OBAMA

Trita is being dishonest

"The Obama administration cannot be faulted for not having sought genuine diplomacy with Iran."--Trita Parsi

Trita isn't unintelligent. But when Trita makes unintelligent comments such as these, you know he's simply engaging in political pandering. 

Anyone claiming a single take-it-or-leave-it offer is a show of genuine diplomacy isn't being honest with himself or his council.

Could you please?....

Speak only from one side of your mouth. What is going on? All those who worshiped Trita Pari as the Jesus of our generation, all of a sudden, turned agnostic and denied the holy spirit’s existence. If he starts suggesting pressure on IRR for violation of human rights, these guys come out and say, “hold it…. What pressure? Are you out of your mind?”. If you pressure IRR you will violate “human life” to protect human right. And, these same people claim that they are against the atrocities of IRI. Which side of your mouths are you speaking from?

The guy you were willing to give your life to defend that he is not an IRR lobby has come out and published an article to make your life easier to defend him. He is talking to the same president that you were giving your life to elect. You tore into pieces anyone questioning Obama’s integrity. What happened? You are afraid that your god (Obama) would listen or react to what your Jesus has to say?

This is absolutely mind boggling to understand.

How in the living hell do you expect a change in Iran? You think IRR will let the true opposition get enough momentum to bring millions of people from all cross sections of the society into the streets? Dream on….The opposition in Iran needs support to get rid of the devil (with or without Nuke). If you are not willing to put arms in the hand of the opposition, then at least put enough pressure on the oppressor to blunt his sword a little. Let more people dare to come out with bare hands. The same way they came out 30 years ago.   

masoud A, lol NIAC represents no one

he represents millions of Iranian Americans, are you joking?  How come only 500 people only filled out his survey and he supposidly has 3000 members.  NIAC has a problem with not being truthful with people.

 he represents no one other than his own interest.  he is hated by all sides of Iranians.  listen to makmlbaf and he is no neocon.

Davood Rostami

You come across as trying to quiet critics against NIAC........I know that was not your intent but you do come across as doing so. 

However - As the President of the National Iranian American Council - Mr. Parsi has assumed a position to represent me and multiple millions of Iranian-Americans, without being an Iranian or an American!!!  We do have a lot of issues with this Character, and we openly criticize how he portrays what the majority of Iranians stand for.   It is our right - and just as it has been the case in Mr. Deai Court case - there will be only one loser in any further and future court cases - That would be Mr. Parsi.     Also - the article you see here on this thread, co-authored by Mr. Parsi, is a damage control measure to minimize the advers impacts from the court case initiated by Mr. Parsi himself.   NIAC is a stinking stew - the more you stir it the more it smells...

Having said that - What Mr. Parsi must do at this point is to play straight.   He needs to stop playing games.   It is waaaay too late for damage control - he needs to come clean with his past and focus on how he can help Iran and USA in the future. 

Finally - majority of NIAC members are decent and smart Iranians who have correctly sensed the need for such organization - and they must be on the front lines of the fight against people who have abused them and betrayed Iran and America. 

Dear Rostam

Dear Rostam,

1. NIAC recently did sue Hassan Daioleslam, a known MKO executive committee member for defamation.  Stay tuned.

2. NIAC was formed in the USA after the horrifying events of 9/11 to confront the prejudices that went on against the Iranian-American community with impunity, to be the Iranian-American community watchdog on the hill and to get the Iranian-American community involved in the politics of the USA, where we live at. 

3. You want to sue the government of Iran over murder/torture/defamation of the people of Iran?  I think there is a court set up to deal with ruthless dictators such as those in Iran and it is called the International Court of Justice based in The Hague, Netherlands.  However, I want to remind you of a couple of court cases in N. America.

* A lawsuit in the USA by the victims of a bomb in Israel did sue the government of Iran and won $400,000,000 in 2006.  Since no money was available, attorneys went after the Perspolis artifacts at the University of Chicago and we have been in a battle to preserve our heritage intact (See a recent Iranian.com article: Perspolis – Hertage Taken Hostage).

* There is currently a lawsuit in Canada, against Iran, over the murder of Zahra Kazemi in Iran that was filed by her beloved son, Stephan Hashemi. We are all hopeful to see a guilty verdict in Canada, and although I agree that a guilty verdict will be an embarrassment for Iran, no government officials will be brought to justice.

Nonetheless, let me assure you that there will be international criminal tribunals for the current Iranian tyrants, just as there are tribunals going on for the heads of the former Yugoslavian dictatorship.  When the time comes, many of us will push NIAC to lobby the US government to file for tribunals at The Hague against the current Iranian regime.

MM

I saw that you tried to correct me when I wrote how Parsi admonished the US to "not interfere" in the Iranian fight after the June election, all along while the regime butchered the likes of Neda and Sohrab, and raped thousands.

Well, the following quote reaffirms my point: "According to Trita Parsi, President of NIAC, "condemning violence is different from taking sides in Iran's election dispute. People in Iran have told NIAC's Iranian-American membership that they don't want the US to get itself involved in the conflict..." 

Moreover, for a whole week after June 12, Parsi made the rounds on the talk-show circuit and repeatedly pointed out that this was a fight between Iranians and that the US should not interefere, and not once did he encourage the US to expressly condemn the crackdown. That request came 10 days afer the crackdown, when the blood of hundreds of innocents had already been spilled. 

As Saboohi aptly quotes a NIAC staff member (David Eliot) below: "American policy makers will feel the need to react. But they need to
remember this isn't about us. This is about Iran and Iranians seeking the right to determine their own future. The United States can help little and harm much by interjecting itself into the process. The Obama administration's approach to the election - keeping its comments low-key and not signaling support for any candidate - was exactly the right approach."

Davood-Rahni

I read your views on the possiblity of legal actions against those who believe NIAC is an IRI front lobby in the US.

You wrote: 

"smear campaign and slanderous remarks against citizens in the US and most countries is in violation of civil laws and constitutional statues, and hence, one can be legally prosecuted for having committed it."

My first question to you is, what about "smear campaign and slanderous remarks against citizens of IRAN by the IRI, which lands them in jail left and right?"

There are those Iranians who do take advantage of Western democracies laws, but have no problem deniying the same laws and privileges to their own countrymen in Iran. Or in the case of NIAC, it has no problems remaining mute in the face of horroundous acts committed by the IRI.

To NIAC: Let me know if you need my name and address. I have no problem sending them to you so you can go ahead and sue me for "defamation" while thousands of Iranians in Iran are being "defamed" by the same government you lobby for on a daily basis.

NIAC

As I continue reading in awe some of the remarks here against NIAC officers, it would be an ethical remiss if I did not share my humble two pennies with the audience:

I should not be the one to gently remind us all that defamation of character, smear campaign and slanderous remarks against citizens in the US and most countries is in violation of civil laws and constitutional statues, and thence, one can be legally prosecuted for having committed it. This is especially a very strong case against an accuser if and when it is proven the person has not factual documentation that stands strong in the court of law to corroborate his accusations. So, hiding behind fictitious names, pseudonyms would not give anyone the protection or the rationale to spew hatred toward others. Of course one has every civil rights under the first amendment to assess the positive or negative of a process or an organizational conducts, but cannot solely focus on those running and organization. That is in the realm of the law.

With best wishes to our beloved IRAN and the 72 million Iranians to achieve peacefully and with minimum costs accrued on them.

Iran under military Junta::

Iran under military Junta:: A dangerous power vaccum:

//www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-11-26/irans-dangerous-power-vacuum/?cid=bs:featured4

Tweety punk?

Are you a little tweety apologist?? ;) I didn't know there were fascist tweets out there. Good to know.

Perfect demonstration of character assassination (Fred / Saboo)

The position taken by NIAC can be criticized by their members and it has been.

However, the positions taken by NIAC character assassins like Fred and Saboohi is not defensible as part of any genuine concern for Iran or democracy.

Fred said he is only interested in NIAC's designation not their political positions. That was obviously a lie.

These public relations hit-jobs carried out by unknown cowards prove one thing: It was never about human rights, or "support" for democracy. That was just an excuse to attack NIAC and try to discredit it for ulterior motives to the benefit of rival policy advisory groups like AIPAC. There's no doubt about that now. I'm glad the truth is once again being demonstrated for all to see.

You be the judge

See how Trita Parsi and NIAC were defending Obama's position. Judge by yourself.

For NIAC, all it matters is to give a lip service to the human rights but keep seeking a deal with the regime. As he said last year, the US should share the Middle East with the Iranian regime. (See his advice here //ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42044 )

Some of NIAC's declaration in defense of Obama's policy toward the Mullahs after the June election:

• 5 months ago:

NIAC Welcomes Obama's Strong Condemnation of Violence by Iran's Government

//www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1454&Itemid=2

Washington - The National Iranian American Council welcomes President Obama's condemnation of human rights abuses by the Iranian government and its use of violence against peaceful protesters.

"I strongly condemn these unjust actions, and I join with the American people in mourning each and every innocent life that is lost," President Barack Obama said today.

According to Trita Parsi, President of NIAC, "condemning violence is different from taking sides in Iran's election dispute. People in Iran have told NIAC's Iranian-American membership that they don't want the US to get itself involved in the conflict, but they do want to see the government's use of violence condemned."

Calls by Republican lawmakers to explicitly side with a specific candidate or movement in Iran can be extremely harmful to that candidate or movement. "If our intention is to help, we have to first listen to the people in Iran rather than to pretend to speak for them without ever having had consulted with them," Parsi added.

Yesterday, Parsi published an op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor pointing out that the Obama administration's new posture towards Iran has enabled internal Iranian dynamics to bring about the current stand-off. "If America's posture returns to that of the Bush administration, these indigenous forces for change may be quelled by the forces of fear and ultranationalism," he wrote.

• What Can the U.S. Do?

//niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/mousavi-supporter-to-us-help-us/

David Eliot, NIAC's staff

American policy makers will feel the need to react. But they need to remember this isn't about us. This is about Iran and Iranians seeking the right to determine their own future. The United States can help little and harm much by interjecting itself into the process. The Obama administration's approach to the election - keeping its comments low-key and not signaling support for any candidate - was exactly the right approach.

//www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1454&Itemid=2

• Iranians have to find their own course

//niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/iranians-have-to-find-their-own-course/

By R.K. Ramazani, Member of NIAC's Board of Advisors

President Obama should not take sides in the political crisis in Iran. His critics are wrong in faulting him for not siding with the demonstrators and for not standing for the American value of freedom.

With more than a dozen Iranian protesters already dead, Obama is trying both to protect innocent lives and advance political freedom for Iranians. He realizes that siding with the demonstrators likely would provoke even greater bloodshed.

• Deal or No Deal, Talks Must Continue

//niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/deal-or-no-deal-talks-must-continue/

The rigmarole surrounding the supposed failure of negotiations with Iran is causing the media and government to lose sight of what is really important: talking with Iran. Talking is, in and of itself, a confidence building measure. It allows for the growth of familiarity between the parties, and, therefore, greater confidence that the other side will honor any agreements. At this early stage, negotiations with Iran should be viewed as means to that end.

//www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1511&Itemid=2

Dear Ramin,

Dear Ramin,

Again, the following is a direct quote from Trita Parsi’s op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor on June 22, 2009 which was stated orally even earlier in talk-formats:

“But here is one legitimate criticism, the Iranians are missing two words from Obama: "I condemn." Protesters and political leaders I've spoken to in Iran want the US to speak out forcefully against the government's human rights abuses and condemn the violence. Philosophical formulations about respecting the wishes of the Iranian people aren't enough: The president should clearly condemn the Iranian government's violations and use of brutal force against its own people.”

REFERENCE: What Obama must do now on Iran: Condemn violence, without picking sides. //www.csmonitor.com/2009/0622/p09s03-coop.html

Please do not take words out of context. Thank you.

Well said MM, the

Well said MM, the neo-con/AIPAC have only one goal in mind, how to destroy Iran and bring Iranians under their rule. And of course there are a few here that are more than happy to help them along.

Mehrdad

Back in June

when the regime was raping and butchering the likes of Sohrab and Neda, Trita Parsi was admonishing the Americans to stay out of the Iranian fight, "not to interfere."

Now he's singing an altogether different tune. Could it be, as my dear ham-mihans, Shushtari and masoudA, claim that Parsi finally senses IRI's pending doom and is trying to jump a sinking ship?

Indeed, I would tend to agree that it seems the good "Doctor" has taken on the role of a new-born human rights champion in order to procure a life jacket off the Titanic. What remains to be seen is whether Iranians will fall for this sort of last minute change of heart.

I, for one, remain highly skeptical of his motives.

Abarmard: Excellent

Abarmard: Excellent observation. I hope people take heed. Who is that guy anyway?

Dear MM

Because of our inability to form a real representation - IRR has done it for us!!   This is not a case of "Conquer & Divide" this is a case of further "Fool the Unaware".   Our rather young immigrant community is just learning the ropes..... But we must learn to research the facts, and identify the red flags. 

