Iran Lobby

Exposing the Activities of the lobbies and appeasers of the Mullah's Dictatorship ruling Iran

Iran emphasis on lifting sanctions not likely to happen

by

One YearThis past weekend, the P5+1 group of nations negotiating a potential nuclear arms deal with Iran held impromptu meetings against the backdrop of worsening conditions in Ukraine with separatists battling for control of large swathes of that country.

In a closing press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Barack Obama signaled his clearest belief yet additional extensions to negotiations would not prove useful, nor be granted should this latest third round of talks fail to yield a framework of an agreement by March 24th, a deadline imposed by Senate Democrats.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif offered a slightly differing take when he also agreed any extension would not be useful, but reiterated mullah’s position that economic sanctions be quickly lifted completely should a deal be worked out. In short, Zarif wants a blank check in restoring and normalizing relations with the U.S.

In many ways Zarif could be forgiven his rose colored glasses. He has witnessed the West cave in twice before on negotiating sessions in which mullahs in Iran gave up barely anything and in return, is in the process of receiving $11 billion in frozen assets in several payments at a critical time for Iran’s economy as oil prices tanked globally and Iran’s military commitments in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan were taking a toll.

Zarif has also seen Obama’s foreign policy deteriorate in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East with radicalized Islamist movements gaining nearly everywhere; all of which has led him and his bosses, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei and President Hassan Rouhani, to calculate just how long they can get away with dangling the carrot.

The unfortunate hiccup for them came with the midterm elections in the U.S. when an American public, sickened by the violence taking place around the world and seeing grisly videos of killings, acted swiftly to send an unmistakable message that terrorism was a top concern.

Iranian regime’s imposing PR and lobbying machine in the U.S. towed the party line as groups such as the National Iranian American Council gamely tried to persuade doubting lawmakers that Iran was indeed ready to deal. Their latest so-called “win” was the move by Senate Democrats to delay re-imposing sanctions until March 24th, but all that did in effect was move the June 30th deadline up by three months instead.

Now faced with the dark reality of receiving no more extensions, mullahs in Iran are holding onto the position that any agreement be accompanied by a full and complete cessation of sanctions. In essence, mullahs in Iran wants a do-over and behave as if the past decade of terror, violence, brutality and human rights violations had never happened.

“Sanctions are a liability; you need to get rid of them if you want a solution,” Zarif told attendees at the Munich security conference.

It’s an odd statement since he implies sanctions have to be lifted first before a deal is completed. Secretary Kerry added to the oddity by outlining an acceptable deal would slow Iran’s ability to enrich enough uranium to build a nuclear weapon by one year.

That’s say that again: An acceptable deal with Iran would “slow down” the ability to build a bomb by a year. Not “prevent” Iran from ever having a nuclear weapon, just delay it by a year.

It is hard to fathom a worse situation than to allow Iranian regime the mildly inconvenient cost of 365 days before it gains a nuclear weapon. It is not a scenario that bodes well for the rest of the world.

By Laura Carnahan

Why Munich 2015 is Munich 1938

by

Chamberlain in MunichThis was readily apparent in comments made this weekend by Iranian regime’s Supreme Leader Khamenei who said in a statement released by his office and carried by the ISNA news agency:

“I would go along with any agreement that could be made. Of course, I am not for a bad deal. No agreement is better than an agreement which runs contrary to our nation’s interests,” Khamenei said.

He then alluded to the possibility of agreeing to a deal that did not deliver all that Iran was seeking, which on casual inspection might bode well for a deal to finally be closed. His comments came at the start of the annual Munich Security Conference where an impromptu meeting of the P5+1 negotiating countries (the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and China) took place with Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif.

While the Munich conference was ostensibly going to be focused on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Zarif and Secretary of State John Kerry took the opportunity to do some bargaining.

The renewed push for a deal reflects the very real deadline imposed by a newly energized Congress eager to flex its muscles against a recalcitrant Iranian regime that has so far stalled for two years in reaching a deal while at the time contributed greatly to the growing and rapid deterioration of the Middle East.

Khamenei and his handpicked front man in President Hassan Rouhani have calculated correctly the patience of the American people had finally been worn down to a nub and if any deal was going to be done, it had to come sooner rather than later. The only question for them was how willing was the West to cave and give Iran what it wanted which was a preservation of its enriching and refining capacity in order to continue the development of a nuclear device?

