Iran Lobby

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

Iran Lobby Wrong on Nuclear Deal Stabilizing Region

by

Parsi-and-FitzpatrickOne of the more extraordinary leaps of logic being propagated by the Iran lobby is that a completed nuclear agreement between the Iran regime and the P5+1 group of nations would help stabilize the Middle East and allow the U.S. to refocus and rebalance on more urgent matters. This flight of fancy was espoused by Mark Fitzpatrick, the director of the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), and Trita Parsi, president of the regime’s chief cheerleading squad at the National Iranian American Council.

The claim being made by the two was that the U.S. could work with Iran’s mullahs on issues such as anti-narcotics trafficking, poverty alleviation, female empowerment and halting the spread of the Islamic State.

Now let’s think about that for a moment. They are contending that a regime with some of the highest narcotics addiction rates in the world and one of the largest traffickers in illicit drugs is somehow going to be a force for change in drugs?

They are contending that a regime with an economy in the tank due to the funding of three proxy wars Syria, Iraq and Yemen and terror groups such as Hezbollah and Shiite militias is somehow going to fight poverty? Especially when it ranks as one of the most corrupt places to do business with regime elites and mullahs’ families skimming off the top everywhere?

They are contending that a regime that empowers the Basij paramilitary to enforce strict adherence to Sharia laws such as prohibitions on women driving alone or holding hands in public by beating them and throwing acid on their faces is best equipped to empower women? Let’s not forget recent passage of laws allowing for child marriages as young as 14 years old and misogynist policies such as allowing fathers to marry their stepdaughters.

And they are contending that Iran can halt the spread of ISIS when it was its own policies that gave birth to ISIS by intervening in Syria and pouring billions of dollars in arms and fighters to prop up Assad and allow Syrian forces to drive out moderate rebel forces and encourage the rapid rise of extremist terror groups to form ISIS.

One would have to be a dolt to think these two have come up with a magic elixir to solve all the problems of the Middle East by granting Iran a deal enriching it with billions of dollars while allowing it to continue development of nuclear weapons without inspection of its military sites.

Iran’s chief rival, Saudi Arabia, has already taken dramatic steps to counter Iranian moves by securing a nuclear development deal of its own with South Korea and an air campaign aimed at defeating Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

How does any of this provide a sense of stability and security in the Middle East when Iran’s actions lie at the heart of some of the greatest human misery and suffering now being felt on the planet today?

Let’s not even mention Iran’s abhorrent human rights record which has been widely and loudly condemned by Amnesty International and the UN Special Rapporteur Ahmed Shaheed, who is mandated by the UN Human Rights Council to monitor and report on the situation in Iran.

It’s a farcical proposition by Parsi and Fitzpatrick, but nothing new with only two weeks left before the self-imposed June 30th deadline for a nuclear agreement as they step up the Iran lobby’s efforts to sell even the most threadbare of Persian carpet ideas.

By Michael Tomlinson

The Importance of Linking Iran Sanctions and Human Rights

by

Bijan Khajehpour

Bijan Khajehpour

Sens. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ) have put forward an amendment to the defense budget that would extend congressional sanctions against the Iran regime for 10 additional years. The amendment is aimed at extending the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996, currently set to expire at the end of 2016, to the end of 2026.

The amendment is an important step in resetting the expectations associated with the Iran regime’s nuclear weapons program because it links it to the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles and human rights abuses; a significant step towards properly addressing the central issues with the regime’s conduct towards the world.

The regime’s chief cheerleaders, the National Iranian American Council, predictably were quick to denounce the legislation, warning that passage of the bill would derail ongoing negotiations. The NIAC’s statement was noteworthy for a few things, namely that it placed the burden of completion of a deal on the U.S. and not the regime.

“There are legitimate questions about whether the U.S. will be able to deliver on the terms for sanctions relief under a nuclear deal, and the passage of this amendment would give credence to those concerns,” the NIAC statement said.

