordinary Americans are not being told the full story about Iranian activities. They get saber rattling and half-truths about "terrorist" Revolutionary Guards and infilitration into Iraq.



There is a legitimate concern that Iran is focused on timetables for transparency instead of action, and indeed European powers are saying similar things about this proposal. But I believe US diplomats are directly trying to upset international negotiations in a bloodlust to commit our military to yet another war. And the press is enabling them by writing in favor of this insanity, as well as ignoring any positive developments coming out of talks.

The diplomat close to the IAEA told Reuters that Schulte's comments were "very unhelpful" ... Such immediate downplaying of this development is disingenuous."

"To expect Iran now to comply on the whole package of demands by the Security Council, all at once, when they remain under sanctions, is unrealistic," the diplomat said.

Maybe Iran is dragging its feet. Maybe this deal with the IAEA is not kosher. Wouldn't it be nice if Americans KNEW about it?