Given the relative paucity of any positive news on the foreign policy front with radical Islamist attacks in Canada, Australia and France and the brutal beheadings and burnings by ISIS and the collapse of Yemen and chaos in Libya and Nigeria, it is reasonable to assume the West might very well give in for even the merest glimmer of deal.

For historians, the parallels to Munich and British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s fateful meeting with Adolf Hitler where he essentially gave Czechoslovakia away to Nazi Germany in 1938 in order to hold up a piece of paper upon his returning declaring “Peace in our time” to what is happening in Munich this weekend is striking and deeply disturbing.

Just as appeasement of a brutal dictator by the West did not work and instead accelerated the start of World War II, the same appeasement of Iran by the West today will only inevitably lead to a dangerous reckoning down the road.

George Santayana, the noted philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist, famously wrote in The Life of Reason in 1905:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

A powerful and insightful comment Secretary Kerry would be wise to remember while in Munich.

By Michael Tomlinson

When is a Deadline Not a Deadline?

by

Buyer RemorseA curious thing happened to the powerful lobbying machine working tirelessly around the clock to halt the re-imposition of economic sanctions by a bi-partisan coalition of Senate Democrats and Republicans last week who felt after two earlier rounds of talks failed the current third round was going nowhere fast as well.

Iranian regime’s sympathizers rejoiced at the agreement by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) to postpone action until March 24th and give the Obama administration two additional months to demonstrate there had been meaningful progress towards a verifiable deal agreeable to Congress. Led by the National Iranian American Council, they boasted of the “win” and what it portended for the future of a nuclear agreement.

But in the span of two weeks, these same Iranian loyalists are now suddenly crying foul over the two month delay, now contending all it did was move the original deadline up for a deal from the June 30th deadline agreed to by the P5+1 group negotiating with Iran to March 24th. In essence, the “win” shaved three months instead of gaining two months.

There is nothing quite like patting yourself on the back as a winner only to realize you were an idiot.

Trita Parsi, the NIAC’s head cheerleader, said in comments to Al-Monitor’s Laura Rozen, herself a dedicated Iranian regime fan, that “Treating the March ‘interim deadline as the final deadline is highly problematic.’”

Parsi’s comments are almost comic after the NIAC statement two weeks ago in the wake of the Senate’s action which said in part:

“This is a significant victory for those of us who have worked to support a diplomatic agreement, not a war, with Iran. We commend everyone who has worked to stop the diplomacy-killing sanctions bill.”

It seems the NIAC is having a case of buyer’s remorse.

While it seems the vaunted Iranian lobbying machine may have shot itself in the foot, the truth of the matter is that they have not really lost time. In fact, one could argue Iran has already gained two years since the first round of talks collapsed in failure and were kept on a respirator through another failed round of talks last November.

In fact, American public opinion had swung solidly in favor of action against the unprecedented growth in radical Islamic terror around the world as epitomized by the ISIS video depicting the horrific death of Jordan’s pilot by fire, which was simply the straw breaking the camel’s back, forcing Senators to act.

This is the essential point Iran’s cadre of supporters are frankly scared witless about; the sanctions ship has already sailed in large part because mullahs in Iran have already had three years to make good on any substantial deal.

But in that time, Iran has poured vast resources of arms, fighters and cash into terrorist activities. It has helped Hezbollah as it fought in Syria, Iraq as it took over that country’s military, orchestrated the total collapse of Yemen and allowed ISIS to spring forth just on the foreign policy front.

At home, Iran has publicly executed over a 1,200 men and women, cracked down on Internet access, blocked social media, arrested and imprisoned political dissidents, journalists, ethnic and religious minorities and even American citizens.

The fact that a delay to March 24th was granted is quite probably the last shred of hope the Iranian lobby is likely to receive. The fact they are now crying over it is more a testament to their own inadequacies than anything else.

To paraphrase from singer Bryan Adam’s 1981 landmark second album, I would say to the Iranian lobby: “You wanted it, you got it. Now live with it.”

By Michael Tomlinson

It’s About the Humanity Stupid

by

HumanityDuring President Bill Clinton’s campaign, his manager James Carville coined the now famous phrase “It’s the economy stupid” when deciding on the campaign’s key themes. It proved to be simple, powerful and ultimately successful.

Today we are faced with a variation of that theme with the fast-moving developments occurring on two fronts: the rapid growth of ISIS and the ongoing talks with Iran on nuclear weapons.