It is a remarkable sentence because it firmly ignores the chief obstacle to any agreement between the West and Iran, which is Iran’s historic inability to live up to any of its international agreements. As recently as last month, Iran has steadfastly refused to answer outstanding questions from the International Atomic Energy Agency about the “possible military dimensions” of its nuclear program.

On top of that omission are repeated comments by Iran’s top mullah, Ali Khamenei, who has reiterated publicly his opposition to allowing access to any Iranian military facility or Iranian nuclear scientists by international inspectors.

This follows continued denials by Iran that it is involved in proxy wars being waged in Syria and Yemen, not to mention its control of Shiite militias in Iraq that are now being accused of reprisal sectarian killings against Sunni Muslim villagers, all of which points to a disturbing and repeated pattern of deception, denial and distrust.

The action by Senators Kirk and Menendez comes after passage of legislation signed by President Obama and over the vigorous objections of NIAC authorizing congressional review of any nuclear agreement reached with Iran.

This latest bill from Kirk and Menendez addresses a glaring hole in current negotiations, which is the failure of negotiators to hold Iran’s human rights conduct accountable, as well as including the regime’s capacity to deliver a nuclear weapon well outside their neighborhood and threaten Europe and Asia.

The NIAC and the rest of the Iran lobby have fought hard to keep these things out of negotiations because they know full well their inclusion would almost certainly doom Iran’s hopes of securing a deal and lift economic sanctions and flood the regime with billions in new cash and investment.

The proposed amendment is not a deal breaker for the West as much as it is a safety clause assuring the West does not deliver a bad deal that could come back to haunt them.

By Michael Tomlinson

 

Iran Regime Dangling Dangerous Dollars

by

Delusional Trita ParsiWith the June 30 deadline looming for the third round of nuclear talks between the P5+1 group of nations and the Iran regime, the news media have picked up steam in discussing the possibility of foreign companies jockeying for position in investing in Iran once a deal is completed.

But in the immortal words of Greek fabulist Aesop “do not count your chickens before they are hatched.” More than a cliché, they are prudent and appropriate words for any companies looking to take advantage of a newly opened market in Iran.

USA Today ran a story looking at visiting business delegations streaming into Tehran, all with an eye towards the completion of these talks and a signing of a deal. The vast majority of these companies are European with only a few American firms kicking the tires of an open Iranian market.

“Even if all sanctions are lifted, there will still be blacklists of Iranian companies that Western companies should avoid,” said Bijan Khajehpour of Atieh International, a consulting firm in Vienna that works to bring companies into the Iranian market. “Assets in the economy controlled by the semi-state organizations are gradually approaching the size of government.”

But Khajehpour is wrong when he says that “developing Iran’s economy will lead to greater peace, political reform and moderation by its revolutionary government” because Khajehpour has a long record of associating with supporters and lobbyists of the Iran regime, including Trita Parsi of the National Iranian American Council, in efforts to direct companies and investment into Iran.

Khajehpour and his firm – co-founded with his wife Pari Namazi who is the sister of Siamak Namazi a close confidante of Parsi – have been boldly supportive of the regime in advocating for the lifting of economic sanctions by working to steer greater interest by foreign companies in Iran. The effort is designed to create a fait accompli and build global momentum towards the “inevitability” of a nuclear deal.

While the potential size of the Iranian market is significant with 81 million people, the obstacles are daunting irrespective of what happens at the negotiating table in Switzerland. For one thing, Iran ranks in the top 40 of most corrupt nations according to Transparency International; listed at 136, tied with Nigeria and Cameroon, with corruption running rampant throughout Iran’s government with much of the nation’s wealth diverted to the mullahs who control the country and their families.

Another facet of this corruption is the shell-company ownership of vast sectors of the Iranian economy by quasi-governmental entities such as Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps military which controls nearly a tenth of the entire nation’s economy by some estimates.  The IRGC has made no bones about its desire to see a completed nuclear deal because of the vast wealth that would be pumped into its coffers at a crucial time when it has expended billions of dollars in propping up the Syrian regime, Shiite militias in Iraq and Houthi rebels in Yemen.

