The Islamic Republic cannot be reformed and regime change is the only option!

Friday, January 27, 2012

2012 NIAC OPINION SURVEY: Opinion Survey of NIAC and its President Trita Parsi





key findings


T
he Pro-Democracy Movement of Iran (PDMI) conducted an on-line bilingual (Farsi-English) survey of Iranians, Iranian- Americans and Americans in order to gauge attitudes towards NIAC and its president Trita Parsi.  Respondents constituted a representative sample of 2,507 individuals age 18 and older who had access to the Internet.  The survey’s key findings are that:

·         A majority of respondents had known NIAC for 1 to 5 years
·         95% of respondents expressed NIAC did not represent their interests
·         95% of respondents believed  NIAC was a lobbyist for the Islamic Republic
·         90%  of respondents were aware of the defamation lawsuit against Hassan Dai
·         78%  had read NIAC’s internal documents revealed as a result of the lawsuit
·         95% of respondents believed that NIAD has defrauded the federal government
·         95%  of respondents believed that NIAC had lied to members of Congress about its membership numbers
·         87% of respondents were familiar with Bob Ney and his conviction
·         83%  of respondents knew that Trita worked for Bob Ney
·         68%  of respondents knew about Roy Coffee and David DiStefano
·         70%  of respondents knew that NIAC worked with Roy Coffee to establish a lobby organization
·         83%  of respondents said that they were never asked for their opinion by NIAC
·         4%  of respondents believed that NIAC was a human rights organization and 96% 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, (a  separate Swedish bank account presumably to hide income), the Foreign Agent Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws. 

Trita Parsi, himself, has contributed greatly to the ill feeling and erosion of NIAC's credibility amongst the Iranian-American community by his belligerent, 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. Please click here for the complete report.

introduction

A
 Comprehensive survey of the Iranian-American community regarding Trita Parsi and the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) has not been conducted to date. This survey was designed to obtain information on the opinions and attitudes of Iranians, Iranian- Americans and Americans toward NIAC and its President, Trita Parsi.  The aggregated opinions demonstrate its versatility.  The primary objective behind conducting this on-line survey was to assess Mr. Trita Parsi’s false and dubious claims that his organization, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), is the largest Iranian-American organization representing the Iranian-American’s interests in the United States. This survey attempted to collect data, produce facts, and provide a more accurate and realist picture of the Iranian-American community’s attitude toward Mr. Trita Parsi and the NIAC organization.


This survey was designed to be in electronic format, was posted on the Internet and was publicized via email, Iranian television, social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook encouraging a wide spectrum of the Iranian community to participate to reach and obtain a broad sample.  The link to survey was shared with NIAC and other pro-regime organizations and lobbyists for their participation and was posted on various websites, blogs and social media outlets to reach a larger audience and gain a diversity of perspectives.

Many survey methods were available.  Other Iranian organizations such as the Public Affairs alliance of Iranian American (PAAIA) have used Telephone Surveys as a method of choice. Considering the criminal nature of the regime and past history of assassinations of Iranians who have spoken out against the regime, Telephone Surveys have certain important disadvantages such as no absolute assurance of confidentiality, potential for interviewer bias and distribution bias. It was decided that the survey would be public and online to allow for absolute anonymity, no interviewer bias and wider participation.

Surveys of Iranians and Iranian-Americans conducted to influence US policy in the past are typically commissioned by pro regime organizations and as such are not reliable, very biased and often lack fidelity. In addition to deliberate selection of survey participants and providing a “purchased Iranian surname lists” such organizations deliberately limit the participation to select known groups and individuals known to favor the regime.  

In reality, having families and friends in Iran, Iranians, living inside and outside of Iran, do not feel comfortable and safe  to openly and honestly share their views with strangers, when Telephone, Face to Face, Mail or Focus Group and person to person  are employed for the fear of reprisals. Naturally, even  if they agree to participate, their answers would be in support of regime’s policies. Phone surveys often taken by NIAC and other pro-regime entities such as PAIAA do not truly reflect the prevailing opinions of the Iranians inside and outside of Iran. 

These are the final results of the survey, which ended in January 2012.  A total of 2,507 persons participated in the survey.  The survey participants were asked to answer 16 questions: 

Questions 1 and 2 dealt with participant demographic data.
Question 3 asked participants how long they have known NIAC and Trita Parsi.   
Questions 4, 5, 14 and 15 asked whether the participants thought “NIAC” was a lobby organization. 
Questions 6 and 7 dealt with Mr. Hassan Dai who is the subject of a defamation lawsuit by NIAC for having accused NIAC of acting as a lobbyist for the Islamic Republic of Iran.  NIAC’s internal documents and memos were mostly surfaced as a result of the lawsuit. 
Questions 8 thru 13 surveyed participants’ opinion of NIAC’s activities.  
Question 16 asked the participants as to how they would like NIAC to conduct itself if in fact it is to represent the Iranian-American community.

The findings outlined in this report are intended first and foremost for the Iranian-American community, US policy makers, research organizations and those interested in Iranian affairs. We hope that this survey is considered as another source of information and reference when and with whom policy makers are discussing US foreign policy toward Iran.


This survey was conducted by Dr. Arash Irandoost the founder of Pro-Democracy Movement of Iran. Dr. Irandoost is an educator, researcher, journalist, human rights advocate and political analyst. This report is part of the PDMI technical report series. PDMI technical reports may include research findings on a specific topics, present discussions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, resource for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. PDMI reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity. Please click here for the complete report.


Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial use. The Pro-Democracy Movement of Iran (PDMI) is a private entity that helps facilitate policy and decision making through education, research and analysis.

  Please click here for the complete report.

*Please note that a preliminary version of this survey was released in July 2011 with 1,859 respondents.  It was decided to keep the survey open for even wider participation and launching of our new website (www.pdmi.org), the survey remained online for another 5 month to reach a target goal of 2500.


