NIAC lobby respond!

Fred
by Fred
17-Nov-2009
 

With the revelation of NIAC lobby’s lifetime president and chief lobbyist exchanging cordial businesslike emails with the Islamist Rapists Republic's Ambassador to UN arranging meetings with congressmen, a classic lobbying duty, the quintessential questions are:

Were the NIAC lobby members, supporters and financial contributors aware of this relationship and approved it beforehand?

If they were not aware of it, does it matter to them that the lobby they support has had this till now secret businesslike relationship with at least one Islamist Rapist emissary?

If their lobby’s relationship with IRR which even with the current fragmentary evidence strongly points to it as being  a case of sleeping with the enemy against IRR’s opposition turns out to be one; is that what they signed up for?

Do the NIAC lobby supporters put all the NIAC lobby doubters/opponents in a single category of Anti-Iranian warmongering nutjobs?

At the same time that it is still fighting it in the court trying to prevent all the discovery documents from being made available to all--NIAC lobby still has not handed over all the requested documents for the discovery phase of the civil action it has brought against an Iranian opposing the Islamist Rapists, when it does the picture will get clearer.

Till then NIAC lobby should begin answering questions which even with the conclusion of its civil case or all the NIAC lobby coordinated lovey-dovey write ups and planted stories will not go away.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by FredCommentsDate
ادا اطوار اسلامی
5
Dec 05, 2012
مسجد همجنسگرایان
1
Dec 05, 2012
Iranians are legitimate target
10
Dec 04, 2012
more from Fred
 
Setareh Cheshmakzan

Freddie - Angry and speculating, eh!

by Setareh Cheshmakzan on

Freddie boy, you say 

..."vatanforoush like niac are sucking Iranian blood money.Can I prove that, yes but to whom, you? I don't think so"

Surprise, surprise!  You could have tried!  But, I agree, to prove that you need imbeciles like yourself. 

"As an IRR apologist or agent your opinion is not yours to change. 

LOL :) Even from an AIPAC tea and crumpet server, that sounds rather musty and daft!  

I did not post an attack on niac. I simply commented to a wave of niac PR of which this blog is one.   

I know, neither did Israel commit war crimes in Gaza!  It just acted in self-defence!

"you and your cronies  .."  

ha ha :) Sorry folk!   This is a clinical example of paranoid delusion and meglomania.  The idea that I am some high powered IR agent, and He important enough to be targeted by myself and "my cronies" to sabotage his propaganda :):)

"vatanforoush like yourself" ... "the definitions of low-life, hate and rage".

You must have worked it all out, you little vantanparast, you!  After your "airtight sanctions", the selling price will come down substantially!!!  Speculating eh? ;)  



Zal

setareh you won't accept 'fact' if it slapped you

by Zal on

Your statements are just that. Statements. Unsubstantiated and generally false. Lobbies have to have a specific constituent, be registered, and meet other criteria, so your statements on that front are false or misleading. We will see what happens to niac since they will get due process which is more than IRR they support gives anyone. I'm not court of law so I need not base my opinion on outcome of a court case while vatanforoush like niac are sucking Iranian blood money. Can I prove that, yes but to whom, you? I don't think so. As an IRR apologist or agent your opinion is not yours to change. I did not post an attack on niac. I simply commented to a wave of niac PR of which this blog is one. Then you and your cronies started attacking anyone and everyone that had view other than yours. Any rage you detect is not against niac or the rest but against the vatanforoush like yourself who use the very processes you help suppress in Iran, to express and distribute your support of an anti-Iran regime or organizations that are the definitions of low-life, hate and rage.


Setareh Cheshmakzan

zal, what is a lobby!

by Setareh Cheshmakzan on

1. "niac is not representative of IranianAmericans and  2) source of its funds and activity is part of the issue at hand.  3) nor 'talking' to 'foreign governments' is the function or authority of a lobby. 4) to the extent that niac is a lobby organization it can lobby American congress and senate. So there is your first piece of fallacy in law and logic".

1. NIAC does not have to be a representative of anybody.  It is an organisation with a membership who act on their shared beliefs.

2. There is no evidence that NIAC is funded by the Iranian government.

3.  I referred here over a few posts to the activities of AIPAC!

4. NIAC is lobbying!  I also believe that NIAC should use every contact and avenue possible to stop imposition of further sanctions and war on Iran, both in the interest of the US and out of humanitarian concern and bond of affinity with Iran. 

NIAC has had many accomplishments, the recognition of which is the matter of perspective.  

You are right, facts remain facts and coming to grips with them DO change opinions. Isn't that the reason you are so rageful! 

 


American Dream

Zal, kafar hame ra be kishe khod pendarad

by American Dream on

you do show signs of paranoia that complements your schizo. Focus on the message and enjoy the straight jacket free day.

You are absolutely nuts Zal.

Since you are so passionate about psychiatric problems you probably are a mental patient in a psychiatric hospital.

 


Zal

Your agreement with M&P is expected. So is your support of

by Zal on

niac et al. niac is not representative of IranianAmericans and source of its funds and activity is part of the issue at hand. nor 'talking' to 'foreign governments' is the function or authority of a lobby. to the extent that niac is a lobby organization it can lobby American congress and senate. So there is your first piece of fallacy in law and logic.

And none of this side show address the basic questions raised by many on this thread. Including his non-clean status, his history, non-accomplishments of niac, the dubious characters on its board and the ongoing churn, or for that matter those supporting it here. Sugar coating and diversionary comments regardless of their frequency and multitude do not change facts or opinions.

 


Setareh Cheshmakzan

Bijan - I mostly agree with Moosirvapiaz!

by Setareh Cheshmakzan on

I however responded to your question focussing on the issue of American public's perception that you yourself had raised.  I expounded on the nature and manufacturing of these perceptions.  I believe that was directly relevant to the question of the role and legitimacy of NIAC.  I also believe it is not possible to address the issue of perceptions and questions regarding the role and legitimacy of NIAC without discussing AIPAC and its influence and activities as the context. 

I entirely agree with Moosirvapiaz that if establishing engagement, rather than the alternative of sanctions and war, requires talking to the representatives of the government in Iran, that this is entirely legitimate.  How else then can dialogue be held?  Between the American government and who????!!!  This does not mean agreeing with the regime in Iran, it means recognising the reality that for dialogue, you require people who can act as conduit between decision makers in Iran and in the US!  There is no requirement to like or agree with the medium or the conduit, the requirement is to make engagement possible.

In relation to Fred, I am sure he IS "intimately aware of who and what AIPAC is" and in that respect his statement calling for "airtight sanctions" to "support Iranian people" is understandable!

I am sorry you felt I lectured you, did not like what I said and found it irrelevant.  To have a genuine debate, one can't impose the framework in which questions are addressed.   This is all I have to say on this blog. Thanks for reading. 

 


Bijan A M

Setareh

by Bijan A M on

Sorry that you took my comment as offensive. I went over it several times again and I don’t find it to be impolite or slanderous. Grant you, it reflected my frustration with your response. I don’t need any kind of lectures about the domestic and foreign policies of US or which group has more influence, etc. etc…All I was saying was from what I had read in this site and comments posted on different blogs, it made sense for someone who is not intimately familiar with NIAC’s missions and conducts to conclude they sympathize with IRI, that’s all.

I would have rather read MOOSIR’s response below from the get go and I would have shut-up. I didn’t ask for lectures on US or Israeli’s policies. You and I may have totally opposing political views, but, that shouldn’t stop a civil exchange.

MOOSIR says:

 “….. everything the NIAC does has to be seen in the context of resolving tensions between US and Iran. it does not, and I repeat, DOES NOT mean that if or when NIAC meets with representatives of IRI, that they are working for the regime. I keep repeating myself but it seems like im argueing my points to deaf ears.  Today, Iran is facing grave danger because of the Islamist regimes
adventurous and dangerous foreign policies. We cant change IRI while
they are holding 70 million people hostage, but we can influence the way
US is dealing with the regime. If they dont talk, make no mistake, the
only other path is confrontation and full fledged war. Now NIAC is
argueing for engagement precisely because the alternatives are not in
Iranians/Americans interests. And if it means talking to representatives of the regime then so be it. The engagement policy is not about
legitimising the brutal regime but avoiding something that is going to
make the livelihoods of Iranians even worse than already is. “
 

I believe he is more intimately aware of who and what NIAC is, and I respect him for his  statement here, regardless of our political beliefs.

At the same time I have tremendous respect for Fred for his tireless and passionate effort to stimulate debate over removal of IRI while supporting Iranian people. He is right, something must be done, hopefully from within. But, time is running out.


Zal

It must be Straight Jacket free day american dream?

by Zal on

Enjoy  visits from rest of your IRR cohorts. Yous is the loosest peech so it is not a good idea to hurl that one around.


Setareh Cheshmakzan

Bijan - the lobby is exposed!

by Setareh Cheshmakzan on

Bijan, I gave you the benefit of doubt and politely responded to your question but you have chosen to become offensive and slandering!  This is an attitude we are familiar with. Israeli lobby all over the world, if it cannot seduce and bribe people, it threatens, insults, labels and slanders them!  

For you information, I am not a NIAC member, neither am I a spokesperson.

The fact that the American public opinion is strongly influenced by the deceitful and partisan AIPAC lobby is well documented.  Through its NeoCon membership in the US administration and its influence in the corporate media, it succeeded in convincing a large section of the American public of the threat of Saddam's "mushroom cloud" over New York, and it was instrumental in fabricating evidence to take the US into an inhuman and catastrophic war - inhuman and catastrophic not only for the Iraqis and the people in the region but for the American public: the dead and wounded soldiers, the reduced security, and the bankrupted economy.  

The inducement of fear to control the American public, in Vietnam War, in the Cold War, and in relation to Afghanistan and Iraq, and now Iran, is a well known tactic, sir.  

I am not expecting the American public to believe what NIAC says at the expense of their own leaders.  I am arguing that in circumstances that there are such known partisan interests and influences, NIAC like all other organisations and individuals who believe America's best interests are being betrayed must have the right to publicise its views in an attempt to prevent suffering to people both in Iran and in the US (and elsewhere).  

As you are aware, there is an internationally recognised agreement, Non-proliferation Treaty, and an internationally recognised organisation to monitor the member states nuclear activities, IAEA.  Iran is a member of the NPT and its activities are being legally and stringently monitored.  However, I have never seen you showing any interest in Israel joining the NPT and opening its facilities to inspection, in short getting rid of its massive arsenal of nuclear weapons!

It can be argued, with much more validity, Sir, that Israel's CURRENT possession of nuclear weapons, considering its paranoid nature and expansionist hegemonic ambitions, poses much more risk to the population of the US, than Iran's FUTURE KNOW HOW!

I think it is yourself and Fred who have underestimated the intelligence of others.  


MOOSIRvaPIAZ

peace45, seriously when are

by MOOSIRvaPIAZ on

peace45, seriously when are people going to end with their logical fallacies and lead to outragous conspiracy theories? Learn a thing or two about how to speak logically, then come to me and discuss NIAC.you are trying to link Qaddafi to NIAC now?

 

As for Fred's response:

 


1-The ongoing businesslike relationship between Chief NIAC lobbyist and
the UN emissary of the Islamist Rapists is quiet evident from the text
of the revealed email NIAC lobbyist send to the IRR ambassador. The
question was simple, a yes or no would do.
 

NIAC lobby claims it does what it does with the full knowledge and at
the behest of its members, so did the members approve such relationship
or not? And it is not a detail rather very important fact that a Lobby
which claims it represents Iranian-Americans has had a cordial,
businesslike relationship with the ambassador of a regime that rapes,
tortures and murders Iranians at will and on a large scale.

 

You speak as if NIAC and IRI are in bed with eachother. There are no buisnesslike relationships between Iran's UN ambassadors and NIAC in the way you are portraying them. Atleast not one that we can prove. Trita has said that he met Jarif specifically for interviews for his book, just like he met with Israeli officials. It is how get was introduced to Zarif and how he was able introduce them to US politicians who specifically REQUESTED access. The emails dont tell me much other than that they have met. 

 

As for Javad Zarif himself. you speak as if he has just murdered someone. The guy is wildly believed to be in the reformist camp. You know the camp the Iranians inside shout slogans in support of. And last time I checked the reformists were still popular inside and outside Iran. 

Only recently Javad Zarif, along side Khatami and now  prisoner Kian Tajbakhs were accused of working with George soros to topple the regime. It is interesting and sad that MKO cult member Hassan Dai's illegally leaked documments will only make life harder for Kian Tajbakhsh. One has to wonder whether Hassain Dai is the one working for the hardliners in Iran.  

Lastly, everything the NIAC does has to be seen in the context of resolving tensions between US and Iran. it does not, and I repeat, DOES NOT mean that if or when NIAC meets with representatives of IRI, that they are working for the regime.

I keep repeating myself but it seems like im argueing my points to deaf ears. 

Today, Iran is facing grave danger because of the Islamist regimes
adventurous and dangerous foreign policies. We cant change IRI while
they are holding 70 million people hostage, but we can influence the way
US is dealing with the regime. If they dont talk, make no mistake, the
only other path is confrontation and full fledged war. Now NIAC is
argueing for engagement precisely because the alternatives are not in
Iranians/Americans interests. And if it means talking to representatives of the regime then so be it. The engagement policy is not about
legitimising the brutal regime but avoiding something that is going to
make the livelihoods of Iranians even worse than already is. 

 

 


peace45

NIAC has hired the same PR firm as Qadaffi has.

by peace45 on

NIAC has hired Brown Lloyd James, a PR firm , to defend themselves. Why??

 Parsi has a lot to lose but where do they get the money to hire Brown LLoyd James, the most expensive PR firm 


American Dream

Freedom5

by American Dream on

"in fact we IRANIAN should be asking for the other Iranian to re join main land.. such as Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan."

Those countries are independant countries.  They were under Russian rule in the 1800s.  So much time has passed that those countries have more in common with modern Russia than with Iran. 

The rest of your last post is just one big rambling sentence of what you think about me.  Simply put, "Yek kami peech-haa-yat shol-eh!"

As for your knowledge of American history, it is as weak as you knowledge of Iranian history.

Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt?


Abarmard

What happened?

by Abarmard on

I typed a long message, went to edit a mis spelling and gone? I hate typing from my phone. Oh well.


Bijan A M

Setareh

by Bijan A M on

This is getting a little silly, mam. Let me make sure that I understand you correctly. You have already decided that American public’s perception of risk is flawed and it is the duty of any patriot American to convince their people to believe that IRI is telling the truth and their own government is made up of a bunch of liars and corrupted thieves? You lobby to sell to the American people that IRI’s enrichment is only for peaceful purposes and at the same time you expect no one should think that you are IRI’s spokesman?

 

Excuse me madam, I’m not that stupid. I think I have said enough and I believe you answered my question by making my point. Fred is right, the answer is, no answer.


Fred

Reply to the vanished reply

by Fred on

I don’t know why your post was removed but since I’ve already typed the reply here it is and if you have changed your mind about what you had written, let me know and since I can delete my own comment I will.

 

Thank you for the two answers & the two non-answer answers.

I still would like answer to questions 1&2 if you will.

1-The ongoing businesslike relationship between Chief NIAC lobbyist and the UN emissary of the Islamist Rapists is quiet evident from the text of the revealed email NIAC lobbyist send to the IRR ambassador. The question was simple, a yes or no would do.

NIAC lobby claims it does what it does with the full knowledge and at the behest of its members, so did the members approve such relationship or not? And it is not a detail rather very important fact that a Lobby which claims it represents Iranian-Americans has had a cordial, businesslike relationship with the ambassador of a regime that rapes, tortures and murders Iranians at will and on a large scale.

 

2-If the members were not told beforehand about their Lobby’s relationship with IRR, is it something which is of any concern to them or the fact that it has been revealed now? Since your non-answer answer to the above question is used to answer this one too, it is being posed again.

 

3-Thank you for the straight forward answer to the sleeping with the enemy scenario, lets hope that is not the case and no kissing of any grounds is required, being a fallible human being with more faults than I care to reveal, I assure you even in that case you will be kissing the wrong person’s footsteps. BTW, what you term as attacking NIAC, I like to rephrase as questioning NIAC lobby, they want to play in the major league but be treated by kindergarten rules is not going to work.  

 

4-Again thank you for the straight forward and lucid answer, alas many NIAC lobby members/supporters or at least the ones I’ve come across do not feel the way you do and are more than ready to label all their doubters/opponents as "warmongers", believe me I know.


Setareh Cheshmakzan

Bijan jan

by Setareh Cheshmakzan on


Thank you for the reply.  You say:

"If NIAC is taking up this challenge, it would only be natural for the people to question the loyalty of such group, especially if there are mitigating reasons (such as dual nationality) for such questioning". .... "The question I posed was not meant to start a debate on validity of public perceptions. It was just a question of logics".  

