AP reports "Historic, seismic shift" in US-Iranian relations??

The Associated Press--like all of the mainstream media--strongly supports Obama and the Democratic party.  Thus the AP always spins stories so events detrimental to Obama or Democrats are portrayed as trivial, while events that are of no significance whatsoever are portrayed as great accomplishments for Obama and the Democrats.

Thus we have this AP propaganda piece:

The United States and Iran took a historic step toward ending more than three decades of estrangement on Friday when President Barack Obama and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani spoke by phone and agreed to work on resolving global suspicions that Tehran is trying to build a nuclear weapon.

The 15-minute call capped a week of seismic shifts in the relationship that revolved around Rouhani's participation in the annual U.N. meeting of world leaders. The night before the two leaders spoke, U.S. and European diplomats hailed a "very significant shift" in Iran's attitude and tone in the first talks on the nuclear standoff since April.

Iran is also seeking quick relief from blistering economic sanctions that the U.S. and its Western allies have imposed on Tehran to punish it for refusing to scale back its nuclear activities. Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, but years of stonewalling inspections and secrecy about its activities have fueled fears it is seeking to build warheads.

Rouhani and Obama spoke while the Iranian president was in his car and headed to the airport to fly back to Tehran, with Obama at his desk in the Oval Office. Rouhani's aides initially reached out to arrange the conversation, and the White House placed the call.

The last direct conversation between the leaders of the two countries was in 1979 before the Iranian Revolution toppled the pro-U.S. shah and brought Islamic militants to power. Obama said the long break "underscores the deep mistrust between our countries, but it also indicates the prospect of moving beyond that difficult history."

"While there will surely be important obstacles to moving forward, and success is by no means guaranteed, I believe we can reach a comprehensive solution," Obama told reporters at the White House. 

 It's truly amazing how much propaganda is crammed into this article.  Taking it from the top:  The term "historic" is usually used as praise. In this case no one can know if the mere act of talking will have any positive outcome.  But the writer has set the tone from the first sentence.

"Seismic shifts in the relationship."  The adjective suggests phenomenal, earth-shaking.  Okay, what's the evidence?  Why, the Iranian prezzy actually attended a meeting at the U.N.!  Not only that, he actually a  phone conversation with a guy who got a Nobel peace prize.

This is less earth-shaking than it's the swooning of 8th-graders:  "OMG, he (she) smiled at me!" 

It's also significant that two days earlier British papers reported that the White House had tried to set up a short face-to-face meeting between Obama and the Iranian, but the Iranians declined.  The AP reported only that "the Iranians said it was too complex" to do.  Hmmm.... Interestingly, very near the bottom of the story the AP notes

The White House had reached out to Tehran earlier this month to offer a meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly on Monday or Tuesday, but Rouhani declined at the time. Rouhani may have asked for the phone call before he left the U.S. to avoid the impression that he snubbed Obama at the United Nations when the two failed to meet.

In any case, the Iranian couldn't even be bothered to meet Obama when both were at the U.N., yet the mere appearance of the Iranian at the U.N. and the call while he was enroute to the airport has the AP in ecstasy.

But the topper is the 'graf where the writer notes that the last direct conversation between the two nations was in 1979.  And pray tell, what was the cause of the long silence?  As the AP tells it, it was evidently the fact that the Iranians overthrew the pro-U.S. Shah.  This is the writer's entire historical summary.

Wow.  No mention whatsoever of "students" taking over our embassy and holding 52 Americans captive for well over a year--holding mock executions from time to time.  The AP apparently felt that wasn't worth mentioning--perhaps because we're still trying to decide whether to investigate the murders at our embassy annex in Benghazi?

And it's worth noting that no one under age 53 or so has any direct memory of the embassy takeover.  Ah, that's probably why the AP didn't mention it.  Wouldn't have meant anything to most of their readers.  Prolly why the AP stuck with the "Shah" reference.

Finally there's Obama's statement to the White House reporters, "I believe we can reach a comprehensive solution."  Oh, naturally any solution would have to be "comprehensive," because if one omitted that key word the fantasy would be too obvious:  Iran is a problem because they support terrorism--Hezbollah in Syria, for example--and have repeatedly agreed to stop atom-bomb development only to renege later.  That would seem to be a sign that they're not serious about stopping.

Oh wait...that was before the new Iranian prezzy actually took a call from Duh Won.  After refusing to meet Obama at the U.N.

As the AP wrote:  historic.

I'll defer to the folks at PJ Media for the wrap:

What a breakthrough! Diplomats are swooning over Iran’s “significant shift” in “attitude and tone.”  Of course the needle on substance didn’t move a centimeter, but who cares about the real world when we can have this glorious fantasy of a “moderate” Iran?

I sense a second Nobel for our peace-loving president.

Iran won’t stop developing a nuclear bomb, of course, but we will pretend they aren’t, thus achieving an historic peace. The US and our allies are now committed to reaching a deal with the Iranians — no matter how bad for us. It’s what happens when you put arrogant ideologues in charge who think they know better than anyone else.