In both cases, the nature of the public debate and discussion about each has moved to almost polar opposites for these two issues. On the one hand, ISIS is generating a visceral, deep emotional horror as the world watches video after video revealing beheadings and now burnings. ISIS is attempting and succeeding in forcing an almost gag-like reflex at the barbarity and cruelty it is displaying. ISIS has few if any supporters outside of the few radicalized state sponsors of terror and rival terror groups.

In contrast, the ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear weapons program have begun to take on a more technical, dry and almost boring aura. Discussions over centrifuges, enrichment capability, stockpiles of fuel and their purity are topics sometimes more avidly discussed in college physics courses than on late night talk shows. Iran also employs a vast and well-funded lobbying and PR machine that encompasses public interest groups, public relations firms, high-priced lobbyists, columnists and journalists and the occasional ex-public official.

But in weighing the importance of the two issues, there is no greater threat to the stability and peace on a global stage than mullah’s regime in Iran and its quest for a nuclear weapon; which brings me back to Carville’s turn of phrase.

The debate and discussion about Iran’s nuclear weapons program needs a literary jump start and the lexicon of humanity needs to be re-injected back into the issue. Iran has worked mightily to keep any link to its dismal human rights record or sponsorship of terrorist groups from being attached to ongoing nuclear talks. Iran’s mullahs have sought and succeeded to some degree in keeping the discussion as dry as the desert sands.

But these talks do need the context of the impacts Iran is having on the rest of the world in order for the P5+1 group of nations to gain a greater understanding of exactly who sits across the table from them. The difficulty is that after two previous failed rounds of talks and almost three years of unrelenting compromise from the Iranian side, any sane and normal person might be feeling a bit exhausted by this exercise.

The political pressure the Obama administration is under to deliver a foreign policy win of any kind has pushed the talks forward into giving Iran access to over $11 billion in frozen assets for few if any meaningful concessions. The West, in large part, has lost the language battle by no longer including terms such as “human rights,” “political dissidents,” “public executions” or “terror sponsorship” as part of the discussions.

Secretary of State John Kerry briefly introduced a fig leaf when he brought up the plight of imprisoned Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian, but that brought little result and still leaves unmentioned the plight of literally thousands that are imprisoned by Iran, including other American citizens.

What has also been notable is the lack of vocabulary amongst Iran’s supporters over the increasing levels of barbarity and violence coming from ISIS. Aside from a statement from the Iranian government, there has been no similar reaction from Iran loyalists such as the National Iranian American Council or their affiliates.

The very absence of any humane commentary illuminates what is missing from any dialogue concerning Iran. It is also the key issue that leaves many Senators on both sides of the political aisle uneasy about any deal negotiated with Iran. Can the U.S. trust a regime whose concepts of human rights and fair and equal treatment of its own people are as foreign to us and ISIS seems to be from the rest of humanity?

Ultimately Congress has marked a red line in the sand in which any deal reached by the P5+1 must be reviewed by Congress and meet with its approval. Senators recognize giving mullahs in Iran a deal providing even the smallest wiggle room to push a nuclear warhead through would forever change the outlook not only for the region, but the rest of the world. Iran is no North Korea. It has proven oil reserves giving it access to all the military technology capability it needs to build and deliver a nuclear weapon.

When negotiators next sit down with their Iranian counterparts, they should be telling themselves “It’s about the humanity stupid.”

By Laura Carnahan

ISIS New Low and the Change It Brings

by

Jordan PilotThe world watched in horror yesterday as the terror group ISIS broadcast video of its execution of Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kassasbeth by burning him alive in a cage and then burying him with a bulldozer. The imagery was graphic, searing into the international consciousness a new level of revulsion that even surpassed the beheadings ISIS had delivered earlier with regularity.

But what happened in the 24 hours following al-Kassabeth’s death was more revealing of where exactly the world stands in the face of such unremitting brutality. Jordan acted swiftly, executing two prisoners it had in its custody with a promise from official sources of swift and harsh response and retribution.

Japan and Great Britain joined in solidarity as did many other nations who have had nationals at risk or killed by ISIS during its rampage across Iraq and Syria. The death was so shocking and in contradiction to Islamic practices which forbid cremation that other moderate Muslim nations quickly expressed their own revulsion at this act.

