Iranian Liberal Democrat

Questions For JM Official!

"Dear" JM official M. Kazemzadeh,

1- Based on your position on sanctions against Iran, not only I do not regard you as a melli organization, but also I regard you as an anti Iranian group controlled by AIPAC, can you explain why instead of Iran's interests you are protecting AIPAC/US interests?

I will be grateful for your honest answer in this public forum. I hope we can continue this discussion with mutual respect. From your own writings and those of your zealot supporters (e.g Shazdeh Assdolla Mirza) I strongly oppose you, and in addition to considering you a foreign controlled entity I consider you a non-democratic group. I have very little hope in you providing honest answer to my question, but what the heck!

"Best"

Marhoum Kharmagas

Mr. Kazemzadeh

1- Yes I am a member of NIAC and no I did not hear from NIAC about his "engagements" with CIA. Likewise what I have heard from other sources, only here and by you, have not been convincing yet to show any impropriety, hence I questioned about your seemingly disingenuous intention of bringing it to light.

2. Again, I have not been told that by NIAC and so far there has not been any evidence of any "relationship" that I know of? If you know of such, you could help bring it light to many many Iranians that are a member of NIAC so they can decide to change the leadership if there is in fact any "relationship" that does not meet the stated objective of NIAC organization.

3. Isn't that the same question as #2 or am I missing some it? Do we believe if we repeat the words "CIA" … "relationship" over and over again, it would give it more creditability?

Now if I may ask you, is your intention to discredit Mr. Parsi or NIAC?

Do you believe Iranian-Americans ought to have a voice in Washington and if so, do you know of a more creditable organization that tries to protect our interest?

I, as a member of NIAC, don’t believe this organization is about Mr. Parsi but about giving Iranian-Americans a voice in Washington that we so badly need to have. The issues and priorities gets often discussed and put to vote by its members and the sheer amount of support and number of members speaks volume to that fact.

I look forward to your responses and will hope that they are not a simple Yes and No.

Dear Anahid,

I am glad I am not the only one that felt so about Mr. Kazemzadeh way of questioning and thank you for bringing to his attention.

Mehrdad

Mehrban

You would be right if T. Parsi was a publically elected official, whereas NIAC is an advocacy group on behalf of Iranian-Americans who join NIAC because of what they have accomplished, the respect NIAC gets in the Halls of the Capitol as well as NIAC's stated policy positions (//www.niacouncil.org/site/PageServer?pagename=About_policy_positions). 

Secondly, Dr. Kazemzadeh is on a perpertual quiz-quest from NIAC.  I personally emailed NIAC and got the answers for his first THREE sets of questions in his previous blogs in the past few days, but as I predicted before, he devises more questions, some completely unrelated to his original questions and some based on the answers.  He has also devised sets of questions for IC contributors (e.g., Mehrdad and Anahid) who question his motives and techiques. 

Dr. Kazemzadeh just keeps on going like that bunny from a battery commercial (please look at the string of comments/answers/sets of question) in his last few blogs.  That is why I have asked everyone to put a stop on answering this line of perpetual questions.  I have to agree with NIAC's email that this line of questioning as he is pursuing is a waste of time and belittles his motives as a deperate, unsuccessful, envious academician.

Hamsade Ghadimi

Hamsade jan if a thank you makes you happy, then 1000 thank yous :)

Masoud, I'm not sure you're

Masoud, I'm not sure you're aware of certain security protocols that often times apply to persons connected with defense and security organizations.

For instance, we don't know if Dr. Parsi holds a security clearance. And even if he did or does, he wouldn't be at liberty to even discuss it.

This all revolves around intent. If the intent is to promote peace and understanding between the US and Iran, that's fine. But if the intent is to further intensify conflict, then that's a bad thing.

Going by the results of NIAC in attempting to lessen the proximity of war between the two counties, the former intent appears to be the case. 

Now, I've been critical of NIAC for elevating the HR issue to the point where I feel it is entirely counterproductive. But, in my case, Trita has always taken the time to explain his views. And even though I still didn't agree with him as late as 2009, I appreciate the time he has taken to explain himself.

I should say that the more successful and influential individuals among the Iranian-American community are surprisingly approachable. This includes Trita Parsi, Vali Nasr, Hooman Majd and a host of others. These figures offer sincere and helpful elaborations on their works.

I don't see what the problem is, Masoud. If you've concerns with NIAC advocacy, contact Dr. Parsi. If you still don't agree, don't join NIAC. Join a different organization. If you're anti-Iran, I'm sure AIPAC would love to have you. For that matter, so would NCRI or whatever they happen to call themselves on any particular given day.

Prof. Kazemzadeh, It does not look good

That Parsi met with the CIA. That is why they will not answer the questions and try to dodge them. This is the same CIA that these IRI apologist love to hate and blame everything on. The same CIA that is in bed with you know, the MOSSAD. Parsi's meeting with the CIA , even if it was with good intentions, does not look good. It has very negative mazeyeh talkh miyareh type of a feeling to it.

When the average person (Iranian American) in the street hears that Parsi met with the CIA (in such a hush hush manner), they will make the assumptions our IRI apologist don't want them to make.

For example, Mammad always has an answer but now with PARSI/CIA GATE your questions are like "IRI" interrogations for him all of a sudden. Very convenient. Ask him a question about AIPAC and he will have an answer about them "mafiosos" right away.   

Moosir va Piaz

Moosir va Piaz,

You ask excellent questions (sanctions and participation in the 2009 election) but they are not germane to the issues of THIS blog. I am waiting to hear from Mammad to see whether he wishes to continue our debates. If he is willing to continue to participate in debates with me, then I will begin a debate on the issue of sanctions in a different blog devoted to it. But please do not confuse others issues with the issue of this blog.

If you are a member of NIAC, I would be glad to read your responses to my questions.

1. Are you a member of NIAC?

2. If yes, then please let tell us if NIAC informed you of any meeting or meetings (if they did happen) between NIAC President and the CIA.

Best,

Masoud

Thank you Q

Q,

By "PUBLIC" it should be obvious that it is meant something that is not hidden to the public. In other words, something that the public could see (via C-SPAN). The C-SPAN cameras were there and Chomsky could see those cameras. You are not suggesting that Chomsky was not asked permission before hand that there would be C-SPAN cameras. The Chomsky speech was broadcast to the public, it was not a secret talk.

Were the meeting or meetings (if there were such meetings) between Dr. Parsi and the CIA taped and broadcast by C-SPAN or any other tv program, or they were not available for the public to see or know?

I am trying to find out if the meeting/s between Dr. Parsi with the CIA (if there were any or many) were kept secret from the members of NIAC or was this information shared with the members of NIAC.

Based on your answer to question 4, you are stating that you first heard about Dr. Parsi "engagement" with the CIA (whatever it maybe) from Fred and I. This means that you (presumably a member, although you refused to confirm this here, but did not refute it) did NOT know about Dr. Parsi (President of NIAC) having a relationship with the CIA (if he did any or many).

Thank you for the time you took to answer my questions. I appreciate it.

Best,

Masoud

You people of "Fred" offer

You people of "Fred" offer indirect proof twice a day! 

Perhaps you care to better inform us about yourselves? Otherwise, all we have to go by is this indirect proof.

Go ahead, tell us about yourselves. 

Mammad

Dear Mammad,

Of course, you do NOT have to answer my questions. But what is this forum? Why one participates in the Iranian.com debates in blogs?

We are at this forum to exchange our views on politics and policies. You and I participate in this site and its blogs and its responses to DEBATE on these issues of politics and policies. So, when YOU participate at the Iranian.com blogs exchanging views, then you present your analysis, opinions, facts, and ask questions from others (some of whom may agree with you and some may not).

You and I are here. Therefore, in our exchanges, we ask questions from each other. This is called DEBATE. Asking each other questions is the ESSENCE of DEBATE.

You can ask me questions about my positions on public issues as I ask you and other participants about theirs.

You have been a very active participants in DEBATES at Iranian.com. Why now that it appears that you have some difficulty with my questions, you have problems with asking questions from each other, which is the ESSENCE of DEBATE??????