The IRGC also recognizes that unless it can secure a deal and have foreign investment flow back in, disaffected Iranians suffering under the mismanagement and general ineptness of the mullahs might very well choose regime change in order to get their Apple iPhones and McDonald’s Big Macs.

The true scope of the conundrum facing Western companies revolves around the central idea of why would you want to invest billions in a corrupt regime who’s very actions might turn all those billions into lost assets in the likelihood that Iran’s mullahs continue their nuclear development in secret as they did before?

Every public hanging, arrest of a religious minority, acid attack on a woman, or assault by Shiite militia poisons the well so to speak and makes it untenable for any politician to give the mullahs what they want, especially in an election cycle.

By Michael Tomlinson

The False Choices of the Iran Lobby

by

War and PeaceAs we enter the Memorial Day holiday weekend, families will gather for barbecues and picnics and others will gather to remember those who have fallen in past conflicts and made the ultimate sacrifice for their nation. But Memorial Day should also be a day to commemorate those who didn’t put on a uniform, but still had to make the same sacrifices and their families had to pay that ultimate price.

It is an unfortunate legacy of the world we live in today that innocent men, women and children often have to bear the same price as those who are trained and volunteer to fight. Throughout the Middle East, that scenario is being played out on countless battlefields, in numerous villages, towns and cities in places such as Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Nigeria and Afghanistan.

But even cities and nations unaccustomed to fighting have been places of terror and carnage such as an office in Paris, a store in Sydney or a government building in Canada. All at the hands of extremist Islamists who have copied their playbook of terror from the Iran regime which has had a 30 year head start on terror spectacles and continues to this day with almost daily public hangings in most city squares.

So this Memorial Day ought to serve as a sobering reminder not just of the sacrifices service personnel make, but for those innocents who have been caught in the escalating violence around the world.

All of which makes the choices offered by the Iran lobby in regards to ongoing nuclear talks with the Iran regime all the more odd since supporters such as the National Iranian American Council have consistently framed the choices in a nuclear agreement as stark ones between war and peace. Their hyperbole clouds the real issue driving the mullahs in Iran and for them the choices are not about war and peace.

It’s really about cash and lots of it. Iran’s economy is reeling under the triple blows of corrupt mismanagement by the ruling elites, spiraling oil prices and the heavy costs associated with funding proxy wars and terror groups in Yemen, Iraq and Syria. Not to mention the billions of dollars being spent by the regime in building and maintaining a far flung network of installations and research facilities dedicated to developing nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles necessary to carry them.

That need for billions of dollars in unfrozen assets, proceeds from oil sales and renewed capital investment is what drives the mullahs. They hunger for cash in the same way an addict craves his next drug fix. It is also why Iran’s top mullah, Ali Khamenei, has consistently demanded a complete lifting of all economic sanctions at once, including those levied by the UN Security Council, European Union and the U.S. Congress and president.

And that is the quandary facing the NIAC and other regime lobbyists; how do we sell a nuclear deal driving by a need for a financial bailout of Tehran? In classic spin control, they opt to frame the debate as a choice between war and peace.

They recognize that America is war weary and that voters have little appetite for more American blood to be shed, but the choice for Americans and by extension for Congress and the Obama administration is that the choice really is not between war and peace. It’s about whether or not to let mullahs in Iran get the cash they want and so desperately need.

Economic sanctions work. They brought the mullahs to the negotiating table and they are still the most compelling non-violent tool available to the International community. To abandon them without a solid deal that not only cuts Iranian regime’s nuclear program off at the knees, but also modifies its behavior towards proxy wars, terror groups and human rights is dumb and a mistake of historic proportions.

For when we gather to commemorate and celebrate Memorial Day weekend, we should remember that the surest path to peace is not through appeasement, but through strength; strength of conviction, strength of commitment and strength of will.

I hope your Memorial Day is a peaceful one.

By Michael Tomlinson

Iran-Nuclear Talks Going Nowhere Fast

by

 

Khamenei Military SpeechPity the supporters and cheerleaders of the Iran regime such as Trita Parsi of the National Iranian American Council. They have all but shouted themselves blue to the highest mountains that Iran’s mullahs were indeed ready for a sea change in their relationship with the world. They argued that Hassan Rouhani was a new kind of moderate Iranian politician. They urged President Obama to embrace dialogue as the surest path to peace.