Predictably, Iranian regime was not one of those nations and gave a formal condemnation with notable delay almost a day after the international outrage about the crime. Its supporters in the U.S. were even more quiescent; not even offering a simple tweet of revulsion at the act. In fact, in the case of Iran’s chief lobbying ally, the National Iranian American Council, there were no public statements. Its leading official, Trita Parsi made only one mention of the incident before launching into tweets criticizing Jordan’s King Hussein.

The rest of Iran’s supporters and sympathizers ranging from Ali Gharib to others were similarly silent on any condemnation of the brutal act. It does foster the question of why?

One could assume that it does not serve Iran’s interest to condemn ISIS since its intervention in Syria’s civil war on behalf of President Bashar al-Assad is in large part responsible for the growth of ISIS in the first place. But why would U.S.-based groups, sympathetic to Iran, such as NIAC simply not join the vocal outrage over this death? What would it cost them to send out a single tweet saying this was “gross” or “horrible” or even “tragic”?

But none of those things occurred and we are left with a better understanding of the true nature of Iran’s support network. Its sole aim and mission is to represent the interests of Iran here and most importantly to lobby hard against any re-imposition of economic sanctions during the ongoing third round of negotiations with the P5+1.

In contrast though to the NIAC has been the vocal condemnation sent out by Iranian resistance groups, most notably the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Its denouncement by Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, a woman at the head of a leading Muslim organization, is noteworthy because it forcefully takes a stand other Muslim groups do not and joins with the broader global outrage over the event.

Therein lays another odd quirk of the Iranian regime’s obsessive interest in fabricating regular attacks on the NCRI. Even with the world debating this violent act, the Iranian lobby spends considerable energy posting editorials attacking NCRI.

Why?

Because the mere existence of a group of Iranians dedicated to opposing the mullahs regime is anathema to them and puts a spotlight on the lie they perpetuate that all of Iran is united behind their rule. It is the most glaring blind spot mullahs ruling Iran have and a constant reminder to them of the essential weakness of their position in nuclear talks.

At the end of the day, Iran’s mullahs cannot be trusted and that is at the heart of why both Senate Democrats and Republicans are more than willing to toe the line and impose sanctions on March 24th should Iran not deliver a substantial and meaningful agreement to their liking.

The intelligence uncovered by the NCRI on human rights abuses and covert nuclear research sites has been instrumental in revealing the deceit of the regime and the mere fact they cannot recognize the barbarity of the death of al-Kassasbeth adds to the damning truth that Iran tacitly approves of what happened.

By Michael Tomlinson

The Irony that is Iran

by

Trita Parsi Earplug (1)That ever loyal servant of the Iranian regime, Trita Parsi of the National Iranian American Council, penned an editorial appearing in Reuters where he used a curious turn of phrase saying there were schools of “doubt” in Iran as to who was calling the policy shots in the U.S. He was pointing out a view that held Iran’s mullahs either believed President Obama was genuinely interested in a new rapprochement or was simply being captive to the politics of Congress.

Parsi attempts to lay out the idea that Iran is stuck between a rock and a hard place because it wants to do the best deal it can, but has to contend with confusing American politics.

For Parsi’s benefit, we should point out it is because this is a democracy. Get it?

Democracies are messy affairs. They involve open and sometimes hostile public debate. They require free and fair elections. They generate substantial discussion on news media and social media. They need checks and balances to ensure the rights of minorities are respected. In short, they do all the things Iran’s mullahs are terrified of in their own country.

Parsi also attempts to posit the idea that sanctions against Iran are fast coming undone because of a recent delay proposed by Senate Democrats to give President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry an additional two months to nudge Iran forward. Considering Iran has already had two years to stall, demand and berate negotiators, two months doesn’t seem like much.

Democrats, led by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) were also clear in demanding any deal be reviewed by Congress and that they would hold any proposal under close scrutiny in meeting their approval. Not exactly a Rose Garden walk-through for Iran, but then again Parsi will take anything. So desperate is Iran to gain any advantage, it would take even this twig and portray it as an olive tree.

Parsi goes on to portray the complete erosion of Democratic support for new sanctions, but the irony is that the Democratic and Republican proposal is not for the imposition of new sanctions, but simply the re-imposition of existing sanctions that were temporarily suspended after the interim agreement was reached and contingent on Iranian regime making substantial progress forward.