Bijan, I did recognise that but I answered it from a different logical perspective.  I agree with you that if the public perception is formed in such a way that it perceives Iran as a threat to the security of the US citizens, then it is of course natural that many (but not all) will question the loyalty of a group such as NIAC.  But you see, the validity of public perceptions is always an issue.  People's collective responses under circumstances of hysteria and intense propaganda and manufacturing of emotions, are rarely rational, they are driven by often unconscious affect and mass driven emotions.  Iranian democratic and national Revolution and its conversion to an Islamic Revolution and Islamic Republic (which we must admit has had mass support) is a case in mind.   Getting back to your specific question, yes, I believe it could and should be argued logically that regardless of NIAC's natural affinities towards Iran, the membership, as patriotic Americans and in the interest of American welfare and security, have legitimate right and moral obligation to campaign against a pervasive wrong perception that might drive the US into war and undermine the safety and welfare of its population, as did the manufactured false perceptions and the consequent invasion of Iraq.  I agree with you that suspicion would arise regarding NIAC's loyalties, but like any other fringe group which challenges  mass misperceptions (which are in this case manufactured and fuelled by other lobbies and interest groups) it has legitimate rights to advocate the pursuit of dialogue instead of war and sanctions.  There is no contradiction between this advocacy and American patriotic interests, they are entirely logically congruent.

I know exactly what you mean!  I just open up and frame the question differently!

Thank you too for reading my post.  


Freedom5

REPLY,

by Freedom5 on

Hey Zal,

I stand corrected, I am not aware of the other vatanforoush, there might be few but the prom queen of all is AMERICAN DREAM.


Zal

Freedom5, please clarify yourself with the vatanforoush comment

by Zal on

You seem to be responding to american wet dream but with all the suitable candidates it is hard to know who you are referring to because that description fits many: Q, Irandokht, molla, shotor, mirza, setareh, holly......

And be careful because not all are necessarily vatanforoush. Some just get a rise out of anatgonizng and engaging is pissing contests. A closer review of comments and their patting of each others' behind can shed some light on who belongs to which category. american dream is just a plain old certifiable.


Freedom5

Vatanforoush , there is no minority in IRAN, we are all IRANIAN

by Freedom5 on

Do not patronize me by giving slogans, we are all IRANIAN. Kurd , balouch , Azari……in fact we IRANIAN should be asking for the other Iranian to re join main land.. such as Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan. What is your purpose on this site ….. sabotage. You are sick minded and everybody know. You are saying that you are IRANIAN but I am certain that you are laying. You are true enemy of IRANIAN and IRAN. Why do you taste your own medicine, and speak on behalf of your beloved country the US. People are being exploited in the US, the black want independence so as the native and Mexican as well as the South as a whole listen to me and listen good, there is no minority in IRAN, I know you don't know what IRAN means but we all are IRANIAN with different backgrounds. I have told, you sure know Farsi but sir, you are not Iranian. My guess is that you either from Iraq or Afghanistan and you find this site to throw your obscured comments for simply the hate that you have for us.


Bijan A M

Setareh Khanoom,

by Bijan A M on

With all due respect, I don’t intend to be arguing, but feel to offer some clarifications. If you have read my post carefully you wouldn’t have missed this statement:

 

“You may argue that AIPAC has influenced the whole nation thru its control of Media, Congress, and even the white house. But, nonetheless, the US nation feels the risk (real or perceived).”

 

Regardless of who has influenced the perceptions, let’s say something is determined (according to the constitution of US and the system of democracy that guides the government’s actions) to be the will of the people. Of course, the system allows for any group (within the rule of law) even challenge the will of people. If NIAC is taking up this challenge, it would only be natural for the people to question the loyalty of such group, especially if there are mitigating reasons (such as dual nationality) for such questioning.

 

The question I posed was not meant to start a debate on validity of public perceptions. It was just a question of logics.

 

Thanks again for your post.

 


kharmagas

genAbe Bijan

by kharmagas on

Bijan jAn, we have known each other for several years ......, can you and Fred stop beating around the bush. Aren't you two here for AIPAC? Personally I'll have more respect for you guys if you stop these gimmicks. I wish you two had a fraction of DW Duke's ethics, you would then be able to increase the understanding between Iranians and Israelis much better.


