I was just looking at the Technorati website yesterday and I noticed something that knocked my socks off.  Next to my blog I saw the graphic you see here: Top 100 World Politics, which means this blog is ranked in the top 100 of all world politics blogs that Technorati tracks (which presumably is tens, if not hundreds of thousands of blogs).  The specific ranking is 38th.

Tikun Olam’s World Politics authority ranking is 754, which is determined by the number of blogs that link to me and their respective authority.  Other factors that are considered are size of readership and numbers of subscribers.

So thanks to all of you to contributing to the continuing success of this enterprise.  May we go from success to success.

And as we get into the holiday season when lots of folks make decisions on their philanthropic commitments, please remember Tikun Olam and give as generously as you can to support this work.  Fundraising to support the Iran-Israel-U.S. conference next month in Seattle also continues.

Related posts:

1. Tikun Olam’s Alexa Ranking 189,000
2. Tikun Olam Going Through Changes
3. Tikun Olam Joins The Seminal

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Related posts:

1. Iran-Israel-U.S.: Resolving the Nuclear Impasse
2. Barak: Nuclear Iran No Existential Threat to Israel
3. Iran-Israel OpEd JTNews Refused to Publish

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

“Hang on Sloopy,
Sloopy hang on”

–Hang On Sloopy, The McCoys

Obama’s desperate.  Even certain unnamed Israeli officials are desperate.  Mahmoud Abbas has had it with U.S. wimpitude and Israeli nyetitude and threatened to resign.  He raises the specter of the dismantlement of the PA, which might force Israel to resume adminstration of the West Bank–something Israel devoutly wishes to avoid.  Alternatively, Abbas raises the possibility of a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood blessed by the Security Council.

So how does the Obama administration respond?  According to the NY Times’ Ethan Bronner, with the usual bromides and half measures…hang on, Mahmoud they beg:

American and Israeli officials are contemplating a series of steps to persuade Mr. Abbas to stay. They include a marked intensification of security and economic coöperation, more money, invitations to Western capitals, robust statements of support, prisoner releases and efforts to draw Arab states more fully into the process.

I mean really.  What in this list is substantive and anything more than window dressing?  Doesn’t Obama realize that even those gluttons for punishment, the Palestinians, will see through this empty gesture.  Does the U.S. think that the PA can live by “robust statements of support??”  And how will they draw the Arab states into the process when they’ve desperately tried to do so and failed thus far?  If this wasn’t so f’ing serious I’d actually be laughing.  This gives Abbas everything but what he really needs: genuine accomplishments.

Israelis understand “facts on the ground.”  That’s what they used to call settlements in the days when Ariel Sharon was Housing minister and building a settler presence in the Territories.  That’s what Mahmoud Abbas wants.  Not rhetoric, not statements, but genuine facts on the ground.  Barack and Bibi–if you can’t muster that you might as well just close up shop and go home.  Then you can leave the field to the wild-eyed men of hate on both sides.  Let the bombs fly for that the language of violence is the only speech the two sides seem to apprehend.

Why in God’s name would Abbas want to stay under these conditions?  He’d be crazy to do so.  Better to resign and retain some dignity than continue and be the butt of Palestinian jokes and worse and the object of Israeli condescension.

Ever the pro-Israel Pollyana, Bronner can’t avoid throwing a bone to Salaam Fayyad’s ridiculous two-year plan for Palestinian statehood–a plan which is something like telling the Planning Commission what your plans would have been for a piece of property that’s on fire and in the process of burning down:

Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister, opposes seeking international recognition of a state. Instead, he has put forth a two-year plan aimed at building institutions and security so that the future state will be strong, transparent and well-run.

We might as well call a spade a spade.  At this rate, the much vaunted Obama peace initiative is dead and we will have to look elsewhere for ways to advance the peace process; or at least prevent it from falling even farther into the ditch than its already gone.  Similarly, with Obama butting his nose out of the I-P conflict, this leaves the Netanyahu government free and clear to pursue virtually any policy it wishes to continue the Occupation and further the aims of Judaizers seeking to evict Palestinians and further constrain their presence in Jerusalem and the West Bank.  This leaves the Israeli right triumphant at least for the time being.