Since then, however Iran’s progress has been as quick as a snail and as noticeable as glaciers growing larger. The regime in Iran has consistently refused access to additional nuclear research sites to the International Atomic Energy Agency. It has stepped up a brutal crackdown on human rights against its own citizens. It has engaged in four separate wars in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan now, while still supporting terror groups such as Hezbollah.

At no point has the regime in Iran made any substantial concessions on the core issues of reduction in centrifuge capacity and elimination of missile delivery technology obtained from North Korea, another rogue nuclear state.

With the spread of ISIS and Boko Haram and utter collapse of Yemen, the American people have raised concerns over terror above those of jobs and economy in recent polls. This leads one to wonder why Parsi takes the position that sanctions proponents are now on the margins in this debate.

We might excuse his hyperbole for the simple fact NIAC is a well-greased lackey for the mullahs in Iran, but considering the topic of his editorial, we might be more inclined to think Parsi shares the confusion of the mullahs in simply not understanding how a democratic society truly works.

While Parsi raises his histrionics, the fact remains Congress and a bipartisan coalition of Democrats and Republications numbering at least 62 Senators with an additional 14 patiently waiting two more months before pulling the proverbial trigger on sanctions are more than sufficient to re-impose sanctions and override any presidential veto. We assume Parsi is an intelligent operative for mullahs in Iran and can count votes, which may be why he is throwing everything he can in hopes something sticks before March 24th.

By Michael Tomlinson

Why Human Rights Matter in Iran Nuke Talks

by

Prison BarsThere has been a dirty little secret about the negotiations going on between Iran and the P5+1 group of nations seeking to limit Iran’s nuclear capability. It has hung like a cloud over two previous rounds of failed talks over the past years and threatens the third round of talks now underway.

What is it? The unwillingness of the P5+1 group to seriously raise the issue of Iran’s dismal human rights record and the need to make steep improvements in order for Iran to secure any kind of agreement.

For years now Iran’s ruling mullahs and their lobbying and PR machine in Washington, DC have argued strenuously that human rights issues are domestic ones and have no place at the bargaining table. In fact, the chief public face for Iran in the U.S., the National Iranian American Council has made the inclusion of human rights in talks a de facto red line in the sand, akin to asking mullahs in Iran to give up its military capabilities.

It is an odd position to be in since the U.S. has historically pushed for improved human rights situations as a condition of moving forward with international treaties and agreements with totalitarian regimes for decades. For example:

• The U.S. threatened to hold up China’s membership in the World Trade Organization if it did not improve its human rights situation in the wake of the Tiananmen Square massacre;
• The U.S. threatened to hold back on the North American Free Trade Agreement unless Mexico improved the plight of migrant workers and narco-terror gangs; and

So it is not unusual or inappropriate to broach such topics. In fact, Secretary of State John Kerry just recently raised the issue of the arrest of Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian during the most recent round of talks, opening the door to a broader discussion of Iran’s human rights violations.

Iran and its lobbying allies have long contended that talks should be strictly centered on the issue of nuclear research and development, but even that position is a canard since Iran routinely seeks to tie other issues to the talks such as the immediate suspension of economic sanctions or the release of frozen assets.

Why are human rights important to these talks?

Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David Cohen, the Treasury Department’s outgoing point man on Iran sanctions, said in this weekend’s Wall Street Journal that Iran was “stuck. They can’t fix this economy unless they get sanctions relief.” Adding “I think they are coming to the negotiations with their backs to the wall.”

A hopeful sign, but also one that reinforces the historic opportunity the West has to seek real and meaningful change in Iran for the Iranian people. In the past year under Hassan Rouhani, there has been a significant rise in a broad crackdown on political dissent, cultural expression, gender restrictions and access to uncensored information and sources.

According to Amnesty International, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Iran and various human rights groups on the ground such as the National Council of Resistance of Iran, public executions have taken off over the past year and reached over 1,000 men and women. Iranian regime’s notorious Evin Prison is now filled to capacity and the mullahs continues to aggressively fund terror groups such as Hezbollah and Houthis and engage in open wars in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Yemen.

More importantly, a nation’s view on human rights towards its own people is the most accurate gauge of its views on its neighbors and the world. By not involving human rights in these discussions, we leave out the one element that could truly make the West trust any agreement reached with Iran. Without a marked improvement in human rights, there can be no guarantees or assurances that Iran would ever live up to whatever bargain it brokered out of economic necessity and not from a worldview that it was right or a moral decision.

By Michael Tomlinson

Super Bowl Sunday and Iran

by

FootballAn estimated 184 million people will be noshing on guacamole, hot wings and downing beverages of all kinds on Super Bowl Sunday. They will be gathering in bars, house parties, military bases and casino sportsbooks to watch what is arguably one of the best demonstrations of American cultural and commercial celebration.

People will flood Twitter with comments about the game, the commercials and results. Instagram and SnapChat will distribute millions of photos and videos from fans. Facebook, Tumblr and reddit will host endless debates about the plays and outcome. Satellite dishes, cable modems and WiFi signals will beam it all.

Unfortunately, the people of Iran won’t have the same options and choices available to them.

They live in a regime ruled by a cabal of religious mullahs whose interpretation of God’s will defines the choices and punishments their people face.

Satellite dishes are routinely ripped from rooftops to keep Iranians from watching news programs unfiltered by Iranian officials. The internet is routinely monitored to capture IP addresses of Iranians viewing “inappropriate” or opposition websites. Iranians using proxy servers to get around the regime’s Great Wall blocking unapproved websites may find police knocking their doors down to confiscate computers and sending them off to Evin Prison.

Iranians don’t have access to most of the social media websites Americans take for granted. They can’t express their feelings, or share their joys or frustrations, let alone their criticisms of the government. Even kids who want to share a mash up video lip synching to a popular song are routinely arrested.

While Americans are enjoying a growing economy and experiencing an unexpected windfall in lower gas prices, Iranians suffer through chronic food shortages and bleak economic opportunities as the mullahs siphons off billions of dollars to fund terror groups such as Hezbollah fighting in faraway places such as Lebanon, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Syria.

Americans are expected to spend a whopping $14.3 billion on new high definition TVs, athletic gear, decorations and game day food. Iranians won’t see any of the anticipated $11 billion being released by the U.S. as part of the interim nuclear agreement; those funds going to pay for ongoing nuclear development, missile technology from North Korea and funding for the lavish lifestyles enjoyed by the families of the mullahs and those in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.

In America, politicians decry the widening gap between the rich and poor, but in Iran, any public protest or outcry about the plight of ordinary Iranians and the money going to the elite and powerful yields arrests, imprisonment and even a public hanging.

You won’t hear any calls for reforms in Iran or help for ordinary Iranians from the extensive lobbying and PR network Iran employs in the U.S. Groups such as the National Iranian American Council are not concerned about such things. They prefer the West not hear video testimonials, see selfies from anguished Iranians. They prefer our Super Bowl Sunday isn’t disturbed Facebook posts or Tumblr blogs talking about the sad state of affairs in Iran.

While Americans bask in the glow of their freedoms and bounty, Iranians struggle under the yoke of oppression. Many in the U.S. Congress have heard and seen their suffering and have pushed the Obama Administration hard to hold Iran’s leaders accountable for the plight of their people; both Democrats and Republicans.

In a political environment where Americans can’t seem to agree on Seahawks or Patriots, there is common agreement that Iran needs to be free and democratic.

It would be a great outcome if we could simply line up on a football field to decide the fate of Iran and not worry about the dangers from the Iranian regime due to terrorism, nukes and foreign battlefields.

By Laura Carnahan

Learning the NIAC Two-Step

by

Two Step ChartWhile the cheerleaders for the current Iranian regime at the National Iranian American Council are busy congratulating themselves on a two month extension on the immediate re-imposition of economic sanctions temporarily suspended because of an interim agreement reached last year by the P5+1 nations and Iran, the Senate Banking Committee by a wide bipartisan 18-4 margin passed out a bill over its first procedural hurdle to set the stage for a showdown vote in March on re-imposing sanctions.

It must not be too reassuring to the NIAC and its Iranian overlords to see this bill pass by such a large margin, nor coming on the heels of what they had hoped would be a pause long enough to allow Iran time to bamboozle the administration into accepting a “framework” by March in order to buy more time until July before having the entire negotiating process collapse again as it has done twice before.

NIAC’s Jamal Abdi in fact, in a piece published on the group’s website, breathlessly recounted the blow by blow narrative of how this two-month sanctions pause was achieved; and of course all because of the NIAC’s massive lobbying effort on behalf of Iran. Mine you, on behalf of Iran’s mullahs and not Iranian Americans, but that’s for another day’s editorial.