American Dream

Freedom5

by American Dream on

The goal is to liberate ethnic minorities in Iran.

The threat to seperate from the central government should be alarming.  It should lead to the central government attempting to alleviate the problems of ethnic minorities in Iran.  That is the goal of such an action.

I am for the liberation of ethnic minorities in Iran.

You on the other hand are for a dictatorship of your views. 

And your views are just plain nutty.

And you quoted me and there is nothing that is a lie there.

Is there a drug problem in Iran?

Yes.

Do some Shia Muslim Iranians drink alcoholic drinks?

Yes.

Are revolutionary guards in Iran involved in the black market in Iran?

Yes.

Everything I wrote was the truth.


Fred

The answer

by Fred on

Of all the comments by obvious supporters of the NIAC lobby, none, not a single one even attempted to answer any of the legitimate questions posed in the blog, which in itself is an answer.


Setareh Cheshmakzan

Bijan jan

by Setareh Cheshmakzan on

What you say regarding American interests would have been understandable and acceptable had it not been for the fact that many of what is presented as American interests is dictated and promoted by the AIPAC lobby!  A lot of the hysteria about Iran's intentions and nuclear threat derives from the tireless work of that lobby!   Even if it were the case that Iran was building nukes, the necessary conclusion is not that it is posing a threat to the US or Israel.  Under circumstances of Israel's possession of stockpiles of nuke (which is not considered a threat to the US or its citizens!) and the US's own astronomical nuke capabilities, such a prospect could be seen as a reasonable defence, or as Nousha Arzu calls it, "an insurance policy against external attack"!   Another point I would like to add is that even under circumstances of Iran's developing or possession of nukes, NIAC's work towards reduction of tensions, against war and against sanctions, and efforts to promote dialogue would be even more crucial than it is today.

 


Bijan A M

Helllllp.....?

by Bijan A M on

I am drowning in all this mumbo jumbo about NIAC. Would someone please help me understand a simple problem in logic? Let me first lay the ground.

1-I admire NIAC’s stated mission (at least the way I understand it) that it exists to promote the political interest of those Americans that are of Iranian descent (i.e. Iranian-Americans). They strive to give stronger voice to I-A  in US politics.

 

2- Let’s accept that Trita Parsi is the greatest Iranian ever lived. The true Vatanpast who is willing to give his life for a free Iran. He is not even a muslim, so, no one can accuse him of having the slightest religious bias.

 

According to their mission statement and within the framework of the law they lobby (sorry, they can’t lobby by law), they advocate against war and against sanction for the interest of American public. After all they are an American organization formed by American people. However, there comes a situation where US government and American public feel their national interest could be at risk (namely IRI arms with nuclear weapons). Nobody can make this a neo-con, warmonger, AIPAC, …argument. I don’t think you call Obama or every other liberal living in the US a neo-con. You may argue that AIPAC has influenced the whole nation thru its control of Media, Congress, and even the white house. But, nonetheless, the US nation feels the risk (real or perceived).

 

Now, NIAC comes in and in the interest of American public and in the interest of humanity tries to stop confrontation (either war or sanctions) and pushes for dialogue, diplomacy, and face-to-face negotiation. And they along with every other peace loving soul succeed in their mission.

 

Here is where I get bugged down. What is US supposed to do if diplomacy fails and the threat (or risk) continues to exist? If US with its democratic system and its most liberal legislative, judicial and executive branch in its history, decides to take confrontational action and you continue to oppose it and try to stop it without offering an alternative, wouldn’t you be acting against your own nation (America) and consciously or indirectly supporting the other side? Where is the flaw in my logic?

 

My question has nothing to do with the defamation suit and I by no means am suggesting that NIAC is supported by IRI or even any faction within IRI. But, in a situation like this, knowingly or unknowingly, they give the appearance of lack of respect for American interests and support for IRI (not in words but in deeds).


Abarmard

With all due respect

by Abarmard on

Craig's personal opinion is not important. He is not American of Iranian decent and he does not share our concerns. His opinion is important among his family and friends.