Those claims have been undone in large part through Iran’s own actions including the overthrow of the Yemen government, provocative acts in international waters, the decision to move forward with spy trials of American journalists and the continued crackdown at home including stepped up public executions and packing its prisons like sardine cans.

But out of the mouth of the regime’s top leader, Ali Khamenei, comes the most damaging statements to the credibility of the Iran lobbying allies.

In a speech at the Imam Hussein Military University in Tehran yesterday, Khamenei again denounced what he said were escalating demands by the P5+1 negotiating group and flatly declared any interviews of Iranian nuclear scientists by international inspectors to be completely off the table, as well as not allowing inspections of any of Iran’s military sites.

This follows similar statements he made last summer when Khamenei vowed to greatly expand Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity, scaling up to industrial size with 190,000 centrifuges, 10 times the number currently installed.

Not surprisingly, the regime still has not responded to a dozen questions from the International Atomic Energy Agency on the scope and scale of the possible military dimensions of its current nuclear program, leading to the agency’s head declaring serious doubt about Iran’s ability to live up to any agreement.

As the New York Times described, the inability to interview Iranian nuclear scientists makes compliance a moot point.

“Central to that is the ability to interview nuclear scientists, starting with Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the man considered by Western intelligence officials to be the closest thing Iran has to J. Robert Oppenheimer, who guided the Manhattan Project to develop the world’s first nuclear weapon,” the Times said.

“The scientists and engineers Fakhrizadeh has assembled over the past 15 years are best suited to explain, or rebut, documents suggesting that Iran has extensively researched warheads, nuclear ignition systems and related technologies. Fakhrizadeh has never been made available to inspectors for interviews, and his network of laboratories, some on university campuses, have not been part of inspections,” added the Times.

Even more surprising were statements made by France’s foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, who unveiled details about the current state of nuclear talks in advance of the June 30 deadline currently taking place in Switzerland, where the Iran regime demanded a 24-day period before international inspectors could visit any of its nuclear sites in the event of a suspected violation.

It is absurd that Iran regime could get over three weeks to cover up or clean out any suspected violation before allowing any inspectors in. It makes a mockery of the P5+1 promise of “anytime, anywhere” inspections as part of the framework agreement previously announced.

Unsurprisingly, Trita Parsi and the rest of the Iran lobby have been as silent as fence posts during all this, probably realizing any comments they make in the face of such explicit statements from the one man in the regime in Iran who has the final say over an agreement would be worthless.

By Michael Tomlinson

Shrinking Hopes of the Iran Regime

by

Shrinking Man (1)The Iran regime continues to suffer reversals on several fronts as it becomes increasingly clear it has overreached in supporting proxy wars and acting as an international rogue state, alarming its neighbors, as well as members of Congress even as it seeks to close a favorable nuclear deal.

Even while the third round of nuclear talks to move the April framework forward begins shortly, Iran’s mullahs have exhibited a callous disregard for international opinion as it engages in an ever brutal human rights crackdown which was highlighted by the arrest of noted human rights lawyer and death penalty opponent Narges Mohammadi without warning or explanation.

According to report released by Iran Human Rights group, in the 18 months since the election of President Rouhani in June 2013, Iranian authorities executed more than 1,193 people. This is an average of more than two executions every day.

The number of executions in that period was 31 percent higher than the number in the 18 months before President Rouhani assumed power. The number of juvenile offenders executed in 2014 was the highest since 1990.

Other human rights and Iranian resistance groups have pegged the number of executed by the regime even higher at 1,500 men, women and children.

But the prospect of a nuclear agreement is being met with growing skepticism with unexpected signs of trouble emerging including the potential for Iran to vastly increase its cyber warfare capabilities.

In a piece in The Hill, Fred Kagan, a national security scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and co-author of a recent report on the Iranian cyber threat, said “We’re in a lose-lose situation from that standpoint. Would you rather have them do that with more resources or fewer?”

