Court Reveals Iranian Operatives In Charge Of Obama’s Iran
Policy Since 2009
September 26, 2012 By Doug
Book 31
Comments







inShare34






A ruling handed down on September 13th by the D.C.
District Federal Court has finally made clear what many have known for
years–that the Obama Administration’s Iran policy was initiated and advanced by
a group with illicit, hidden ties to the Iranian Regime and financed by the
U.S./Israel- hating George Soros.
In 2009, Barack Obama turned over virtually all responsibility and
authority for foreign policy negotiations with Iran to Trita Parsi and his
National Iranian American Council (NIAC). Founded by Parsi in 2003, the
Washington-based NIAC is a powerful lobbying group that is
“…widely considered the de facto lobby for the Iranian Regime in
America.”
Like too many organizations that claim to represent the best
interests of the nation of Iran and Iranian-Americans, the NIAC is tightly connected with and known to
be funded at least in part by the George Soros empire. Small wonder NIAC advice
on dealing with Iran was replete with claims that Israeli propaganda was
responsible for the negative image imposed on otherwise peace-loving,
misunderstood Iranian mullahs. Not exactly a friend of Israel is George
Soros.




And how did the reputedly “non-partisan” NIAC suggest the Obama
Administration proceed with negotiations? Simple. The Council “…opposes sanctions on
Iran, soft-pedals any controversial events in Iran, and counsels “patience”
regarding Iran’s stance towards its nuclear program.”
What better way for NIAC representatives to serve their hidden
masters in Tehran than by promoting a policy of “peaceful coexistence” between
the US and Iran. And to the NIAC, peaceful coexistence
meant “…acceptance of [the] Iranian government, accepting
Iranian hegemony in the Gulf and its place in other parts of the Middle East,
removal of sanctions and pressure against Iran, abandon of assistance to the
Iranian people’s resistance against the regime and etc.”
For the U.S., the consequences of this game of intrigue played by the
Administration’s hand-picked, Iranian representatives are summed up in this
statement by Barack Obama: “I’ve made it clear that the United States
respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering
with Iran’s affairs.” And indeed, this is the path Barack Obama has
followed. Not exactly reassuring words from a president
charged with keeping the American public safe from a nuclear-bound
administration of religious fanatics dedicated to our demise.
And it is thanks to an ill-advised lawsuit that proof of the NIAC’s
wrongdoing has finally been placed before the American public. In 2008, Trita
Parsi and his organization filed a defamation suit against
perpetual critic Seid Dai. Dai had publicly accused Parsi of secretly working
with the ruling Iranian Regime against the interests of the United States and
the Iranian people. But when Parsi filed suit hoping to
silence-through-intimidation such potentially lethal criticism, it opened the
floodgates of legal discovery allowing Dai to demand internal NIAC documents and
emails that eventually “… confirmed [Parsi’s] ties to the [Iranian]
mullahs…”
Not only did recovered emails reveal that Parsi
had held “…numerous secret meetings with top level IRI [Islamic Republic of
Iran] officials,” “Court documents show the NIAC was guilty of: lying to members
of Congress, fraudulent membership numbers, tax law violations and evasions,
Lobbying Disclosure Act violation, the Foreign Agents Registration Act
violations, foreign bank accounts, defrauding of federal funds, bribing of eye
witnesses, etc…”
And so egregious were NIAC attempts to duck its legal
responsibilities of discovery that Judge John Bates dismissed the Parsi
defamation suit, ordered sanctions against Parsi for his failure to comply with
discovery, and ordered Parsi to pay significant percentages of Dai’s costs and
fees.
This is an immensely important story, not surprisingly “missed” in
its entirety by the mainstream media.
But why has the Romney campaign not demanded Obama’s rationale for
handing the foreign policy decisions of the United States and the security of
the American people over to representatives of the Iranian government itself?
Could voters be pleased upon finding the president had placed America’s safety
from possible nuclear attack in the hands of Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad?