Comments on: Iran: The Political Attack on the National Iranian American Council

By: picard

picard — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:43:30 +0000

It t’would appear that Daniel Luban of the splendid “faster times” spoof blog (of Michael Ledeen) reads enduring America…. (see post #16 above)

http://thefastertimes.com/diplomacy/2009/11/16/why-everyone-hates-george-soros/

Either that, or great minds think alike: :-}

“So for the neocons, Soros is an Iranian stooge; for the Ahmadinejad regime, he is an American stooge. The man just can’t win.”

By: picard

picard — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:19:58 +0000

Two other angles:

1. It dawns on me that there’s another neocon agenda at work here — the effort to embarrass John Limbert, the new top man for Iran at the State Department. (an infinitely better choice than Dennis Ross — who was unwelcome to Iranians of nearly all stripes — except of course the monarchist crowd)

2. I’m saddened for Barbara Slavin in all this. For a decade or more, she was an excellent, independent reporter on Iran matters for USA Today. A lot of us were startled when she took an editing role at Washington Times (long know for being… very “conservative”)…. Yet much of the reporting on Iran during her watch at WashTimes has been quite good. (at times better & scooping the WaPost)

I gather she recused herself from this story, as Parsi is a friend of hers. But what the heck is Eli Lake, top neocon attack dog from the NYSun, doing at the WashTimes (a Mooney owned paper)? Working theory — he was brought in to “balance” Barbara. Wonder how long she’ll last there now….

By: picard

picard — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:15:53 +0000

There indeed is another related irony here — the Wash Times does note that NIAC has received considerable funding from Soros’s foundation. (which is openly noted on the NIAC web site in various places — but not the amounts) In the recent show trials, much was made of links to various defendants to the very same foundation — e.g., that they were trying to foment “velvet revolution.”

So NIAC might easily be accused — by neocons in Iran of being part of some vast “velvet conspiracy.”

And likewise, US & Israeli neocons (as well as the Mooj stooges like Daioleslam)
accuse Parsi & NIAC of being part of a Mullah conspiracy.

By: Dennis Hill

Dennis Hill — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 21:23:01 +0000

Masoud – I don’t read farsi, but your point is very good. Because the lawsuit is clearly not about whether NIAC is a lobby or not. The neo-cons are trying to make teat the issue. The issue is whether NIAC lobbies for the Islamic republic – and the neo-cons are very clear: If you oppose war and additional sanctions, then you are with “them”!

By: Masoud

Masoud — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:17:30 +0000

From Tabnak, a publication close to Rezaei / the IRGC:

پرنفوذترین لابی ایرانی! به دلیل تخلفات، زیر تيغ تحقیقات فدرال آمریکا
http://www.tabnak.ir/fa/pages/?cid=72769

(funny — not to mention ironic — that those close to the regime ALSO label NIAC a “lobby.” not the first time we’ve seen the american far-right and the iranian far-right come to resemble each other, i have to say…)

By: David

David — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:49:36 +0000

Scott,
Foreign Policy Magazine has the incredible back-story on this. They got ahold of documents that show this is really about attacking President Obama’s Iran policy. Read this:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/11/13/does_washington_have_an_iran_lobby

By: Amir Pirouz

Amir Pirouz — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:19:53 +0000

Mr Ghesh, I happen to be an Iranian and know well the type of Iranians that are “exiled” in Sweden. Let me tell you something point blank: you and try to drag Trita Parsi through the mud all you want with your false accusations, but we Iranians will NEVER EVER accept your darling Rajavi as our “president-elect”. Vassalam. Give it up.

By: Dennis Hill

Dennis Hill — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:27:02 +0000

Mr Ghesh – sorry, but you arguments make little Sense. You are trying to portray Parsi as if he only spoke out against human rights this past summer. Perhaps you should check out this page:

http://www.niacouncil.org/humanrights
NIAC organized a conference on human rights in 2007 together with Amnesty.
Then, there’s an oped in 2005 (!) by Parsi in the Financial Times, arguing that the US must include human rights in any negotiation with Iran. 2005!