Ayatollah: Iran Already an Atomic Power

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/01/27/ayatollah-iran-already-an-atomic-power/



In today’s Friday prayer sermon, Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, a senior ayatollah and a member of the Islamic regime’s Assembly of Experts, criticized the European Union for their decision to impose oil sanctions on Iran and stated that in effect, “the EU has sanctioned itself from our oil and that it will harm their economy much more than Iran’s.”
He then focused on the recent State of the Union address by President Obama and his statement about Iran facing alienation and strong sanctions and saying that the U.S. will not allow Iran to get the nuclear bomb. Khatami responded by saying that so far four regimes — servants of America — have been toppled in the region and “Obama needs to bug off, and despite his rhetoric, Iran is already an atomic power.”
Khatami stated that what the Islamic regime in Iran is facing now is similar to what Prophet Mohammad was facing in his time, but through faith in Allah, Islam will be victorious.
Seyyed Emad Hosseini, spokesman for the Majlis (parliament) Energy Commission also said on Friday that the Islamic regime has the world’s third biggest oil reserve and cannot be eliminated from global energy equation. He added that oil sanctions imposed by European countries will only harm the European Union countries and that Iran is prepared to bring the European Union to its knees by stopping Iran’s oil exports to them as early as next week.
Iranian lawmakers are set to debate a “double-urgency” bill on Sunday to decide whether to ban oil exports to the European Union countries.
General Naghhdi, the chief commander of the Basij, the regime’s militia army, stated on Thursday that after Iranian officials received the letter from Obama begging for negotiations, they decided to show some leniency and allow the U.S. Navy ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
Days ago it was reported that USS Abraham Lincoln, a nuclear-powered carrier, passed through the Strait of Hormuz and entered the Gulf without incident.
As reported on January 23rd, President Obama sent a message to the Iranian leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, stating his concern about the threats to close the Strait of Hormuz and his desire for negotiations because he does not want to take any action against the regime.
Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for a former CIA operative in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and the author of the award winning book, A Time to Betray. He is a senior Fellow with EMPact America and teaches at the U.S. Department of Defense’s Joint Counterintelligence Training Academy (JCITA).

Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV?

Timmerman: Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV?
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
January 26, 2012 6:40 am


Authorities in Britain revoked the license of the Iranian regime’s English-language global television channel known as Press TV because of evidence that it is a propaganda outlet controlled by the Iranian regime. But the Obama Administration permits the channel to operate on American soil without a license and in violation of U.S. sanctions regulations, which ban commercial transactions with Iran. It appears to be another example of Obama coddling the terrorist regime.

British authorities justified the move by citing the specific example of a Press TV 2009 interview with a Newsweek correspondent held in an Iranian jail. British telecom regulator Ofcom found that the interview by Press TV with Maziar Bahari, who was jailed by the Iranian regime over his reporting of the disputed presidential elections in June 2009, was conducted under duress. It held that Press TV was in violation of its British broadcasting license because its content was dictated by the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, the state broadcasting authority, and instructed the satellite carrier BSkyB to remove Press TV from its platform.

Press TV, IRGC Mouthpiece and Propaganda Machine

In the United States, the situation is even worse because although it operates openly in Washington, D.C., New York and Los Angeles, and regularly conducts interviews with such figures as Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, it does not have a license from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). So far, the Obama Administration has done nothing to shut it down.

What appears to be lacking is a determination from OFAC pointing out the obvious—that the Iranian state propaganda channel is operating illegally in the U.S. Because of this failure to enforce the law, Press TV is able to operate a propaganda facility in downtown Washington, D.C. with a prestigious K Street address and send its operatives to observe and survey U.S. Government offices, under the cover of “freedom of the press.”

“While other countries might not respect the right to a free press, this is something we take very seriously,” an administration official told this reporter. “We like to stay true to our values.”

But why do our values permit accommodating the actions of an illegal television entity devoted to propaganda and support for an outlaw regime that the Obama Administration itself says supports international terrorism?

In the case at issue in Britain, Bahari was picked up by the Iranian authorities at his parents’ home in Tehran on June 21, 2009, and jailed for four months in Iran. After an international campaign won his release and he returned home four months later that October, Bahari said that his captors had forced him to read a prepared script in front of Press TV cameras, just as American POWs were forced to do in Vietnam.

Press TV has scrubbed the interview from its website but it was widely reported at the time. In the script his captors gave him to read, Bahari accused Western reporters of working “as spies,” and “confessed” that he had been covering “illegal demonstrations” as part of a Western effort to promote a “color revolution” in Iran. His family and the media dismissed his “confession” as clearly coerced.

Clinton Excuses Tehran

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed Iran hard to release Bahari, but never made a statement condemning Press TV for airing the coerced interview. “We’ve been condemning the Iranian government writ large on this, not any specific agency,” a State Department spokesman said.

The Obama Administration has continued to allow Press TV to operate unhindered in the United States, despite clear evidence that it is operating as a propaganda arm of the Iranian regime. Indeed, the State Department regularly entertains questions from Press TV reporters, and allows bloggers on its “DipNote” website to plug rabid anti-American and anti-Israel propaganda with links to Press TV articles and interviews.

“If Press TV were to request a license to operate here in the U.S., the activities that led to having their license removed in the UK would certainly be reviewed by us,” a U.S. official said. “But for now, we cannot take a similar action because they have no license.”

So because it operates illegally in violation of the law, the U.S. will take no action. This might be enough for administration lawyers, but it defies common sense.

Other Propaganda Outlets

Press TV is not the only Iranian government media organization operating in the United States. The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) operates Aftab TV, which broadcasts in Persian and operates a prominent website.

On December 28, 2006, for example, Aftab featured an interview with prominent pro-Tehran advocate Trita Parsi, who heads the National Iranian-American Council, NIAC. In prefacing the interview, Aftab stressed the importance of the “Iranian American lobby on behalf of the Iranian regime” and described it as the regime’s “unofficial diplomacy.”