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), recalled a speech last year in which Iran’s top mullah Ali Khamenei reminded university students they were “cyberwar agents.”

“I do not expect Iran’s quest for power to decrease if an agreement is reached, and cyber warfare is clearly part of its strategy,” he said.

In another clear signal about the threat the Iran regime poses to the region, a summit organized by the Obama administration in Washington invited the leaders of the six Arab Gulf states involved in the military campaign in Yemen against Iran-backed Houthi rebels, but only two monarchs confirmed their attendance with Saudi Arabia’s King Hamad bin Isaa Al Khalifa conspicuously declining the invitation.

The decision amounts to a public vote of no confidence in the U.S.-led response to Iranian aggression and proxy wars in Yemen, Syria and Iraq fueled by Iranian cash, weapons and fighters.

All of which served as a backdrop to a vote in the U.S. Senate yesterday by an unanimous zhi90-0 margin calling for the Iran regime to release three Americans – Saeed Abedini, Amir Hekmati and Jason Rezaian – that it holds in its prisons and assist in locating still-missing former FBI agent Robert Levinson.

Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho), who introduced the measure, argued the four should have been released before the U.S. started negotiating a nuclear agreement with Iran.

“Iran thinks it elevates its position in the world because it does these kinds of things. It does not,” Risch said. “Certainly it shows toughness, but a barbarian type of toughness that the world is not impressed with at all.”

The contradictions in these nuclear talks were described by Jennifer Rubin writing in the Washington Post’s Right Turn blog:

“In short, not only can we not trust the Iranians to comply with whatever is in a final deal but we also cannot trust the administration to call them on it when Iran again cheats, as we know it will. In big ways and small, the administration has already signaled it will have a high tolerance for violations so as not to upset its diplomatic goals. Imagine how much more tolerant the Obama administration will be when cheating would spell the demolition of the president’s ‘legacy.’”

As the scrutiny deepens and expands on the Iran regime, more of the world’s news media are beginning to ask the kinds of hard questions the mullahs do not want to answer as they see their hopes for pulling a fast one on the world quickly shrinking.

By Michael Tomlinson

Scrutiny of Iran Regime Increasing Over The Nuclear Talks

by

Magnifying ScrutinyDespite the best efforts of lobbying allies of the Iran regime, including the National Iranian American Council, scrutiny of Iran’s actions and its policies are intensifying with the perception that this latest third round of talks will be the last chance for the Obama administration to close a deal.

With the stakes high, news organizations are finally turning their attention on the regime, and in light of the latest proxy wars started by Iran in Yemen, journalists are taking heed of what those acts may portend for a possible deal.

One such area of increased attention was the collective warning from Sunni Arab leaders to the U.S. that Iran’s role in arming and funding Shiite allies in the Middle East is powering extremist groups like Islamic State and Al Qaeda.

These same Arab leaders are pressing the Obama administration to more aggressively support Saudi Arabia and its allies in pushing back Iranian influence in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere in order to drain support for Islamic State and Al Qaeda.

Journalistic skepticism continued with the apparent contradiction over the issue of the economic sanctions should a nuclear deal be completed. Bloomberg View columnist Josh Rogin detailed speeches by Vice President Joe Biden and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew in which they outlined the administration plan to only lift sanctions after many years of compliance and only through Congressional action.

But “that explanation directly conflicts with what Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif told an audience at New York University earlier that day,” Rogin wrote.” Zarif said that UN sanctions would be lifted within days of an agreement being signed and that all sanctions would be permanently lifted, including Congressional sanctions, once Iran met its initial obligations.”

In Commentary Magazine, Jonathan S. Tobin offered similar skepticism over the idea of “snapback sanctions” actually being of any effect. He correctly points out a critical flaw in the deal being contemplated:

“Just as important, the administration is drawing a broad distinction between branches of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, the regime’s terror sponsor as well as an economic powerhouse. Lew promised that the U.S. would rightly hold the IRGC’s Quds Force responsible for its terrorist actions and keep sanctions in place on them. But the rest of the IRGC’s vast infrastructure will be exempt from sanctions after the deal is implemented. Such a distinction will enable Tehran to go on funding terrorism through the IRGC’s vast holdings that amount to a third of the Iranian economy. Money, like terrorism is fungible but if you’re determined to turn a blind eye to how the Iranian regime operates, anything is possible.”

But besides focus on the Iran regime’s foreign policy and nuclear talks, journalists are taking a closer look at the human rights abuses that continue to grow in new and alarming ways.

Agence France-Presse ran a story on the regime’s efforts to outlaw certain styles of haircuts for young Iranian men that the mullahs viewed as subversive and oddly “devil worshipping.”

Mostafa Govahi, the head of Iran’s Barbers Union, was quoted in the state-run ISNA news agency that “any shop that cuts hair in the devil worshipping style will be harshly dealt with and their license revoked,’ he said, noting that if a business cut hair in such a style this would ‘violate the Islamic system’s regulations.”

In addition, the mullahs aimed to ban tattoos, tanning beds and the plucking of eyebrows in a departure into the realm of weirdness. We can only assume given the regime’s preference for imprisonment and public hangings, haircutting in Iran might now be considered a dangerous profession.

And in a further embarrassment to those supporting a nuclear deal with Iran, the Observer chronicled the plight of homosexuals in Iran where an estimated 4,000-6,000 gays and lesbians have been executed by the regime since 1979 to today.

At a time when the U.S. is having a national debate over same-sex marriage, there is scant attention being paid to the abuses gays are undergoing in Iran; until now.

All of which points to the growing and well deserved scrutiny the regime is now undergoing. We can only hope the effect of a magnifying glass aimed at the regime’s policies will be similar to putting a bug under the burning glare of the sun.

By Michael Tomlinson

The Delusional Trita Parsi

by

Delusional Trita ParsiTrita Parsi, head of the National Iranian American Council and apologist-in-chief for the Iran regime, published an opinion piece that may very well be regarded as one of the most delusional pieces of editorial copy written since British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain brought back the Munich Agreement after meeting with Adolf Hitler in 1938.

The Munich Agreement permitted Nazi Germany to effectively annex large portions of then Czechoslovakia and is widely regarded as the most significant example of failed appeasement in modern times. Paris’ editorial rivals that infamous document because he seeks to rationalize the regime’s actions and portrays a post-nuclear Iran as living in peace and harmony with its neighbors.

The most glaring failed piece of logic he attempts to push is the idea that regime top mullah Ali Khamenei is ideologically flexible and committed to the idea of not wanting conflict with the West.

Let’s think about that statement for a minute. Parsi says Khamenei does not want conflict with the West?

The same Khamenei that has led annual “Death to America” chants on national television? The same Khamenei who authorized the incursion of Iranian military forces into Syria, Iraq and Yemen? The same Khamenei who supported the use of Revolutionary Guard troops and Quds Force operatives to target and kill American and coalition personnel during the Iraq war?

Obviously Parsi also believes in the Tooth Fairy, Bigfoot and aliens. It is amusing though when Parsi characterizes Khamenei as offering “heroic flexibility,” especially when considering less than 24 hours after the framework deal was announced in Geneva, Khamenei went on TV to denounce its terms and accuse the U.S. of lying. Sounds pretty flexible to me.

Parsi then charts a torturous path of logic from revolutionary Iran to 9/11 terror attacks trying to portray the regime as a helpful and willing ally to the U.S. He again conveniently leaves out facts such as Iran’s funding of terror groups such as Hezbollah involved in kidnapping and bombing attacks of Americans, including the infamous Marine barracks attack in Beirut.

Parsi also leaves out that Tehran’s race to the bomb really didn’t take off until the beginning of the rapprochement offered by the Obama administration and the subsequent quadrupling of centrifuges for enriching uranium, maybe in a heretofore secret bunker at Fordo that was not known to Western intelligence agencies until disclosed by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the leading dissident groups to the regime.