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/8a048db2-5ce5-11d9-bb9c-00000e2511c8,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F1%2F8a048db2-5ce5-11d9-bb9c-00000e2511c8.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tritaparsi.com%2Fpublications.htm

Care to apologize?

By: scott harrop

scott harrop — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:14:44 +0000

ChrisE’s helpful comment about the “tactical pause” prompted me to check my files. A subtle distinction indeed should be made. See, for examples, TP’s 07/30 essay in Foreign Policy, “The Case for a Tactical Pause”

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/07/30/make_them_wait

and two weeks later, a co-written NYTimes oped, “Throwing a/n a Life-line”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/15/opinion/15iht-edaksari.html

The former advocates the “tactical pause” in negotiations, in the context of perceived decision-making uncertainty inside Iran. The second essay argues against new sanctions (rather than against diplomacy this time) — as they would “throw A/N a lifeline.”

In both cases, analysis is conditioned, if not directed, by focus on Iran’s internal situation, and therein my own “pause.”

In the latter, Trita too credits “Obama’s new outreach to Iran… depriv[ing] them [the hardliners] of their perennial boogeyman.

That dynamic is still at work….

By: Gheseh2000

Gheseh2000 — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:09:47 +0000

Not Mr but Mrs, and I am not neoconservative as some of you think. I am neither a journalist nor a writer. I am just an Iranian resident of Sweden, as many Iranians exiled by this regime I just follow the news regarding my home land on daily bases.
If it’s one issue I agree with NIAC regarding US, Iran relation is deployment of farther sanctions on Iran will help the Government not the opposition.
Having that said I just want you to follow Titra Parsi’s Tweeter blogs.
Up to Sep. despite of what happened in streets of Iran he was for direct talks between Unite state and Iran. Aug 2009 he was asking for delay in decisions, Sep 2009 Human Rights issue.
Ask yourself Why wait so long? Why National Iranian American council took it’s time to Join Iranians both inside and outside Iran?
I did send a request to Swedish radio for sending me the file from Interview they made with Mr Parsi, and I’ll publish it into your site as soon as received.
Here is a link to one of his articles calling the end of beginning every Iranian called “the begining of End” : http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/26/the_end_of_the_beginning
The first piece from Mr Parsi regarding Human rights issue came in Sept. 2009, when he finally realized the green movement is not ended.
See by yourself and point out to me if I am wrong but don’t judge me as if I am for any sanctions or war against Iran. All I am saying is direct talk with Iran on higher level will only be the wind under the wings Ahmadinejad needs for the legitimacy of his government and that’s what NIAC is striving to establish.

By: ChrisE

ChrisE — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:40:51 +0000

Scott H,

I may be wrong, but my recollection is that Trita’s line on a tactical pause was based more on Iran’s foreign policy bureaucracy being in chaos and unable to negotiate on anything substantial. I’m sure Trita would not like to throw AN any lifelines either, but not sure that was his primary point.

p.s I’m developing a similar hunch (I have explored it on other threads here). An escalation of tensions on the nuclear issue is highly unlikley to bring any short or long term benefits to the opposition.

Chris Emery

By: Keyvan

Keyvan — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:22:44 +0000

This is unfortunately the usual problem with diasporas – they’re much more vitriolic than the population inside the country (see Armenians, Cubans, Haitians, etc). There has been a running shmear against Trita Parsi for years, so much that you can’t google his name without some kind of blood-soaked picture popping up of him photoshopped next to Khamene’i. The neocons use this stuff that the more vocal elements of the diaspora put out when it is in their interest, and obviously this attack on NIAC is very much in their interest. Eli Lake is a slime ball – his article should be read in journalism school as lesson one in how not to do a story. These guys are Leninist in their instrumental use of the truth.