Last year, IRIB opened yet another 24-hour TV network they billed as “Iran’s CNN,” called Islamic Republic of Iran News Network, IRINN TV. They began broadcasting in the U.S. with an hour-long live program from a new Washington, D.C. studio on April 6, 2011. Their flagship U.S. show is called “Two half-hours (Dow Nim Saat) that airs from 11 a.m. to noon everyday.

While most programs are in Persian, IRINN also broadcasts news in English via satellite to the U.S.

The regime has also lavished money on the print media as a means of maintaining an intimidating presence within the Iranian-American community. The U.S. edition of the Tehran daily, Etelaat, was printed in New York and flown via Federal Express to a dozen distribution points around the country for over two decades, until it was shut down last year after an undercover FBI investigation determined it was being funded illegally out of the Iranian Permanent Mission to the United Nations, a source involved in the investigation told me.

With the exception of Etelaat, the Obama Administration has continued to allow Iranian government media organizations to operate freely in the United States, mostly without licenses, despite nearly two decades of Iran sanctions that prohibit commercial exchanges between the U.S. and Iran.

Doubletalk from Obama

In a series of email and telephone exchanges, officials at the Department of the Treasury refused to acknowledge whether the administration or its predecessors had granted Press TV a license to operate in the United States.

“We are unable to comment publicly on organizations that may or may not have received licenses from OFAC. However, we note that as an official propaganda arm of the Iranian government, Press TV has a history of fabricating news and has faced lawsuits in the UK for airing forced confessions,” a Treasury Department official said.

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls issues trade sanctions guidelines and maintains the list of “Specially Designated Nationals” (SDNs) banned from doing business with U.S. persons.

In the case where an organization subject to U.S. sanctions continues to operate in the United States by moving money under the radar, OFAC has often acted quickly and without warning to shut them down. But not in this case.

Spewing Filth

Press TV spews out unending streams of anti-American propaganda in a full-service program mix that includes talk shows, news reports, and TV magazines, aimed at an American audience via satellite.

Professionally-produced—often times by Americans—these shows trot out a congeries of conspiracy theorists, Holocaust deniers and their apologists, masquerading as “analysts” and “political commentators” to give them a veneer of respectability.

In this case, Press TV appears to be emulating the old Soviet Union, which specialized in propaganda for the regime and against its enemies. The Soviet-led Comintern sent propaganda specialist Willi Muenzenberg to America to recruit propaganda agents.

The Iranian regime has invested heavily in Press TV because it understands the value of propagandists who speak unaccented English and who are not openly tied to the regime to spread its ideological “payload.”

Muenzenberg wrote the playbook that was later used by Press TV and much of the “politically-correct” left in the 1920s and 1930s, when he set up a vast web of cover influence operators stretching from media to academia to America’s newsrooms that continue to make their message felt way beyond the grave.

As former CIA propaganda expert Kent Clizbe explains in his book on Muenzenberg, “the goal of the operations was to make Americans feel that their country was bad.”

“You claim to be an independent-minded idealist,” said Muenzenberg’s widow, Babette Gross. “You don’t really understand politics, but you think the little guy is getting a lousy break… You are shocked, frightened by what is going on right here in our own country… You believe in peace… You yearn for international understanding… You think the capitalist system is corrupt.”

The propaganda from Occupy Wall Street appears to be a modern-day example of the Muenzenberg approach.

Press TV takes the anti-American propaganda to a global level. Like the old Soviet propaganda networks, Press TV uses Americans to make the case against their own government and society.

Consider the case of James Fetzer, “a prominent philosopher” who went on Press TV to comment on the violent turn of the Occupy movement in Oakland last November.

He blamed the police. A professor at the University of Minnesota-Duluth, Fetzer said, “We are seeing the increase in militarization of the police forces throughout the United States and that is a very bad tendency that has been taking place since 9/11. We see the rich getting richer and the increasing gap between the rich and the poor. This gap has been widening since the administration of Ronald Reagan,” Fetzer said.

He went on: “What they are doing, the politicians are ignoring the needs of the average American and the working families. We have had increasing foreclosures, and unemployment is seen as the tip of an iceberg resistance to the corruption of politics in America… I believe this movement is not going to go away, and that what we are seeing is the real face of the police state of America has become.”

As it turns out, James H. Fetzer is indeed well-known—as a conspiracy theorist.

In a Wikipedia entry tagged by editors as “an autobiography,” Fetzer is described as “a well-known conspiracy theorist,” who has written extensively on the JFK assassination, 9/11, and the plane crash that killed U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone.

Fetzer claims, for example, that the film footage taken of the aircraft that crashed into the World Trade Center towers on 9/11 was “video fakery” caused by “holographic projects,” because the high-speed crash was “in violation of Newton’s laws” of physics.

His own website highlights his book, The 9/11 Conspiracy: The Scamming of America. A YouTube video shows Fetzer arguing that Senator Wellstone was assassinated, not killed by accident in a plane crash.

After a federal judge in District Court in New York issued a finding last December that Iran “shared responsibility with al Qaeda” for the 9/11 attacks, Press TV naturally turned to Fetzer for comment. Calling the ruling “preposterous,” he said he knew who was responsible for the attacks: Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad.

“Multiple investigations by independent journalists have revealed that Israel—the Mossad—played a key role in 9/11,” Fetzer said. “Look up ‘the dancing Israelis.’ Look up ‘urban moving systems.’ Look up ‘CITS ‘and you’ll find ample indication that Israel was profoundly involved in 9/11.”

Another Press TV Propagandist

Another propagandist used by Press TV as an on-air commentator is Mark Dankof, whose support for the Ron Paul presidential campaign we highlighted in an earlier story.

In a May 2011 article aimed at discrediting the Ofcom case against Press TV in Britain, Dankof hauled out the big artillery. Why was the British government attempting to shut down Press TV? It was, of course, all because of the Jews.