Unfortunately to argue an idea with someone such as Mr. Craig is very difficult. I don't disagree with everything he says, since I know he is coming from René Descartes ideas "I think therefore I am".
Many people sub-consciously believe that philosophy: If there is a tree in a jungle and you are not aware of it, it doesn't exist (And reverse is also true). However, that concept is challenged and overlooked when it comes to the "groups" or "crowds" of people from different decent.
One would wonder at times, what's his beef with Iranians? According to him "They hate America”. There you go. How much weight one can give to one’s opinion about anything Iranian (political or social), when one comes argues from that outlook.
In every aspect of his arguments, he follows the similar pattern of debating techniques. He is not wrong, only his scope is limited. For example "I wouldn't know, as I've never met anyone from France who had a US green card." Meaning:

1- French are not my concerns. They don't "HATE" America

2-I have not met them, therefore there is no such thing
.
Or as he explains his Chinese experiences. It's within a scope of his vision, and although he doesn't seem to be fond of Chinese and their culture, and even made fun of his own ex wife speaking her second language 'English" with an "accent", he doesn't think that they "hate" America as Iranians do. Why? Well in his mind Iran took the hostages and "declared war" with America.

YOU ARE THE ENEMY people. Mr. Craig doesn't give a damn about having an intelligent argument based on fact or historical realizations. He thinks, similar to those rulling Iran that criticism translates to hate. Since Iranians hate the US (to begin with), hence them saying anything against the US policies equates to hating America (Sounds familiar? Rush Limbaugh? Or regular AM radio hosts-Only this time applies to Iranians only, and perhaps Arabs, or Muslims in general...They also must hate America).

Mr. Craig distrusts and dislikes you until proved otherwise. And that’s OK with me. I have no reason to prove my love or hate to a virtual member of Iranian.com. That's why I go easy and if I see that the arguments get prolonged, I give up. Not so with those who are sharing my concerns and are willing to exchange thoughts.
Time for my morning coffee now. Happy Wednesday.


Darius Kadivar

Craig Jaan My Politically incorrect intrusion in your debate ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

Craig Jaan My Politically incorrect intrusion in your debate with ID and vice versa :

"ID Know Your Limits ..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w

For a Baby Boomer of the mid 1960's I really miss the 1950's ... Life was less complicated ! 

LOL

Sorry ID jaan I just Couldn't help the devil in me ;0))

Interesting debate anyhow !

Kisses to both and have a nice day !

DK 


ex programmer craig

ID

by ex programmer craig on

So you think people who think "improving Iranian-American Image" or "working within the community to increase their political influence" are in opposition to NIAC?

If NIAC works to do either of those things, I've never seen any evidence of it. In fact, I'd say they hurt the image of Iranian-Americans when they advocate positions that go against US interests. And I'm sure you must have read how the poll was conducted and understand that "increasing political influence" in this context means on domestic issues.

Your attempt to reason logically added to your lack of comprehension is amusing to say the least! :o) 

Not as amusing as your attempt to sidestep the fact that NIAC's primary activity - influencing US foreign policy towards Iran (which is what they are embroiled in a scandal for and which is the cause of all these blog posts and comments) is the LEAST important issue that Iranian-Americans want an Iranian advocacy group in the US to be taking up. Sorry, dear. Your team came in dead last amongst Iranian-Americans. And you aren't going to be able to dodge that one.

And by the way, speaking of logic: why do you think it is that Iranians-Americans for the most part (83%!) don't want US policy towards Iran changed? Could it be that they are satisfied with the current policy? Wouldn't that be an indicator that they oppose NIAC's agenda to get that policy radically altered?

But why would I ask you? We've already established you are in an extreme minority amongst Iranian-Americans. You've got no clue.


IRANdokht

Craig

by IRANdokht on

So you think people who think "improving Iranian-American Image" or "working within the community to increase their political influence" are in opposition to NIAC?

Your attempt to reason logically added to your lack of comprehension is amusing to say the least! :o)

IRANdokht

PS to AI: where is your proof? where is the poll? Were you referring to PAIAA's numbers too (like Craig) or just pulling numbers out of you know where?  be honest  ;-)

 


Iraneh Azad

Dear Programmer

by Iraneh Azad on

You got it exactly right. But what do you exactly expect from people who hate America and Americans with a passion? What do you expect from people who make excuses for Iranian failure when it comes to the IRI. The IRI is a backwards welfare state that can not stand on its feet for one day without all that free oil money and these people are worried about "American Imperialism".