We are in the MIDDLE our debate, and you refuse to answer my questions, because I ask questions????!!!!!

On the issue of sanctions, which is ANOTHER debate, either you or I could open another blog devoted to the issue of sanctions. This blog and the previous one were on other issues (possible relationship between Dr. Parsi and NIAC with the CIA and the possible relationship between Dr. Parsi with Atieh Bahar). If you are willing to continue our debate, I will be glad to open another blog and exchange our views and analysis on SANCTIONS. If you are unwilling, or afraid to debate me, please say so, and I will not debate you. It is up to YOU. Would YOU like to have debates with me on various issues. Please either "yes" or "no."

Let me repeat, if you wish to continue to debate, say so, and I will continue. If you do not wish to continue to debate me, say so, and I will not ask you any questions.

Best regards,

Masoud

Anahid jaan

To question public figures (specially ones who try to be representative of a community) is the responsibility of all citizens.  If I were a member of NIAC (which I am not) I would want to know the answers to this questions.  Why should these questions threaten some of the members.

Haji sack of Islamist liar

The sack of Islamist liar Haji whose salary is paid from a NIOC grant and is a nuke lobbyist for the Islamist Rapists says: 

 "the confessed AIPAC Mafioso known as Freddo"  

And

 “Israel lobbyist and confessed AIPAC agent, Freddo,”  

Prove it you sack of Islamist liar!

 BTW, Haji, this aint your islamist Rapist Republic, if you do lobbying for them, expect to be questioned about your lobbying activities and connections to other lobbyists like the outed one you vouched for, the dinner companion one.

Massoud Kazemzadeh

First you tell Iranians to boycott the 09 elections, then you suggest that we should implement tough economic sanctions presumembly knowing very well the record of failed sanctions regimes throughout the world. I have to wonder the effectiveness of your suggestions and tactics when it comes to toppling this regime. and i pose a question, on which alternate universe does one calls himself a nationalist and suggest such backward policies?

Kazemzadeh, you're grasping at straws, why?

Kazemzadeh, you amuse me enough to bother with your obvious (and failing) character assassination attempt.

MM and Mola, please take note. Whenever Kazemzadeh "loses it" and goes overboard on DO YOU HONESTLY THINK X IS Y??? you know he's got no argument whatsoever.

First of all, Chomsky's lecture wasn't "public". You're not allowed on the grounds of Westpoint, unless invited. It was only military personel in attendance. Second, Chomsky, didn't talk about it at all. The fact that CSPAN was invited simply goes to Chomsky's high profile. Had it not been on CSPAN, you may have speculated about it in exactly the same way. Do you know if Chomsky has ever given a lecture to the state department? Maybe you should start a blog about that!

If you HONESTLY actually were curious even 1% of what you pretend to be about Trita Parsi's lectures, you could have written a letter to NIAC and asked the questions that way. But we both know what this is, it's not a "question" but a character assassination. I'm not even sure what? I guess after decades of taking US Government money at your job, you're suddenly becoming "gheirati" about it when it comes to someone else.

1. Maybe it did. I don't know. I fail to understand why you're entitled to know his schedule and his business.

2. I have no idea. Let's say 300. What now?

3. If it was at CIA, I'm sure it's taped!

4. Maybe I am, maybe I'm not. Maybe my membership has lapsed! Maybe if I considered you an honest friend, I may wish to talk about myself more or share personal information. Why is any of  this relevant? I only heard this issue from you and Fred, which is why I'm absolutely certain it's nothing serious. 

5. LOL! NIAC already has a "relationship" with the US Government, the Boss of CIA: the White House and the Congress, all of which him and his organizations have been present in and talking to. If he spoke to the CIA, then, he has a relationship in the exact same way Noam Chomsky has a "relationship" with the US Military, or YOU have a financial dependency on US Government through your job.

6. Yes, and I do regard them exactly as you say. This is a waste of time and a (badly executed) smear attempt at your part to use CIA as a "bogey man". The fact is, if you are in Washington and engaged with the US Government, the way NIAC organization is, then it's perfectly natural to speak to any member of that Government for whatever reason.