Even more incredible is Parsi’s framing of this period as a “truce” between the U.S. and Iran post-framework announcement, serving as a calm period for the careful finalization of a nuclear accord. What makes this statement frankly insipid are recent events in Yemen where Iran’s overthrow of the government there has led to a proxy war with Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations in an unheard of before Arab coalition and the movement of massive U.S. naval assets, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, into the Gulf of Aden to interdict Iranian vessels carrying suspected arms to the Houthis.

How Parsi can claim this period as a “truce” while a confrontation brews on the high seas between the U.S. and Iran is beyond imagination.

The real “truce” the mullahs want from the U.S. is not so much a stop in the adversarial relationship against the West they have nurtured for the past three decades, but rather a truce in the crushing economic sanctions placing their hold over the Iranian people in jeopardy. The mullahs would much rather divert their resources to solidifying their hold over their newly acquired territory and expanding their military rather than constantly having to evade the West.

This global strategy is explained away by Parsi when he claims Iran has no ambitions in Syria and that removal of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad would be devastating for peace options. It is the same rhetoric the mullahs use in Iraq when describing the necessity of intervention against ISIS.

The mullahs have created these shadow terrors as a way of engineering access for their military to intervene in wars they helped initiate in the first place. It’s like asking an arsonist to come put out the fires he started.

The one thing Parsi does get right is that “the diplomacy deficit the whole region suffers from exacerbates each of these more localized problems.”

He just neglects to mention that Iran is the one that lacks diplomacy, instead relying on military force, terrorist proxies and militias to exert its will and shape its foreign policy. It bears the question for Parsi; if Tehran was so interested in diplomacy, why not join in the global call to condemn the use of chemical weapons in Syria? Why not urge the Houthis to negotiate with the Yemen government? Why not urge a joint Sunni-Shia coalition government in Baghdad to build a common future for all Iraqis?

A nuclear deal with Iran, without connecting agreements to restrain Iran’s most troublesome actions throughout the region makes any future problematic. Unless Iran’s mullahs are brought to heel, no agreement will ensure a future of peace, only one of Iranian hegemony.

By Michael Tomlinson

 

Iran Lobby Fails Again to Halt Congress

by

US-IRAN-NUCLEAR-CONGRESSIran’s lobbying machine, led by the National Iranian American Council, failed yet again to sway members of Congress from supporting the Corker-Menendez bill which passed unanimously out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and grants Congress a voice in negotiations on the Iran nuclear accord.

The bill now goes to the full Senate where a veto-proof majority is anticipated to approve it. Recognizing the inevitable, the White House signaled the President would sign the bill after gaining some adjustments to the timeline to Congressional review and approvals of any deal negotiated.

The NIAC was left sputtering with a statement denouncing the bill, but powerless to affect its’ almost certain passage. What does this portend for the future of the NIAC and other regime apologists?

It proves once again that no amount of spin can cover up the  harrowing stories coming out of the Mideast of terror groups supported by Iran’s mullahs wreaking havoc across the region, including beheadings, kidnappings, mass murders and government overthrows.

The bill passed out of committee would mandate the administration send the text of a final accord, along with all classified material, to Congress as soon as completed. It halts the lifting of any economic sanctions during congressional review and culminates in a possible vote to forbid lifting congressionally imposed sanctions in exchange for dismantling much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

The provisions are direct repudiation of demands made by Iranian regime’s leaders including Ali Khamenei, Hassan Rouhani and Javad Zarif who all denounced American versions of the framework agreement and demanded lifting of all economic sanctions immediately upon completion of a deal; not just American sanctions, but also European Union and United Nations sanctions.

Quite simply, the American people will have their say over whether or not Iran’s mullahs can be trusted to abide by any agreement.

It is a triumph of democracy over an autocratic theocracy, but it only sets the stage for what will likely prove to be another long summer filled with false hopes, clashing views and endless updates leading to nowhere.