“It may not be a coincidence that the British Ofcom case against Press TV Iran pops up against the backdrop of Netanyahu’s state visit to the United States to press his own case for ongoing Talmudic Death and Destruction in the Middle East,” Dankof wrote.

The “logic” of his case went like this: Press TV accuser Maziar Bahari was a contributor to Newsweek, whose late chairman, Sidney Harman, was married to Rep. Jane Harman of California, a Jewish Democrat. “Mrs. Harman, in turn…proves to be the very member of Congress wiretapped by the American National Security Agency (NSA) conveying promises to Israeli agents that the dogs would be called off from tailing and successfully prosecuting the espionage case involving key executives of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC),” Dankof wrote.

In the article, “Empire continues to sweat over Press TV,” he went on, “This is the transparent connection in this case, as it is in other recent attacks on Press TV in the West involving media outlets and correspondents with provable connections to the American Jewish lobby; Israeli intelligence; and Neo-Conservatives thirsting for a War of Civilizations with Iran specifically, and the Islamic world generally.”

“If anyone wanted to run the traps and understand the connections, they should read the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,” Dankof concluded. Press TV was being persecuted because it was “one of the few exceptions to The [Jewish] Lobby’s control of global print and electronically transmitted news and analysis.”

The Protocols was a Russian forgery designed to blame the Jews for the world’s problems. Muslim religious leaders and political leaders have touted its “accuracy” to me in interviews throughout the Middle East for decades.

More material of this sort can be found in the innumerable interviews Press TV conducts with “expert” Paul Sheldon Foote, whose favorite line is that “Crypto-Jews” have initiated a war between Christians and Muslims. Such arguments harken back to the ugliest forms of Western anti-Semitism.

The Rise of Press TV

When Press TV CEO Mohammad Sarafraz announced the creation of the new English-language satellite broadcasting channel in June 2007, he stated at the get-go that the goal was to spread the propaganda payload of the Tehran regime.

“Since September 11, Western bias has divided the media into two camps: those that favor their policies make up one group and the rest of the media are attached to radical Islamic groups like Al-Qaeda. We want to show that there is a different view. Iran, and the Shi’ites in particular, have become a focal point of world propaganda. From the media point of view, we are trying to give a second eye to Western audiences,” Sarafraz said.

While Press TV made some effort in its U.S. programming to invite guests who weren’t always fans of the Iranian regime, all pretense of its propaganda aims disappeared in May 2009, just before the stolen elections that gave Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a second term in office.

That was when a group of Ahmadinejad supporters raided the petty cash desk at Press TV’s Tehran headquarters and used the money to support Ahmadinejad’s election campaign, according to Press TV insiders who subsequently left or were forced to leave the network.

Since the June 2009 elections, opposition politicians, such as Mir Hossein and other challengers to Ahmadinejad, have been banned from the airwaves and Press TV has abandoned any pretense of even-handedness.

Skirting the Sanctions

Press TV has used a number of subterfuges to skirt the U.S. sanctions on commercial transactions with Iran.

From the start, Press TV has maintained close ties to the Iranian Mission to the United Nations, the Iranian regime’s only legal financial base in the United States. The UN mission may have paid some staff in cash brought in through the diplomatic bag. Press TV maintained an official presence at the Iranian Mission.

Because it could not incorporate directly in the United States, Press TV worked through production companies operating in the U.S., which in turn hired crew, correspondents, and producers.

Former Atlantic Television News (ATN) correspondent Colin Campbell questioned U.S. officials on Press TV’s behalf. ATN Productions Ltd. has seven reporters currently registered with the Senate Press Gallery: Nicholas Ewing, Affra Khallash, Taleb Khallash, Zina Khallash, Dirik Rice, Mohamed Said Ouafi, and Firas Tuma. The company is registered in Denmark and produces the weekly magazine show “American Dream,” hosted by an American, Nisa Islam.

ATN operates out of production studios located on K Street in downtown Washington, D.C. AIM Center for Investigative Journalism director Cliff Kincaid was invited and appeared on its “American Dream” program a couple of times, before realizing that ATN was operating as a front for the Iranians. When he criticized the Iranian regime on one of the programs, he was not invited back.

Press TV contacted Accuracy in Media on another occasion, looking for a guest for one of its programs to discuss why Republican Representative and presidential candidate Ron Paul was not getting more favorable attention from the U.S. media. Paul has pleased the Iranian regime by defending its pursuit of nuclear weapons. AIM declined the invitation but considered the request as more evidence of how foreign propaganda channels, such as Press TV and Russia Today, have embraced the foreign policy views of the Texas congressman.

The Press TV Media Universe

Press TV also contracts with American Press and TV Services (APTVS), an outfit run by Egyptian nationals Gamal Hassanein and Samir Ezeldin. Like ATN, they hire producers and camera crews to film events and conduct interviews at Press TV’s request.

“Gamal and Sam were running the operation, because Press TV was not allowed to incorporate here,” a former Press TV insider told me.

APTVS took over Press TV’s bureau at the United Nations in 2010. Like ATN, their correspondents and camera crews have all received press passes for the U.S. Capitol complex from the Senate Press Gallery. They hired Colin Campbell away from ATN, and have also registered the following staff with the Senate Press Gallery: Ibrahim Alshamrani, Moaz Attawia, Fahd Banhawy, Umut Colak, Samir Ezeldin, and Mike Kellerman.

The Senate press passes not only give the Press TV contractors access to the House and Senate chambers, but serve as accreditation for a much wider range of events reserved for members of the press corps, including White House, State Department, and Defense Department briefings. Although each of these three issues its own credentials to beat reporters (the “White House press corps,” etc.), the Senate press pass gets most reporters through the door for the occasional event.

Although APTVS and ATN are not part of Press TV, they produce “works for hire” for Press TV. Should OFAC decide to enforce the law, this could be construed to mean that they are engaging in unlicensed commercial transactions with Iran.

In an effort to forestall precisely such an investigation, APTVS for several years received payment from Press TV through a Palestinian production company in Ramallah run by silent partner Maher Shalabi, according to former Press TV insiders. On his Facebook page, Shalabi identifies himself as General Manager of that company, PMCC TV.

“Press TV used to contract Maher, and he then contracted with APTVS in Washington,” a former insider said. “APTVS then booked the guests and studios and conducted the interviews or satellite link-ups.” Shalabi also works for “Palestine TV,” and conducted a high-profile interview with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for that channel in 2010.

Do the activities of Press TV and these production companies fall within the “information” loop-hole of the Iran sanctions?

“If I am sending an academic journal, or some materials that actually will help the exchange of knowledge, that is allowed,” an Obama administration official told me. “But if I am actually conducting paid journalistic work, right now I still need a specific license to allow that to happen.”

Press TV does not have a license, this official hastened to add. “Therefore, they are operating illegally.”

Yet, the Obama Administration permits the channel to continue to operate in violation of the law. Congress should investigate.

---

Kenneth R. Timmerman is the New York Times best-selling author of Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran (Crown Forum, 2005), among other works. His books and articles can be found at kentimmerman.com

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2012/01/26/timmerman-why-doesn%E2%80%99t-obama-ban-iranian-press-tv/

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Letter to Canadian Authorities on Upcoming Islamic Republic Event at St. Paul University

Jan 25, 2012

The Hon Laurel Broten
Ministry of Education
Public Inquiries Unit
14th Floor, Mowat Block
900 Bay Street
Toronto ON
M7A 1L2


Hon. Minister Laurel Broten,


The Pro Democracy Movement of Iran, on behalf of Iranians, Iranian-Americans and Iranian Canadians express grave concern about St. Paul university involvement and participation in the Islamic Republic’s and Culture Center of Islamic Republic of Iran (CCI) upcoming Event (The Land of Art and Love) scheduled for Friday January 27th, 2012 at Saint Paul University. Our concerns are based on thirty-three years of Islamic government’s blatant record of human rights violations and deliberate attempts at neglecting and destruction of Iran's past and cultural heritage.

According to the World Encyclopedia, cultural genocide is a term used to describe the deliberate destruction of the cultural heritage of a people or nation for political or military purposes. Since coming to power, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been in a constant battle with the Iranian people as well as her culture and heritage. To promote the Islamic ideology and obliterate the Iranian identity, the Islamic government in Iran has been deliberately hard at work implementing policies that deemphasize Iranian nationalism and rewrite Iran's past in official documents, history and textbooks. It routinely renames many Iranian-named streets and incorporates many non-Persian (Arabic) words and phrases into the Persian language.

Iranians remember all too well the interview conducted by the late Peter Jennings inside the plane returning Khomeini to Iran. When Khomeini was asked how he felt returning to Iran after many years in exile, he shamelessly replied: Nothing! Indeed, Khomeini had other ideas in mind for Iran. From the early days of the hijacked revolution of 1979, one of the key objectives of the regime has been the promotion of a Shiia-based Islamic nation in the region. Ayatollah Khomeini, ever since he put foot on the Iranian soil, openly expressed such notions on his various speeches during the early days of the revolution and suppressed any thought on nationalism and Iran as a nation, with a glorious past and civilization.

Indeed, one of the primary objectives of Khomeini was to advance his Shiite-centered Islamic ideology from Baghdad to the holy sites in the heart of Israel, aimed at destroying Israel, as was echoed by the IRI’s president Mahmood Ahmadinejad!

The Islamic government has unsuccessfully tried numerous times to cleanse the pre-Islamic Persian heritage. It tried to declare war against the Persian New Year or “Nowruz”, and then, it attacked many other Persian traditions and customs. In 1979, Khomeini's right-hand man, the Ayatollah Sadegh Khalkhali, tried to bulldoze Iran’s greatest epical poet Ferdowsi's tomb and Persepolis palace. The total destruction of the relics of the palace was averted by Iranian patriots who literally stood in front of the bulldozers and did not allow the destruction of this heritage of humanity from taking place.


Hon. Minister Laurel Broten, the Islamic government's overtures and respect for Iran’s cultural heritage is just a ruse, a dog and pony show, aimed at taking the focus away from regime’s blatant human rights violations. The regime also aims to use such events to convince the Western countries to ease up on sanctions so that it can legally procure the equipment and tools it needs to finalize its nuclear weapons' program.

The Saint Paul University’s accommodation and participation at this event will inadvertently assist the Islamic Republic of Iran reach its often hideous hidden objectives. Islamic government's disingenuous and deceptive practices at hiding its true intentions are well known among the Iranian community. Such events are not publicly advertised for the most part and only a select few Iranians at the service of the Islamic republic are invited to attend. We respectfully ask that you cancel this shameful and sham event.


Sincerely,

Arash Irandoost, Founder
Pro-Democracy Movement of Iran
www.pdmi.org

Shabnam Assadollahi, Human rights activist, Canada
www.radiohamseda.net

Pardis Irani, Transparent Movement of Iran
http://www.NextConstitution.org

Walton K. Martin III - Director
The Iran Information Project

Cc: Dr. Reza Moridi, MPP and Parliamentary Assistant, Minister of Energy

Help Ken Timmerman defeat Chris Van Hollen in Maryland

Dear friends,

Wasn’t Obama outrageous last night? Our state of our union is ”getting stronger.” Really? How many of you can say you are better off today than you were four years ago?  Is America stronger? More prosperous? Do Martians wear bifocals?

One of Obama’s chief allies in Congress is Rep. Chris Van Hollen, former head of the DCCC. I am running to challenge Van Hollen in the new 8th District of Maryland where this limousine liberal will be facing nearly 200,000 new constituents in predominantly rural, conservative, Republican Frederick and Carroll counties.

