Iranian Liberal Democrat

Haji sack of Islamist liar

Islamist Haji sack of liar, you forgot to add your most stunning achievements of all, that of your self-proclaimed “world renowned scientist”.  It is on the video!!!

 You say:

“I, on the other hand, am consulted with, quoted, and interviewed by the NPR, NY Times, VOA, BBC, ABC TV, practically every major radio station, etc., etc. So, who has had the impact when it comes to Iran? Yeah, yeah, as you said once, the "message" of your "blogs" reaches the intended audience!!!”

If I am such nobody as you keep telling me, which in the big scheme of things I really don’t have any argument with it, why do you bother with nobody like me?

You keep saying you know me but in comparison with someone of your caliber, you don’t want to bother revealing my identity because I am too much of nobody, fine, I buy that.  But I am going to tell you this so you know what a bold-faced, sack of charlatan Ali Shariati filled, got a job because of NIOC grant, Islamist liar you are.

Haji sack of liar, if you knew my identity, you would have told me to my face what you keep writing about me here, you’ve seen and talked to me often enough.

Boro Haji sack of liar, boro!

OnlyIran

We are free to criticize T. Parsi for contacting the Iranian UN rep. as well as consulting with the US officials.  But, the veracity at which NIAC is attacked for taking grants, for being an IRI agent as well as a being a CIA stooge is unprecedented, and may suggest deep-seated undercurrents/jealousy. 

See my last post where Trita describes how he came to contact the Iranian UN rep. (quoted below). 

"On a few occasions, US lawmakers asked if Parsi could introduce them to the Ambassador, since Parsi had interviewed him on numerous occasions for his book. Parsi obliged and did make introductions. He did not, however, arrange any meetings. In his email to the Iranian ambassador, Parsi also made it very clear that the introduction was solely made due to NIAC's hope to prevent a US-Iran war. Again, the email was sent at the request of those Members of Congress - not the Iranian government. NIAC has never and will never work on behalf of the Iranian government."

Again, in the article by Eli Lake, the same paragraph that describes Parsi's relationship with CIA/Clinton, he talks about how Parsi knew about Obama's speech to Iranians, so 1. The lecture was not so secret and even Eli affirms that Parsi may have talked about the speech, and 2. Eli's description suggests that Parsi may have been consulted on the contents of Obama's speech. 

Mammad: talking to Fred is only a waste of time

Numerous times I have provided him proof of lying and like you said, it is all in his blog and each time he has failed to try to set the record straight, retract his pervious lie/statement or acknowledge it.

I have since boycotted his two-blog-a-day hate message until he comes out and sets the record straight.

Mehrdad

Mark, I thought you knew already!

We'd like to know. 

I thought you knew already.  Isn't  Fred a collection of Mossad agents working out of Tel Aviv?  Isn't that what you write on all of his blogs?  So, why do you ask?  Does this mean that all of your comments on his blogs were just BS?  Oh, wait...we already knew that.     

so which is it?

Trita works for the CIA? Trita works for the iranian regime? Maybe trita is a tripple agent actually working for the Saudi government? haters gonna hate. haters cant seem to make up their minds about which talking points to use.

mammad

in your haste to belittle fred and write a few paragraphs on how someone big like you wouldn't spend time on a little guy like him(contradiction in itself!), you forgot to include his confession that he works for aipac.  i appreciate you include his confession next time you claim it. and please don't tell me that i have to read all his blogs to figure it out.  i just want his confession and be done with it.  anxiously anticipating.

Mammad

Mammad, who exactly is "Fred" and what does he do?

We'd like to know. 

Really depends, OnlyIran.

Really depends, OnlyIran.

If that "X" group is promoting peace and attempting to thwart the Israel lobby's economic warfare directed against Iran, most of the people that will still be against it are those groups envious of its influence, or those groups advocating war and sanctions against the Iranian people. 

i'm sure some iranian

i'm sure some iranian americans don't mind that trita parsi is cozy with the iranian administration and at the same time "lectures" the cia (as we see in this thread).  the question is "does trita parsi publicize his relationship with iranian officials and his involvement with the cia?"  is parsi transparent with niac's activities.  if he does and he is, i would like to see it.  that's all.

