Opinion survey of the NIAC and its president Trita Parsi

• A majority of respondents had known NIAC for 1 to 5 years
• 99% of respondents expressed NIAC did not represent their interests
• 99% of respondents believed NIAC was a lobbyist for the Islamic Republic
• 90% of respondents were aware of the defamation lawsuit against Hassan Dai
• 82% had read NIAC’s internal documents revealed as a result of the lawsuit
• 99% of respondents believed that NIAD has defrauded the federal government
• 99% of respondents believed that NIAC had lied to members of Congress about its membership numbers
• 88% of respondents were familiar with Bob Ney and his conviction
• 85% of respondents knew that Trita worked for Bob Ney
• 73% of respondents knew about Roy Coffee and David DiStefano
• 74% of respondents knew that NIAC worked with Roy Coffee to establish a lobby organization
• 82% of respondents said that they were never asked for their opinion by NIAC
• 1% of respondents believed that NIAC was a human rights organization and 99% believed that NIAC worked
  as a Lobby for the Islamic Republic 
• A large majority of respondents wanted NIAC to disclose its financial documents, membership list and
  numbers, and be held accountable for its actions
• Such extent of negative attitude toward NIAC and its president is in some
  measure due NIAC’s filing of lawsuit and release of its internal memos
  and documents as a result of defamation lawsuit brought against Hassan
  Dai. NIAC’s internal memos have given a lot of credibility to the claim
  that NIAC is acting as a lobby for the Islamic Republic. Two other
  publications have greatly damaged NIAC’s credibility amongst the
  Iranian-American community: one is a paper published the Center for
  Security Policy authored by Clare M. Lopez in 2009 named ―Rise of the
  Iran Lobby‖. Another damaging article was published in the Washington
  Times alleging that NIAC and Trita Parsi has operated as an undeclared
  lobby and may be guilty of violating tax laws, the Foreign Agent
  Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws.
• Trita Parsi has contributed greatly to the ill feeling and erosion of NIAC’s
  credibility amongst the Iranian-American community by his inconsistent
  and inaccurate statements. Furthermore, NIAC’s internal memos showed
  that it employed a policy of ―cease and desist‖ against any of its
  opponents to intimidate them into silence. The extent of negative
  opinion toward NIAC might also be related to the lack of transparency,
  prevalent double speak and continuous ―shifting of gears‖ by Trita
  Parsi, inconsistencies in NIAC’s words and actions, lack of regard for
  Iranian opinions, NIAC’s denial of its relationship with top level
  Iranian government and business officials. Detailed report here …

http://www.newmediajournal.us/pdf_files/irandoost_niac.pdf