Iran’s mullahs have followed a specific negotiating plan aimed at stalling any final agreement for as long as possible, giving the regime time to destabilize the region through direct military action in Iraq and through proxies in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, in an effort to force the hand of Western nations into giving in to Iran’s demands in the false hope of enlisting Iran in quelling the very conflicts it has started.

Ultimately though the regime’s plans will fail just as its lobbying machine has failed because it cannot hide its barbarism, nor resist the pathological desire to inflict pain, suffering and death on all those it finds objectionable, such as other Muslims, Christians, Jews, women, gays, kids surfing the Internet, bloggers, artists, journalists, etc.

By Michael Tomlinson

Iran Regime Lobby Losing Grip on Congress

by

Trita parsi, greeting the mullah's delegation in Geneva during the nuclear negotiations -March 2015

Trita parsi, greeting the mullah’s delegation in Geneva during the nuclear negotiations -March 2015

The Iran regime’s lobbying and PR machine, notably led by the National Iranian American Council, invested significant resources in a blatant effort to lobby and influence members of Congress over the recent negotiations on the regime’s nuclear infrastructure.

The NIAC attempted to portray the negotiations as the only clear path towards peace and any member of Congress denigrating it was no better than a war monger. In response, Congress offered up the Corker-Menendez bill which gives Congress the power to keep economic sanctions in place while it reviewed any deal. Despite NIAC’s objections, it passed out of committee on a bipartisan vote.

Then NIAC was part of the “National Day of Action” involving delivering petitions to local Congressional offices. The effort produced sporadic selfies in scattered offices of volunteers, mostly Democrats already pledging to support the regime. In response, 47 Senate Republicans sent an open letter to the Iran regime promising to overturn any bad deal.

Itching for more failure, the NIAC marshalled its forces again for the stretch drive of talks and went on a media blitz and sent Trita Parsi and Reza Marashi to troll lobby bars in Lausanne, Switzerland. Instead, the House this time sent out a letter signed by 367 Democrats and Republicans, representing a veto-proof majority, calling for review and approval of any deal.

Even after talks concluded with a “framework” agreement that appears to be different in its terms if you read Iranian, American or French versions, NIAC continued to call it an historic agreement. On Monday, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who is on track to be the new Democratic Leader succeeding retiring Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), announced his support for the Corker-Menendez bill and called on Congress to review and halt any deal it deems bad.

His support is crucial and now probably gives Republicans the 60 votes necessary to override any veto from President Obama. Both houses of Congress now stand united in the need to review, debate, verify and approval or disapprove any final agreement coming out of P5+1 talks with the Iran regime.

Why did NIAC fail? Quite simply, it overpromised and underdelivered.

NIAC members, especially Trita Parsi, regularly mistakenly took positions throughout talks over the past three years that ended up having to be retracted or were proved wrong. Most notably were its claims about the Iran regime’s desire for peace, only to be routinely undercut by top mullah Ali Khamenei who gave his annual “Death to America” speech alongside demands that Iran retain all its nuclear infrastructure, immediate lifting of all economic sanctions and promise to keep developing ballistic missile technology.

In a way, you have to pity Trita Parsi and NIAC for having to work for verbal loose cannons like Khamenei who have all the subtlety of a freight train, but then again, Parsi and NIAC enjoy the perks of being mouthpieces for the biggest state sponsor of terrorism. i.e. Iran’s mullahs which explains how they can manage trips to Switzerland and an unlimited bar tab waiting for journalists to ask their opinions.

But has Iran’s mullahs really gotten the results expected from NIAC? If you judge success based on legislative wins in Congress, the answer has to be a resounding “NO!” The NIAC’s grip on Beltway reality grows looser, especially with new revelations from Breitbart News and others about the deep connections now being uncovered between NIAC and national security and foreign policy teams in the Obama administration.

The lack of disclosure by the administration has further tainted arguments made by NIAC for the deal as it becomes increasingly clear the organizations does not stand for the interests of Iranian Americans – four of whom remain in regime prisons without trial or charge – and instead is simply a cheap lobby for the mullahs.

We would urge Khamenei to get a refund from Parsi and cut his expense account for lack of results.

By Michael Tomlinson