Confessed AIPAC Mafioso known as Freddo

You want proof? First of all, you have a lot of nerves. You, someone who in two short posts, has already lied a few times about me, want proof! Your so-called blogs are all here - the best proof. Your concern is Israel not Iran. You justify every crime by Israel, and when you cannot, you simply disappear or become silent.

I have exposed your nonsense contradictory claims on Dr. Trita Parsi, a true patriot in my eyes. So, what do you do? Coming back with more nonsense, more innuendoes, more lies. You have no shame, as amply demonstrated by repeating your outrageous slander about my salary from my University.

But, as I said, I consider you a dawrf - a human being dawrf, a "blogger" dawrf, a true dawrf in the complete sense of the word. I do not waste my time on a dawrf. You do not count. You have no significance, zero achievement in your entire life (I know this because I know who you are and what you do). If you had any achievement, anything significant to do, you would not be on 24/7 alert on this site, attacking everybody. The only thing you do is exposing your ugly, vengeful, full of hatred nature and your destructive attitude towards Iran, Muslims, and Islam.

I, on the other hand, am consulted with, quoted, and interviewed by the NPR, NY Times, VOA, BBC, ABC TV, practically every major radio station, etc., etc. So, who has had the impact when it comes to Iran? Yeah, yeah, as you said once, the "message" of your "blogs" reaches the intended audience!!!

Haji Mashdi Mammad, the nuke lover, Dr. Stranglove, Islamist - have I missed any other label you have given me?

MM, forget about RP--let's assume

that a U.S. based Iranian organization called "organization X" was getting help from the U.S. State Department, had discussions with the CIA and was setting up an event at with the help of the U.S. in Saudi Arabia to discuss Iran issues.  What would have been the response on this site about that event?  You think it would have been praised or criticized as a "neocon", U.S. puppet, Zionist / Saudi effort, anti-Iran event, etc.? 

Onlyiran - NIAC vs. RP! - Also, rebuttal to Eli Lake's article

OnlyIran,

The difference between NIAC and RP's monarchists is the fact that NIAC is an Iranian-American organization subject to rules and regulations set up by the US government, whereas, RP and his organization are, according to themselves, THE de facto government of Iran currently in exile.

Now, as the head of Iranian government, we can criticize RP for taking orders and/or talking with the US government, just the same way NIAC is being criticized for allegedly talking with CIA. 

Rebuttal to Eli Lake's article by NIAC,

The following rebuttal was published by NIAC after the Eli Lake article came out.  For more, see the full article. 

BTW, The US is a free speech country, so one is even free to quote an Eli Lake article as the absolute truth.  

//www.niacouncil.org/site/PageServer?pagename=About_myths_facts

------------------------------------

The following corrects numerous inaccuracies in an article written by Eli Lake, with the assistance of Hassan Daioleslam. Readers can view an in-depth investigation of the allegations against NIAC, and the political motivations behind them, by BBC Persian [Persian/Farsi]. 

//www.niacouncil.org/site/PageServer?pagename=About_myths_facts

Truth: NIAC was skeptical of the appointment of Dennis Ross as the special envoy to Iran because his record of advocating an Iran policy close to that of the Bush administration. This would be a familiar and hawkish approach to diplomacy with Iran that would be misguided and counterproductive. NIAC does not lobby American officials to unilaterally lift the broad economic sanctions against Iran. NIAC does not believe that the broad economic sanctions against Iran should be lifted unless the government of Iran ceases its reprehensible activities. In addition, NIAC has argued that additional sanctions are not a substitute for diplomacy and their inevitable failure would put the United States back on a path to war with Iran.

Truth: From 2006-8, NIAC worked tirelessly to prevent a US-Iran war. In its meetings with Members of Congress, US lawmakers often complained that the Bush administration didn't listen to anyone and that to prevent a war, lawmakers needed to take matters in their own hands by initiating a dialogue with Iran or even going to Iran. Though NIAC continued to advocate that lawmakers pressure the White House to pursue diplomacy, Trita Parsi and NIAC staff were on occasion asked if they could advise lawmakers on how they could pursue their own diplomacy. Parsi suggested that the first step towards such diplomacy would be to talk to the Iranian UN ambassador in New York. On a few occasions, US lawmakers asked if Parsi could introduce them to the Ambassador, since Parsi had interviewed him on numerous occasions for his book. Parsi obliged and did make introductions. He did not, however, arrange any meetings. In his email to the Iranian ambassador, Parsi also made it very clear that the introduction was solely made due to NIAC's hope to prevent a US-Iran war. Again, the email was sent at the request of those Members of Congress - not the Iranian government. NIAC has never and will never work on behalf of the Iranian government.

Truth: The fact that NIAC's positions reflect the views of the majority of Iranian Americans was reaffirmed in November 2009 by a national poll of Iranian Americans conducted by Zogby International. NIAC represents the majority view of the Iranian-American community, who according to numerous polls oppose war, oppose broad sanctions, support human rights and support diplomacy.

Truth: NIAC is a 501(c)(3) educational organization with an H election.  As a result, NIAC is permitted to engage in lobbying up to 20% of its budget. NIAC and its staff are in full compliance with all regulations and laws. The issues NIAC has lobbied on are nevertheless quite transparent - NIAC has opposed and helped kill a resolution that would pave the way for war between the US and Iran; in 2008, NIAC favored a resolution supporting an incidents-at-sea agreement between the US and Iran; NIAC opposes additional broad economic sanctions on Iran due to the inability to resolve US-Iran tensions through sanctions, to name a few.

Educational activities and advocacy for general policies, such as opposition to war - as opposed to specific legislation - are not lobbying under the law. If at any point a 501(c)(3) organization were to exceed the permitted lobbying quota it would be fined by the government. If the violations are persistent, its tax status could be withdrawn. However, NIAC is in full compliance with all regulations and laws.

Truth: Per the vote of its membership, NIAC has been a vocal critic of the Iranian government's human rights abuses for years. While NIAC's extensive coverage and repeated condemnations of the Iranian government's brutal crackdown against peaceful demonstrators did garner significant media attention this summer, our work on human rights started much earlier. When NIAC made the decision to seek peaceful solutions to the US-Iran crisis, NIAC also decided to educate lawmakers and the general public on Iran's human rights abuses. NIAC has issued countless statements condemning the government of Iran or calling on it to respect basic human rights. Additionally, NIAC has held two major conferences on Capitol Hill to focus attention on Iran's human rights abuses. Our speakers have included representatives from Human Rights Watch, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, Amnesty International, and Members of Congress.

Truth: With the support of grants from the National Endowment for Democracy, NIAC conducted nonpolitical trainings for non-governmental organizations (NGO's) in Iran to help foster a stronger Iranian civil society. Subsequently, in 2006, the Bush administration started the Iran "Democracy Fund" - a program explicitly intended to use Iranian NGO's to overthrow the Iranian regime. We witnessed firsthand how the atmosphere in which Iranian NGO's operated inside Iran became drastically worse due to these funds. Even though most Iranian activists and human rights defenders refused to take any politicized funds, all Iranian NGO's and their employees came under suspicion and threat from the Iranian government after the Fund's creation.

Prominent Iranian pro-democracy and human rights activists -- such as Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Shirin Ebadi, investigative journalist Akbar Ganji, Woodrow Wilson scholar Haleh Esfandiari and Human Rights Watch -- have all come out forcefully against any politicized US government funding for organizations inside Iran, because of the additional security risk these funds pose to on-the-ground activists. NIAC believes that it is critical for the United States to take the concerns and perspective of pro-democracy human rights activists inside Iran seriously. NIAC believes that any effort by the US government to help the Iranian people must be supported by the Iranian people, and must not endanger their lives.

For more information, see this report by the BBC.

Eli Lake isnt a reliable "reporter"

his agenda, just like MEK operative Hassan Daeioslam (who works day and night on the on the iranlobby conspiracy site), or people like Fred who post daily on this site (hides behind "human rights" issues) is to push for a military attack on Iran's nuclear facilities or basically toe the AIPAC line. They are sympathetic to neoconservative cause.  Go look at Eli Lakes records by the way: //www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/tag/e...

So in that capacity they have found NIAC to be a nice target of smear campaign. (J Street is another victim of this campaign).

Because NIAC is closest to anything Iranian-Americans have had in Washington for defusing tensions and avoiding catastrophic war.  NIAC might not be 100% representative of Iranian-Americans but overall they are the closest and most effective organization we have and we should cherish it. we should support them by giving them feedback and constructive criticism and not by smearing them and destroying them. This is exactly what war advocates want.  

smear campaigners can take everything you say and turn it against you. this is why organizations like AIPAC put top dollar to such causes.

The stooge and his family

The stooge and his family were discredited and expelled in '79. They're of no use to the USG in this regard. So your hypothetical is flawed.

Tahgord - First of all, no one spoke to you, so shoo away

second, I am not an RP supporter.  I was using him as an example. Learn to read.  

Dream on, Onlyiran. RP is so

Dream on, Onlyiran. RP is so personally half-hearted and irrelevant, as well as being undereducated, he has zero chance of even being considered for these types of USG needs.

What I find interesting is that the NIAC gets praised

for working with the U.S. State Department and for even setting up an event in Saudi Arabia (out of all places) with the help of U.S. consulate there.  But can you imagine what this same crowd would have said if it was Reza Pahlavi or some other opposition group which was cooperating with the U.S. State Department and setting up events in Saudi Arabia?!!!  God, these people would be blogging and tearing themselves apart calling them America's stooges, out of touch and working with Iran's enemies.  The hypocrisy is appalling.  

My contacts

I work with or maintain some level of contact with Americans and Iranian-Americans who have worked with or are currently working for the CIA, DOD or CENTCOM. Each, in their own way, working in their past or previous capacity, has advocated peace with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

To do otherwise would be a disservice to the United States, as well as commit treason against one's ancestral motherland. And I don't associate with traitors, be they traitors to America or Iran.

I think MM provided the best response to this blog post, one post among many bearing the usual anti-Iran rhetoric. 

I don't agree with much that NIAC has written, particularly its over-focusing on HRs. Recently they've toned that down, and If I'm in any way responsible, I find that encouraging.

I support NIAC as the only Iranian-American organization that has any ability whatsoever of standing in the way against the Israel lobby's drive toward a US war against the people of Iran. That is paramount: the prevention of war.

Just look how rabid those Israelis that write under the nom de guerre of "Fred" get with the NIAC: all because they put up a resistance to their lobby's cause for war. And these people have the nerve to ask us to provide proof? These people at "Fred" provide roughly two blog posts of proof every day right here on IC.

One wonders what is the

One wonders what is the motivation of some try so hard to discredit NIAC? Of course the motivation of a few such as Fred is obvious to most and not subject to this question. But if we are for empowering and giving a voice to Iranian-Americans, wouldn't be more affective to

1- join the organization and try to influence its direction by our participation

2- criticize specific policies/directions that NIAC has taken

3- Form a new and alternative group to give Iranian-Americans a voice in Washington

NIAC is not all about Titra Parsi you know? Iranian-Americans could benefit from having a voice in Washington and Instead of trying to dig up things about Titra Parsi, we could put our effort to improve or provide alternative to NIAC. But lets not try to kill the voice unless that is your intention just as Fred's aim is to do so.

Mehrdad

Please show

some respect for each other. I know people are pissed off so am I. But calling someone a mafioso is hardly appropriate. No I don't want it removed. Just if we want a civil discussion then this it not helping. My opinion of Fred is not going to change by calling him names. The first step in a discussion is respect.

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 in another blog the same sack of Islamist liar said:

“Israel lobbyist and confessed AIPAC agent, Freddo,”

Prove it you sack of Islamist liar!

ps. you sack of Islamist liar, if you know my identity as you claim, go ahead and reveal, you sack of Islamist Liar! Go ahead!