What he neglected to mention and what has been widely credited by virtually every political commentator and analyst, including Senate Democrats themselves such as Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), as being the key influencing factor on the delay was Speaker John Boehner’s move to invite Israeli Prime Minister to address a joint session of Congress on Iran and its nuclear weapons program.

For many Democrats, the move smacked of overt politics and stiffened their resolve, but even that was not enough to move them totally off the sanctions bandwagon. All it did was keep alive the central piece of legislation and move the action date from February to March.

The one thing both Democrats and Republicans readily agree on is that the regime in Iran should not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon…period. Both sides of the aisle also agree sanctions should be re-instated broadly and harshly if mullahs in Iran do not deliver a deal agreeable to Congressional review.

So while the NIAC chortle in public, privately they know they are swimming against the tide of sentiment; a sentiment that will inevitably grow stronger as the clock resets and again counts down to March 24 with another round of scrutiny growing day by day with more and more pressure being applied to Senators by a nervous public watching the nightly news of ISIS, Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda and Taliban advances.

So while the NIAC, Al Jazeera and the Obama administration may have excised “Islamic extremism” from their daily use, it has not escaped the attention of Americans who in recent polls have placed concerns about terrorism above even the economy and jobs.

All of which is bad news for mullahs in Iran and its supporters as they try to learn new dance steps.

By Michael Tomlinson

The Curious Thing About NIAC

by

NIAC Word CloudDuring the past few weeks, the leading cheerleader for Iran has been the National Iranian American Council. A curious institution in that its mission statement discusses the need to bridge cultural understanding and empowerment of Iranians living in America, but instead it fills its websites, blogs, Twitter feeds, YouTube channels and other social media feeds with a relentless stream of vocal support for the Iranian regime; sometimes bordering on the hysterical.

It is an odd position to take since while the NIAC is ostensibly here to support IranianAmericans, it spends almost its entire bandwidth on issues related to Iran and more specifically the policies of the Iranian government.

Why?

As documented throughout this website, the NIAC has a nefarious history of being supported by the Iranian regime itself and was created to help bolster Iran’s positions within the American media, Congress and various non-governmental organizations. Most of NIAC’s internal workings were revealed through a defamation lawsuit that NIAC eventually lost and in the process was forced to reveal its connections to the Iranian regime.

But a more scientific and entirely more interesting social media look at NIAC reveals a similar commitment to Iran without any attention to the pressing issues the vast majority of Americans and Congressional Representatives and Senators are interested in.

By using a word cloud generator through NIAC’s own RSS feeds, we gain some insights through NIAC’s own words what its priorities are. At a time when ISIS is exercising brutal murders on video and Boko Haram is rampaging across Nigeria and Yemen is collapsing, while Iraq and Syria are gripped tighter by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, NIAC’s word cloud is amazingly devoid of any of these issues.

In fact, even a casual perusal of the Twitter feeds of NIAC’s leaders such as TritaParsi, Tyler Cullis, Reza Marashi, Jamal Abdi and Ryan Costello for example reveals virtually no mention of human rights, terrorism, radicalization, extremists, or anything remotely connected to what is happening in the real world.

In fact, NIAC and its employees and supporters seem to be gripped with the same linguistic disease afflicting members of the Obama Administration; the inability to utter words like those related to the despicable activities being perpetrated by Iran and its terrorist allies.

If we look at a word cloud for NIAC, we see ample use of words such as “Menendez,” “Washington,” “Sanctions,” and “Senate” but nothing about “human rights,” “terror,” “abuse” or even “women.” An odd scenario for an organization supposedly dedicated to the plight of Iranian Americans, and yet American Iranians remained imprisoned in Iran and await an uncertain fate. None of their names get mentioned by NIAC even though they are the ones the NIAC is supposedly championing their causes.

This all leads us to the basic truth about NIAC: It is nothing more than a mouthpiece for Iranian government policy and should be treated within the same context as official Iranian news organizations. There is no perspective within their pronouncements except those approved by the Iranian government.

In a way, it is a tragic development since there is a strong need for a passionate and loud voice on behalf of Iranian Americans here at home who pine for a return of their homeland to a pluralistic democracy, free from religious edicts and censorship, where women and people of differing faiths are free to pursue bright and promising futures. NIAC is indeed far away from that.

By Laura Carnahan