You and your paranoid concern troll friends really need to make up your mind. Is NIAC on the payroll of US or Iran? AIPAC Lobby Answer!

Could not agree more

with what you say Anahid Khaanoum-e Hojjati. Dr. Kazemzadeh, an academic and nationalist who knows about Iran should not do such things, as I just told him for the 2nd time in my second post.

Mammad

Dr. Kazemzadeh

First of all, I did not disappear. I simply did not return to that blog, because I did not want to read more lies and nonsense of the confessed AIPAC mafioso whom you admired. I had said what I wanted to say, and moved on. In one short line the man had said three lies, but had the nerves to demand proof of something that is "azhar ol-manashams," calling me a liar in the process.

Secondly, even if I had returned to the site and had read your 11 more questions, it was unlikely that I would have responded. What is this? Interrogation? Since when I agreed to answer any question that you or anyone else may pose? Since when am I obligated to do so? Since when did I make a declaration that this action of yours may be good for the public? I have a track record which is completely public. Anyone can examine it under my full name.

Third, I just do not believe in your arbitrary way of deciding that you want to ask me or others questions, and then expect an answer. Even if there is going to be a debate, it has to be based on mutual agreement. And, of course, if that person or organization does not answer, he or it would be subject to your criticisms, and possible speculations as to why he or it did not answer. Who says that NIAC, me, or anybody else for that matter should respond to such arbitrary acts?

Fourth, there is no comparison between someone living in Iran and knowing about Iran's nuclear program and deciding to divulge the information to a foreign intelligence agency, and someone giving a lecture about the political/social situation in Iran. The first one is treason, the second one is not, even if you or I or both consider it as distasetful or even disgusting. All I said was, I would not do it, but I can see why others may do and their action can be, under certain conditions, acceptable or understandable to some, and do not read the vast majority of the blogs.

Fifth, just because some NIAC officials post things here does not mean that they constantly check it. Even if they do, does not mean that they would or should respond. I also come to IC everyday, but I do not comment or respond to things 95% of the time.

Sixth, what I say in any post is my honest opinion, whether you or anyone else for that matter agrees with it, or believes that it is honest. I simply do not care. I am not seeking anybody's approval. This is not a popularity contest. Even if your comment about "those whom I like" is true, so what? My opinion is my opinion. You believe in tough sanctions against Iran that will bring tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of death (remember Iraq?) - which I totally reject - but still care to respond to you with respect. That should be good enough.

Mammad

Anahid jaan

Anahid jaan,

If you want to learn about an organization, how would YOU ask your questions. The two main issues are:

1. The relationship between Dr. Trita Parsi with the CIA (if any), and the relationship between NIAC (as an organization) with the CIA (if any);

2. The relationship between Dr. Parsi and NIAC with Atieh Bahar and the fundamentalist regime officials (if any).

I am asking my questions directly from the NIAC organization as well as from members and supporters of NIAC.

Please suggest the best way YOU think one should proceed. Whom should I ask the questions (other than NIAC, its members and supporters)? WHAT questions YOU suggest one should ask?

If you can think of a way that is superior to mine, please open a blog and find the answers to the main issues. I would read your blog.  If you think that the two issues are not relevant, please explain why they are not.

Best regards,

Masoud

Writing to NIAC

MM is right, again.

I've personally exchanged correspondence with Dr. Parsi on a number of occasions. I've been critical of NIAC's overemphasis on HRs, pointing out that it only serves to contribute towards the anti-Iran narrative that assists hawks in their drive to war.

I've also written NIAC many times to advocate policies of rapprochement with the IRI, as espoused in the manifesto of the Leveretts. I believe this serves the interests of ordinary Americans and ordinary Iranians.

Dr. Parsi has always taken the time to respond in a forthright and direct manner.

So here we have our own little Masoud trying to start some kind of political brushfire, here on the IC. Well, I don't know what kind of professor you claim to be, but in the social science of history I can tell you that we strive to include references from primary sources in putting together a proper analysis.

But of course this is not an attempt at a proper analysis, is it Masoud. This is simply a manifestation of political envy. Perhaps it's also a form of professional envy. For we are all aware of the successes of Dr. Parsi in trying to prevent a US war with Iran, but who has ever heard of a so-called Professor Kazemzadeh from a place in backwater, Texas?