BTW, you vouched for your dinner companion who turned out to be CASMII member captured on video praising Islamist Rapists. You Islamists have no shame, none, it is a dogma thing with you Islamists.

Dr. Kazemzadeh

I did not say that Freddo was lying, as you say in one of your responses. I asked him to mention the foundations. But, he and you both missed the point. There was a purpose in making the comment:

1. To name the foundations - you named them.

2. Once (1) is done, to see NED mentioned - you did that also, and that was the real purpose.

Since 1980s NED has been deeply involved in inciting protests and even "velvet revolutions" in countries disliked by the US, from Latin America to Ukraine, Georgia, and elsewhere.

So, once again, the nonsense and lies of the confessed AIPAC Mafioso known as Freddo become clear - and he has the nerves to call me a liar while constantly lying about me, my job, my work, my scientific research, even the source of my salary which is a brazen, shameless slander (and this is while I know his full identity), except that I consider him as too insignificant - a dawrf - to care about his lies.

So, if NIAC received funds from NED - which it did - and if its president does all that work with the State Department, CIA, etc., how can NIAC and Dr. Parsi be IRI lobbyists? The only way I can see that happening is all of them have been taken over by IRI lobbyists!

Regarding your question, here is my answer. Anytime external threats on the IRI increase, the people and the democratic movement pays the price, not the IRI. It is the people who are under tremendous pressure economically and politically. Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan did wonders for IRI hardliners. The most and first victim of the current round of sanctions and military threats are the people and the Green Movement.

The opposite is also true. Anytime external threat is reduced, the society has a chance to confront the ruling establishment. The examples are just too many.

Therefore, in my opinion, any action that may lead to a reduction in the level of external threats is a good thing to do. It is based on such a belief that I have been writing my series on Iran nuc since 2003, and post articles on antiwar.com.

Therefore, I fully support NIAC's effort in the direction that I am talking about.

Mammad

...

One of the best ... Thank you Masoud jan .

Ari, is it 1212211?

:-)

Masoud jan

Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people

Doris Egan

LOL Ari Jaan However I may disagree with you on NIAC ;0)

I can Only admire your sense of humor and brilliant responses ...

Cheers and Don't exagerate on the Abjooyeh Eslami !  

;0)

DK

PS: Except that Trita is NOT Iranian-American but merely a Swedish -Iranian with a Green Card speaking on your behalf ... 

Salary

I always have a lot of respect for my friend MM. However Dr Kazemzadeh is right. The money that he gets from State of Texas and US government is perfectly legitimate. It does not compromise him in any way. No more than someone getting any other research grant from a government agency.

MK, your yes/no answers in reverse order

2. If YOU get an invitation to provide consultation to the CIA, will YOU accept? Please either yes or no.

Yes.  Sometimes it helps avert war or sanctions on inncocent people (and sometimes Bond girls may be involved)

1. Have YOU been invited to provide consultation to the CIA? Please either yes or no.

No.  They must know I'm no good at baccarat.

Here's a secret agent question for you, if you answer correctly you too may be invited to lecture at the CIA: what is the next term in the following sequence?

1,11,21,1211,111221, ...

MM

MM,

Are you on drugs? The budgets for "state" universities come from the states (in my case the state of Texas) as well as from student tuition. The FEDERAL government may also provide something, although how and to what proportion, I do not know.

To compare a university professor getting his salary to a political or policy-oriented organization soliciting and getting money from the Federal government (via NED) to carry out policies is utterly absurd.

According to your "logic," there is no difference between a teacher, or a worker in Iran who get paid by the Iranian government and those who get paid by the same Iranian government for torturing political prisoners in Evin???????

Do YOU realize how absurd your "logic" is?????

MK

Ari, So Will YOU work for the CIA?

Ari,

1. Have YOU been invited to provide consultation to the CIA? Please either yes or no.

2. If YOU get an invitation to provide consultation to the CIA, will YOU accept? Please either yes or no.

I look forward to your answers.

MK