I need your help. This is going to be a national race against the poster boy for the Left, who has boasted of his role in drafting and passing Obamacare. But it’s also going to be a race fought hard on the ground and on the nets.

I need you to spread the word to your social networks. You can start by visiting my website, click on the Donor page, give $25 – and make sure that you click on our special feature that allows you to tell five or ten of your friends about your donation.

This is something everybody can do now. I’m not asking for big dollars (okay, that would help, too). I am asking for something that everybody can do. Even a $10 donation accompanied with telling five or ten or your friends will help my campaign to go viral on the net.
 
Chris Van Hollen doesn’t realize what’s going to come at him this November. We are an insurgency. We the people of Maryland are fed up with government solutions, government intrusions, government incompetence. If government would just get out of the way, we’d be much better off 90% of the time.

OK, maybe there is a silver lining here. We may be more united as a nation today than we were three years ago – against Obama’s nanny state agenda that is putting people out of work, piling up debt, and endangering our freedoms.

Have a look at my website. Learn more about me at  <http://timmermanforcongress.com/about-ken>  If you want to find out more about my conservative views and my work to expose corruption in Washington, defend our national security, and bring aid to persecuted Christians in the Middle East, follow the links on that page or read summaries on my Issues page <http://timmermanforcongress.com/issues>.

We can take back Maryland. We can take the new 8th District. Click on the Donate button on my website and give $25 or even just $10 and spread the word to your friends on Facebook.
Let’s start this movement together.

Yours in freedom,

Ken
 
--
Ken Timmerman
Republican candidate for U.S. Congress
Maryland District 8
11140 Rockville Pike, #100-298
Rockville, MD 20852

Tel: 301-946-2918
Campaign website: www.timmermanforcongress.com
Personal website: www.kentimmerman.com

Paid for and approved by Timmerman for Congress Committee,  John A. Schaffer, Treasurer.

By federal law, campaign contributions are not tax deductible, must be made with personal funds, and can only be accepted from U.S. Citizens and permanent residents. Checks should be made out to Timmerman for Congress Committee and can be mailed to the address above.

Why Can't the U.S. and Iran Seem to Negotiate?

Jeffrey Goldberg
JEFFREY GOLDBERG - Jeffrey Goldberg is a national correspondent for The Atlantic and a recipient of the National Magazine Award for Reporting. Author of the book Prisoners: A Story of Friendship and Terror, Goldberg also writes the magazine's advice column.
More

  • Why Can't the U.S. and Iran Seem to Negotiate?
JAN 25 2012, 9:54 AM ET 2
Sohrab Ahmari dismantles a new apologia from Trita Parsi, the head of the National Iranian American Council, who has consistently extended the benefit of the doubt to the regime in Tehran and has never extended the same courtesy to the Obama Administration. Oh, and Parsi has consistently blamed the usual suspects for everything that's gone wrong in the U.S.-Iran relationship. Ahmari:
In "A Single Roll of the Dice," Trita Parsi tries to account for this failure. But rather than re-examine U.S. policy and its underlying assumptions, Mr. Parsi spends much of the book casting blame on a wide range of actors for Mr. Obama's inability to disarm the clerical regime through diplomatic means. Such blame-shifting is not surprising. The author has spent years, as president of the National Iranian American Council, advocating for engagement with Iran; he is now determined to explain away the policy's inherent flaws.
The fault lies with the country Iran has repeatedly threatened to exterminate, of course:
Predictably, Israel and American Jews with an interest in U.S. policy are subjected to the harshest criticism. Israel's perception of the Iranian threat, Mr. Parsi says, has long "resembled prophesy more than reality," impelling the Jewish state to frame its conflict with Iran's clerical regime "as one between the sole democracy in the Middle East and a theocracy that hated everything the West stood for." Mr. Parsi rejects that perception. Beneath the Iranians' viciously anti-Semitic and anti-American sloganeering, he contends, lies a legitimate demand that their "security interests and regional aspirations" be recognized. Meet the demand, he thinks, and Iran will no longer be a threat.

Israel and its allies in the U.S. were determined to prevent such an exchange of strategic respect, according to Mr. Parsi. Thus was closed a rare diplomatic opening represented by the election of an American president with a persona well suited to peacemaking and without "the baggage of previous administrations."
Ahmari forthrightly states what honest observers (including honest observers inside the Obama White House) believe to be the root of the Administration's failure to reach a breakthrough with Iran::
Mr. Obama's engagement policy failed not because of Israeli connivance or because the administration did not try hard enough. The policy failed because the Iranian regime, when confronted by its own people or by outsiders, has only one way of responding: with a truncheon.

Lies, Damned Lies, Zogby & PAAIA Surveys

Originally Published in The New Media Journal
http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/4308




Lies, Damned Lies, Zogby & PAAIA Surveys
Dr. Arash Irandoost
January 25, 2012


PAAIA recently published its third Public Opinion Survey of Iranian Americans which was carried out by Zogby Research Services. As an Iranian-American, journalist, researcher and political activist, I am very supportive of credible and scientific data on issues affecting Iran and the United States and PAAIA and Zogby deserve credit for making the effort. Unfortunately, my appreciation for both organizations has gradually eroded having examined their activities, affiliations, lack of transparency,* biases and double standards.

Nate Silver, statistician of FiveThirtyEight.com, called Zogby International's online polling division, "The worst pollster in the world." ranking it last in his Pollster Rankings. He also ranked Zogby's Telephone Polls 53rd of 64.

Rosemead Times reports that Zogby is politically motivated and accuses Zogby of Islamist bias documented by the fact that Saudi Prince, Saud Bin Turki, is a board member of the Zogby International with ties to the Royal House of Saud.

Atlas Shrugs in an article called Obama: Zogby’s Bias Strikes Again, reports that Zogby’s have been contributing to Obama’s campaign, as cited by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC).

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

«رامین عسگرد از صدای آمریکا رفت»





«رامین عسگرد از صدای آمریکا رفت»

پس از گذشت یک سال از ورود رامین عسگرد به صدای آمریکا، این مدیر رسانه پارسی‌زبان وزارت امورخارجه ایالات متحده پست خود را ترک کرد.

آقای عسگرد که پیش‌تر مشاور ژنرال پترایوس و جیمز ماتیس در ستاد فرماندهی مرکزی ایالات متحده و هم چنین مدیر دفتر حضور منطقه‌ای ایران در دبی بود نزدیک به یک سال قبل پای به صدای آمریکا گذاشته بود.

فوریه سال ۲۰۱۱ پس از یک دوره بلند مدت درگیری بین دو گروه موافق و مخالف حضور آقای سجادی سردبیر وقت، آقای عسگرد به سمت مدیر شبکه صدای آمریکا منصوب شد. در همان زمان بین چند نفر رقابتی تنگانگ وجود داشت که علارغم آن که به نظر می‌رسید شهریار آهی مدیر صدای آمریکا شود. رامین عسگرد در ماه فوریه همان سال در اتاق مدیریت این رسانه نشست.

اگرچه بسیاری از کسانی که با این رسانه ارتباط داشتند باورشان بر این بود که کسی که تسلط به زبان فارسی ندارد و صرف از خانواده‌ای است که پدر آن ایرانی بوده و بزرگ شده آمریکا است، ممکن است نتواند بر یک رسانه فارسی‌زبان مسلط باشد، اما در پس یک تنش طولانی در این رسانه امیدوار بودند با حضور مشاوران و گروه‌های تازه برنامه ساز این رسانه تغییر رویه داشته باشد.

باید اشاره کرد در دوران یک ساله حضور آقای عسگرد، صدای آمریکا شاهد اخراج و حذف تعدادی از روزنامه‌نگاران و هم کاران این رسانه بود که تعدادی با فشار گروه‌های بیرون بر سر کار خود بازگشتند اما به طور کلی به نظر صاحب‌نظران صدای آمریکا نتوانست از بحران هویتی خود گذر کند و در همان بلاتکلیفی که در زمان ورود این مدیر تازه دست به گریبان بود باقی ماند.

برخی نیز اشاره می‌کنند آقای عسگرد خود می‌دانسته است که برای مدتی کوتاه در این رسانه خواهد بود، اما روشن نیست که به طور کلی روند کار آقای عسگرد تابعی از سیاست وزارت خارجه آمریکا بوده یا به صورت مشخص تصمیم فردی وی در خصوص تعطیلی تعدادی از برنامه ها و یا حذف افرادی بوده است.

اینک پس از آقای عسگرد در حال حاضر به طور مستقیم و موقت این رسانه وزارت خارجه توسط یکی از مدیران ارشد غیر ایرانی اداره می‌شود.

لازم به اشاره است در این مدت علاوه بر برنامه‌های مختلفی که دست‌خوش تغییر قرار گرفته پر مخاطب‌ترین برنامه صدای آمریکا یعنی «پارازیت» نیز درگیر تغییر و بلاتکلیفی شده است.

کامبیز حسینی به عنوان مجری و نویسنده و سامان اربابی به عنوان تدوین و فنی پارازیت را در صدای آمریکا بنیاد نهاده بودند. با این شرایط هنوز مدیر جدید و با روش اداره صدای آمریکا از این پس روشن نشده است.

رامین عسگرد دارای دکترای حقوق از دانش‌گاه تولن است. هم چنین بخش فارسی صدای آمریکا در سال ۱۹۴۲ با هدف ارتباط با  

ایرانیان تاسیس 
شده است

It Takes Two to Engage [NIAC's Policy Failure]

The Wall Street Journal
By SOHRAB AHMARI
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409004577156850984253714.html

Just over three years have passed since President Barack Obama extended a hand to the Islamic Republic of Iran in the hope of stopping its quest for nuclear weapons. Today his policy of engaging Tehran is judged by many to be a disaster. The headlines daily reinforce this conclusion: As Iran's nuclearization drive hurtles to the point of no return, the governing mullahs plot assassination on U.S. soil and threaten American aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf. A diplomatic resolution to the nuclear issue remains as elusive as it was when the Obama administration first assumed power.

In "A Single Roll of the Dice," Trita Parsi tries to account for this failure. But rather than re-examine U.S. policy and its underlying assumptions, Mr. Parsi spends much of the book casting blame on a wide range of actors for Mr. Obama's inability to disarm the clerical regime through diplomatic means. Such blame-shifting is not surprising. The author has spent years, as president of the National Iranian American Council, advocating for engagement with Iran; he is now determined to explain away the policy's inherent flaws.

Although Mr. Parsi is far from disinterested in the ultimate outcome of the engagement debate, "A Single Roll of the Dice" is written with an ersatz air of objective analysis, employing a coolly neutral tone and a prose style straight out of a diplomatic press release. ("Even on the third day, when the negotiators were reaching a point of exhaustion, the atmosphere remained respectful and constructive.") There are also no less than 98 unattributed quotations, with a "senior European official" reliably presenting views that would no doubt go down well at the National Iranian American Council.

Beneath the book's slick presentation, though, political animus simmers. Mr. Parsi accuses a remarkable number of countries, organizations and individuals—including Sunni-Arab states, the European Union, the U.S. Congress and even members of the Obama administration—of having deliberately undermined the president.

Predictably, Israel and American Jews with an interest in U.S. policy are subjected to the harshest criticism. Israel's perception of the Iranian threat, Mr. Parsi says, has long "resembled prophesy more than reality," impelling the Jewish state to frame its conflict with Iran's clerical regime "as one between the sole democracy in the Middle East and a theocracy that hated everything the West stood for." Mr. Parsi rejects that perception. Beneath the Iranians' viciously anti-Semitic and anti-American sloganeering, he contends, lies a legitimate demand that their "security interests and regional aspirations" be recognized. Meet the demand, he thinks, and Iran will no longer be a threat.

Israel and its allies in the U.S. were determined to prevent such an exchange of strategic respect, according to Mr. Parsi. Thus was closed a rare diplomatic opening represented by the election of an American president with a persona well suited to peacemaking and without "the baggage of previous administrations."

Quick to ascribe irrationality and bad faith to opponents of engagement, Mr. Parsi is charitable when it comes to examining the motivations of the Iranian side. But he must frequently sift the obviously belligerent content of the theocrats' statements to find signs of goodwill—signs invisible to unsophisticated "hawks" and "elements on the right" in the U.S.

Consider Mr. Parsi's treatment of the bizarre note sent by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to congratulate Mr. Obama on his election victory in 2008. The letter brimmed with Mr. Ahmadinejad's typically venomous rhetoric: "The nations of the world expect an end to policies based on warmongering, invasion, bullying, trickery" and so on. Yet Mr. Parsi sees a bright side: "The content of the letter was less important than the fact that the letter had been sent in the first place . . . showing Iran's interest in dialogue and willingness to take political risks to begin engagement with America."

Or take Mr. Obama's first video postcard to the Islamic Republic on the occasion of the Persian New Year, where the American president made it clear that the U.S. no longer intended to undermine the Iranian regime. "This is not a change," Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader, had sneered in response. "This is deceit." In the same speech, Ayatollah Khamenei had declared that "the divine laws and the world will change [America] if it doesn't do so willingly." Mr. Parsi does not quote this passage. Instead he tells us that the mere fact of Ayatollah Khamenei's response was "a sign of the success of Obama's move, because no other U.S. president had managed to compel Iran's Supreme Leader to act in this manner."

It is only in his account of Iranian protesters' post-election uprising in 2009 and the regime's crackdown on them that Mr. Parsi strays from this narrative of Iranian earnestness and Western folly. Readers may find it difficult to reconcile his portrait of a regime that "showed no mercy" at home but is also a rational negotiating partner eager to engage the West.

Yet the author concedes that "the election fraud and ensuing human rights violations" strengthened the case against U.S. engagement with Iran and "dealt the biggest blow to Obama." But Mr. Parsi does not follow his concession to its logical conclusion: that enmity between the West and Iran is based on ideological differences, not strategic ones.

Mr. Obama's engagement policy failed not because of Israeli connivance or because the administration did not try hard enough. The policy failed because the Iranian regime, when confronted by its own people or by outsiders, has only one way of responding: with a truncheon.

Mr. Ahmari is an Iranian-American journalist and a nonresident associate research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society

Response to PAAIA's Criticism of PDMI's Online NIAC Opinion Survey


Recently, Mrs. Eftekhari of PAAIA referred to my online, open and anonymous six-month with 2500 respondents NIAC Opinion Survey and I quote her saying:  (Inserted […] are mine, since Ms. Eftekahri after three commissioned surveys does not apparently seem to correctly spell Zogby.)





Mrs. Eftekhari writes: The Irandoost survey is not a "survey" per se. Further he bashes a real survey. The PAAIA one that is done by Zogeby. Now I know 100% all about the PAAIA one. Everything there is to know, inside and out...and Irandoost is plain wrong. And everyone in congress and in the White House knows the Zogeby [Zogby] brothers...so the question is: why? If you don't like the messenger does not mean what they are saying is not the truth. Whether he likes PAAIA or not...the survey is as unbiased and objective as a survey can be...and certainly not a "click in" your opinion...which is an indictor [indicator], but not a survey. 

She is either misinformed, does not know much about surveys, Trita Parsi, NIAC or is simply dishonest.

To PAAIA’s own admission in its 2010 survey, Iranian Americans do maintain close contacts with Iran, have families and friends there and many travel regularly to Iran, and I agree completely. 

Also, all Iranian Americans are fully aware that IRI officials are monitoring Iranians and particularly Iranian opposition activities inside and outside of Iran using surveillance technology and human resources (a known fact). 

Therefore, for Zogby and PAAIA to select Telephone Survey as the method of choice  shows either their lack of experience of Iran, Iranians, Iranian Americans and the criminal regime ruling Iran, or they have a different agenda, since their survey lacks at least one major and critical design flaw: anonymity.  Iranians will simply not feel comfortable to talk openly about political issues.

Assuming that PAAIA or Zogby purchased the surname list from a reliable source, and fully aware such individuals had real names, addresses and phone numbers attached to them, they would be more that reluctant (fearful is the exact word) to honestly, truthfully and without fear, answer Telephone Surveys conducted by Zogby or any other pollster for that matter.

According to PAAIA, ninety-four percent (94%) of survey respondents openly stated that they want regime change and not an Islamic or reformed Islamic government. 


Reputable pollsters and researchers do not normally choose their samples, since such research samples are totally biased considering that is based as it is on a “purchased” list. Purchased lists are neither random nor valid. It is evident that the Zogby and PAAIA have ulterior motives considering the purpose for which such public opinion surveys are utilized: to influence Congress purportedly on behalf of the Iranian-American community. PAAIA’s surveys as designed, carried out and extrapolated by Zogby simply do not pass the smell test. Zogby’s biased phrasing of its questions, carefully constructed choices/answers and manufactured conclusions should be challenged.

My survey, on the other hand and intentionally had several distinct advantages: It was open and after taking the survey any respondent could immediately see the results.  It offered anonymity.  More than 2,500 responded to the survey.  I virtually had no control of the survey once it was posted on line. CNN and other news organizations regularly rely on online surveys.  Why then my survey is "not a survey, per se?", because, it contradicts the common lobby propaganda and lets Iranians plainly and honestly express their opinions. 

I will talk in more detail about Zogby brothers and their activism, pro Islamist views, support of Obama, inaccurate and biased surveys later, of course with proof and documentation as usual.  Stay tuned as I plan to write more on the subject.