AI, MK, you do not make sense

First of all you lump everyone who opposes war and ordinary iranian suffering as a result of sanctions "IRI apologist". there is your first mistake right there.

secondly, terms like neocon, warmongers or aipac sympathizers are usually reserved for those who deserve to be called such words. have Milani or Sazegara supported military actions against iran? I have not heard such a thing. but if they have then are they not the very definition of warmongers?

Lastly, what is wrong with providing sound and ideological-free expertize if you think that it might reduce tension and possible war with Iran? does not matter who gives them (so long as they are real experts and not self proclaimed Chalabi type ideologues).

I might not agree with everythin Trita Parsi has to say but I consider him an expert and a very good one too. Same cannot be said for a lot of members on this site. 

Dear Masoud, this line of questioning is similar to IRI's ways

Dear Masoud, the way you write your questions, is starting to  approach the questioning done by IRI officials. I am sorry but reading your repeated questions first from Parsi and now Mamad and Bavafa reminds me of Iran under IRI.

Thank YOU Hamsade and AI

Dear hamsade ghadimi,

Thank you for your posts.

Best,

Masoud

=============================　

Dear AI,

Thank you for your post.

Best,

Masoud

Prof. Kazemzadeh

There is one difinite fact that you have exposed here and that is the double standard of our IRI apologist here on IC.

Imagine someone like Sazargah or Milani giving a lecture to the CIA. What would this crowd make of such relationship if it was out in the open? He would be labeled a "Neocon" "warmonger" "zionist" "AIPAC"  sympathizer in a micro second.

But Mr. Parsi gets a Pass. Why? Is it because of all the other questions you posed re the treacherous Alliance between Parsi and certain IRI members/officials/insiders? 

Dear All, I would end this never-ending duel

As I suggested shortly before, Dr. Kazemzadeh is welcome to ask these questions directly from NIAC, as I did in his previous blog, since I will not participate in these endless inquisitions anymore. 

Apparently, Dr. Kazemzadeh's college must be on an early x-mass break and there is nothing else to do in lil Huntsville, TX but to do as he is.  So, good luck.

Questions for Bavafa/Mehrdad

Bavafa/Mehrdad,

1. Are you a member of NIAC? You may provide a "yes," or "no," or a 2,000 word essay.

If you are a member of NIAC:

2. How did you hear about Dr. Trita Parsi’s "engagements" [whatever they were] with the CIA?

3. Were you told by NIAC that Dr. Parsi has a relationship with the CIA? In other words, was it a secret to YOU (as a member of NIAC if you were or are) that Dr. Parsi has been involved with the CIA in any way (assuming that Dr. Parsi did provide his information or analysis or thoughts to the CIA)?

I look forward to your answers, short essay, long essay, or whatever form you so desire. Please answer these questions however format you prefer. 

Best,

Masoud

Questions for Mammad on NIAC

Dear Mammad,

Mammad:

In addition, from a practical point of view, it is not as if NIAC has somebody monitoring Iranian.com (or any other website for that matter) to see what they say about NIAC, and react.

Masoud:

If I am not mistaken Mr. Babak Talebi is an official of NIAC. If you know him or NIAC, could you please tell us what is his position at NIAC. He has been posting here and is a poster.

//iranian.com/main/user/babak-talebi/track

Mr. Jamal Abdi just published an article on Iranian.com. He is apparently the "Policy Director" at NIAC.

//iranian.com/main/2010/oct/arabian-gulf

//iranian.com/main/member/jamal-abdi

It appears that officials of NIAC have been and are present at Iranian.com.

Mammad: this blog does not make sense, nor does it contribute anything.

Masoud: I think it would contribute to our knowledge to hear officially from NIAC whether or not its President has a relationship with the CIA, and if there is a relationship with the CIA, is it a personal relations or it is on organizational relationship.

Also if there is a relationship between NIAC and Atieh Bahar, and if there is a relationship between Atieh Bahar and officials of the regime, then for some that relationship might be regarded as a connection between NIAC and the regime ruling Iran. I am asking these questions to learn from officials of NIAC about NIAC.

1. Please explain why learning about these two points is not contributing anything.

If NIAC believes in transparency (being clear and open) about its activities, then it should not have reservations to provide answers to these questions.

Please correct me if I am wrong: all my questions are on activities of NIAC officials. None are personal questions.

Mammad:

If someone is of the view that by giving a few lectures to the CIA and presenting a realistic analysis of the internal situation in Iran, he may give the CIA a dose of reality about Iran, that person may do it.

Masoud: According to YOUR logic, if a scientist or person inside Iran has knowledge about the nuclear weapons program, or any other program, he or she should present his or her realistic analysis to the CIA? In YOUR words, "that person may do it."

Please make it clear.

2. ONLY those persons who you like and agree with YOUR position "may do it" or your principle of providing analysis to the CIA includes those who you do not like and do not share your position?

I look forward to reading, and learning from, your HONEST answers.

Best,

Masoud

P.S. In my previous blog, during our discussions, I asked you 11 questions. You disappeared after I posed the questions. I would be grateful to read your answers to my 11 questions.

Q

Hi Q,

Nice to see you.

Are you HONESTLY saying that a PUBLIC lecture taped and shown on C-SPAN is the same as what appears to be what Dr. Parsi has done for the CIA????

Chomsky did NOT hide the fact that he gave a talk at the West Point. It was a PUBLIC talk. It was broadcast at C-SPAN. There was NOTHING secret about it.

I am waiting for the NIAC officials to confirm that Dr. Parsi gave talk or talks for the CIA. It appears to me that it was a SECRET talk or talks that Dr. Parsi gave to the CIA (if he indeed did that). The purpose of my blog is to find out the actual facts.

I would be grateful to you, Q, to provide answers to these:

1. Did NIAC and/or Dr. Trita Parsi disclose and publicize his lecture or consultations for the CIA?

2. How many times did Dr. Parsi give a talk or other consultations for the CIA?

3. Were these (Dr. Parsi’s engagements with the CIA whatever they may be) PUBLIC and BROADCAST on any television program?

4. If I am not mistaken, you are a member of NIAC. Are you in fact a member of NIAC? How did you hear about Dr. Trita Parsi’s "engagements" [whatever they were] with the CIA?

5. If you are a member of NIAC: Were you told by NIAC that Dr. Parsi has a relationship with the CIA? In other words, was it a secret to YOU (as a member of NIAC if you were or are) that Dr. Parsi has been involved with the CIA in any way (assuming that Dr. Parsi did provide his information or analysis or thoughts to the CIA)?

6. Would you please provide the answers to the 6 questions in this blog. You may not regard these questions, quintessential. And you may regard them as boring, making you yawn. But for me they seem interesting and educational. Would you please teach me (and possibly others at iranian.com) who may be interested to learn about NIAC from one of the most vociferous supporters of NIAC at this site.

I look forward to reading your answers.

Respectfully,

Masoud

NIAC Is The voice of Iranian Americans

This is what Mr Parsi wrote to members after a successful fundraising to defeat the forces of Hatred and War:

"Your support this year has been the strongest endorsement of our work that we could ever hope for – and a ringing rejection of the forces for war.  Keeping an Iranian-American voice in Washington, a balanced voice on policy that seeks peace and human rights, building an active and engaged community, preserving and protecting our cultural heritage and identity – all these things are made possible by you – our members and supporters across the nation."

to bahram, a simple niac member

bahram, before my comment you only knew of one organization that represents iranians.  now, that your awareness has expanded a thousand-fold, this is how you thank me?  "get off your back" you say?  i'm sure some of these organizations that i mentioned even have secret meetings with cia.  next time, a simple "thank you" will suffice.

here's a joke for you so that you lighten up: ye temsah dasht gedaaii mikard, migoft "be man marmoolak badbakht komak konid." :)

Hamsade Ghadimi

I am simple NIAC member and supporter, so, please get off my back.

Chomsky, someone said

I wish that bloody moron never opened his mouth in the case of ex Yugoslavia.