Who Speaks for the Iranian-American Community

I tend to agree that NIAC does not speak for all Iranian-Americans.  However, if you think that you can do a better job, over a long haul, with the knowledge and connections of NIAC, then come-on in.  The K-street has lots of openings.  Let's see you walk the halls of the congress speaking for the Iranian-American community.  Let's see your alternative views of the Iranian-Americans expressed in D.C. instead of snipe remarks, quotes taken out of context and web-text journalism. 

My friend,

* did you object when the congress was passing a bill prohibiting visas to ALL Iranian applicants, after 9/11?  NIAC did, and a writing campaign most likely stopped the bill.  You may be here because that law did not go through!

* did you object when Imos in the Morning Show bad-mouthed Iranians?  NIAC did, and got an on-air apology from NBC & Imos.

* did you start a campaign to shield the Perspolis artifacts from lawsuits.  NIAC has been doing fundraisers & political action writing campaigns on behalf of the Perspolis artifacts since 2006.

* ………………….

Someone is doing a good job of the old British cliché “divide and conquer” around here.  Stop the smear campaign, my friend.  The neo-cons and IAPAC want choking sanction and military action against Iran which will most likely put a stop to a grass-root movement in Iran against the mullahs.  As the only loud voice of reason on the capitol, the neo-cons and IAPAC would love to see NIAC dragged and kicked on the ground.  Do not do their dirty work.  

The Iranian-American community will benefit from discussing all voices of dissent.  But, let’s talk about the message and leave the messenger alone.

Abarmard

I read that excellent piece. He is spot on. Sadly it will go over the head of many self proclaimed "experts" outside Iran. Fred, ramin just to name a few.

Important

حسين بشيريه:

"برای جستجوی حقيقت بايد يک بار هم که شده در باره همه چيز شک و ترديد کنيم"

"...در شرايط فرسايش ساختار اقتدار، مسئله اصلی کارکرد و فايده و نقش افراد، گروه ها و
احزاب در فرايند فرسايش است نه ماهيت عقايد و ايدئولوژی و يا حتی تعلقات
گذشته آنها با حکومت"

"the neo-cons and expatriates"

One has to love “the neo-cons and expatriates” combo, it is a gift that keeps on giving.

Now with Congress and the White House firmly in the Democratic hands, adding to that  NIAC lobby claiming it represents the majority views of Iranian-American and on top of it all NIAC lobby’s boastings about its special access to the White House and NIAC lobby's chief lobbyist giving lectures to the CIA, still blaming it on “the neo-cons and expatriates”?  

The “the neo-cons and expatriates” combo excuse is sort of not cutting it no more. How about admitting all the whitewashings, all the cozying up to Islamist Rapists in the name of “dialogue and diplomacy” and the rest have failed miserably. The simple reason for the failure being that in the history of mankind blaming all but the real culprit has never solved any problem.  

Mr. Ala and Irandokht

Mr. Ala, your bringing up, "there are Iranians whose rights have been violated (in the U.S.)," at this time in our country's history is nothing short of asinine.

Irandokht writes, "I think NIAC has been put under too much pressure lately and they don't have the resources to fight the smear campaign against them and cover all the Iranian interest issues too. It's a shame how Iranians are so willing to sabotage each others efforts and good deeds."

"Good deeds." And who made you the hall-monitor on what makes for a "good deed" when it comes to Iran and Iranians? It's a real pity you have no shame, Sir/Madam -- with friends like you, no one, certainly not the freedom-seeking people of Iran, need enemies.

DEATH TO ISLAMIC FASCISM AND THEIR SHAMELESS SUPPORTERS

Trita Parsi's record on Human rights violations in Iran

It is a natural tendency of a government to circle the wagons and consider all opposition as foreign agents if they even if there are hints of outside intervention.  Iran has been trying to do so, without success because the opposition is a grass-roots movement and hence has the mullahs shedding beard.

Trita's opinion in The Christian Science Monitor (June 22, 2009) stated: What Obama must do now on Iran: Condemn violence, without picking sides. //www.csmonitor.com/2009/0622/p09s03-coop.html

This is a direct quote from the Christian Science Monitor op-ed: “But here is one legitimate criticism, the Iranians are missing two words from Obama: "I condemn." Protesters and political leaders I've spoken to in Iran want the US to speak out forcefully against the government's human rights abuses and condemn the violence. Philosophical formulations about respecting the wishes of the Iranian people aren't enough: The president should clearly condemn the Iranian government's violations and use of brutal force against its own people.”  

Later, Dr. Parsi welcomed the passage of the Senate resolution, S.Res.355, regarding the misuse of the human rights in Iran. //niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/niac-welcomes-senate-passage-of-human-rights-resolution/

Trita's message regarding human rights violations in Iran is clear and consistent. 

Iranian.com is infested..

... with efraati Iranians with a mind full of conspiracy theories and self interested agenda of their own. Just take a look at the previous comments. 

With compatriots like these... 

i love it......!

parsi's 180 turn proves that the mullahs' reign of terror is at an end.....they must sense the danger to finally start 'condemning' the akhoonds' barbaric treatment of our people- which has actually been going on for 30 years!

now I am certain that iran will be free soon.

one correction though paris, you said "Today, opponents of the Ahmadinejad government took to the streets once again..."

in reality, opponents of the entire akhoondi system took to the streets... the party is over, let justice be served.

Looool

I am afraid I can't accept your apology at this point mr. Parsi and NIAC.   But it's a good start.    

BTW - NIAC position after the elections has been very clear - USA must not meddle in Iranian affairs.    His advice to Obama has been far beyond "no military strikes" - it has been " don't even look and turn the other way".  

Ari Siletz, it's not taken out of context

Dear Ari, you tell me if this is taken out fo contex or not. Iguess you're not reading it right. It's so clear. Here is Parsi's article and the complete quote:

//www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/26/the_end_of_the_beginning

“Iran's popular uprising, which began after the June 12 election, may
be heading for a premature ending. In many ways, the Ahmadinejad
government has succeeded in transforming what was a mass movement into
dispersed pockets of unrest. Whatever is now left of this mass movement
is now leaderless, unorganized -- and under the risk of being hijacked
by groups outside Iran in pursuit of their own political agendas.”

The USA is between Iraq and a Hard Place

PUN intended....   

But I apologize to my fellow Iranians....

If the USA is now seen as a meddler the Iranian Military can be quickly aroused  from the sidelines to back the IRI then the Green Movement will be really screwed ...  There must be more FORCEFUL declarations from the UN... Russia China the EU and the USA...

and More behind the scenes actions from the opposition 

Any military action on the USA's part would be stupid 

Saboohi, Parsi quote taken out of context

The authors are saying if the neo-cons and opposition expatiates aren't stopped, Ahmadinejad will get the upper hand. 

I partly disagree with Parsi on this (I believe neo-cons and expatriates are helping Ahmadinejad quite a bit, but the assistance won't be enough to disperse the movement). In the article you quote, Parsi and Aslan are warning against a neo-con/expatriate threat to the movement, they are not disparaging the uprising.

Understanding Parsi’s new position

To understand Parsi’s new position, just have a look at his writings In the past few months. For six months, Parsi was praising Obama’s position and criticized those who condemned President’s soft attitude toward the Iranian regime. Here are only a few examples:
• NIAC Welcomes Obama's Strong Condemnation of Violence by Iran's Government
Tuesday, 23 June 2009
//www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1454&Itemid=2

NIAC Welcomes US-Iran Talks and the Inclusion of Human Rights
Friday, 02 October 2009
//www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1511&Itemid=2

Iranians have to find their own course
//niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/iranians-have-to-find-their-own-course/
Cross Posted from the Cincinnati Enquirer
By R.K. Ramazani, Member of NIAC’s Board of Advisors
President Obama should not take sides in the political crisis in Iran. His critics are wrong in faulting him for not siding with the demonstrators and for not standing for the American value of freedom.

How could Trita Parsi and NIAC welcome the inclusion of human rights in Geneva negotiations (that never happened), praise Obama’s silence and suddenly, come forward and attack Obama for his silence?
The reason is simple: Parsi hoped that the Iranian uprising would be soon over. In June (5 months ago) he predicted the end of the movement:
“Iran's popular uprising, which began after the June 12 election, may be heading for a premature ending. In many ways, the Ahmadinejad government has succeeded in transforming what was a mass movement into dispersed pockets of unrest”
But the Iranian people do not listen to Parsi and continue their quest for democracy; hence, NIAC’s position to welcome Geneva negotiation and Obama’s silence has become unbearable.
Here he become a new champion of human rights.