I hope I’m wrong.  I hope Obama, who seems to be a gifted and persevering fellow, can surprise me.  But the record to this point doesn’t augur well for that.

That means that processes and peace activism spearheaded by the human rights NGOs like the BDS movement and the Goldstone Report will become even more important than they already are.  If the powers that be aren’t yet prepared to do the right thing and bring the Israeli Occupation to its knees, then the world progressive community will have to continue and intensify its campaign.  And Israel and its supporters should expect the continuation of the erosion of its support in the world.  They should expect intensifying cries for justice in international legal venues.  Pressure will mount even if it won’t be coming from governments like the U.S. or EU.  The punishment will come slowly and gradually till eventually it will be death (of the Occupation) by a thousand cuts.

Related posts:

1. Bibi’s Father’s Answer to the ‘Arab Problem”: Hang’ Em in the Town Square
2. Mahmoud Darwish, Palestine’s Greatest Poet, Dies
3. Libya Forces UN Security Council to Take Up Goldstone Report

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Dov Hikind, Jewish racist and agent provocateur for Jewish-Muslim holy war (Jim Hollander/European Pressphoto Agency)

American Jewish pro-settler extremists are playing an increasing role not just in supporting their radical brethren in the Territories, but in obstructing a potential peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.  The Israeli government certainly does a good enough job of this on its own and doesn’t need such support in its obstructionism, but with this added support the obstacles are insurmountable:

Dov Hikind, a member of the New York State Assembly, was in this disputed city on Wednesday looking for property to buy. He said he was most excited about a new apartment complex overlooking the Old City called Nof Zion.

At noon, Mr. Hikind led a group of about 50 American Jews in laying a cornerstone for the next phase of Nof Zion…“I want to buy here,” Mr. Hikind said. “I might make a deal while I am here this time.”

More than a real estate deal, though, it would be a statement: Nof Zion, a private Jewish project, is in Jebel Mukaber, a Palestinian Arab neighborhood of East Jerusalem, in territory Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 war. Israel claims sovereignty over all Jerusalem; the Palestinians demand the eastern part as the capital of a future state.

Even within Israel, the idea of Jews moving into predominantly Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem stirs heated debate.

One of the worst aspects of Hikind’s enterprise is its goal of eradicating a Palestinian presence from historically Arab East Jerusalem neighborhoods. But what he does is couch his efforts in the veneer of civil rights as in this statement by him:

Not allowing Jews to live in certain neighborhoods of the city “is segregation”…

Aish Hatorah's Third Temple model, awaiting an Arabrein Jerusalem

Actually, Jerusalem is currently an entirely segregated, divided city (contrary to the Israeli fiction that Jerusalem “is one”).  There are virtually no Arabs living in west Jerusalem.  There are 200,000 Jews living in historically Arab East Jerusalem.  Arabs cannot live in west Jerusalem.  So saying Jews should be allowed to forcibly evict Arab owners from their homes in East Jerusalem in order to supplant them with interloper Jews is the height of cynicism.  It is a puerile justification for immorality and theft.

I repeat here something I’ve said too many times, but which can’t be restated enough: Dov Hikind and his thuggish friends are a pernicious obstacle to peace.  His wife runs Ateret Cohanim, one of the chief Jewish groups forcibly Judaizing East Jerusalem.  One of the main goals of her group is to build and dedicate a Third Temple, a foolhardy enterprise that would surely ignite a religious war the likes of which even the Holy Land hasn’t seen in decades, if not centuries.  They are buying and stealing Palestinian homes using tax-exempt funds donated by American Jews, thus putting the U.S. government and taxpayer on record indirectly supporting this evil enterprise.  In addition, Hikind and his ‘minyans’ stand blatantly opposed to U.S. policy which opposes settlements and supports a freeze.  How can the U.S. government countenance an elected N.Y. state official serving as a major irritant in a critical international conflict??  When will the president get wise that the only way to handle such matters is with utmost firmness?

The following sorts of statements by Barack Obama are not only patently obvious, they’re far too little and too late:

“Additional settlement-building does not contribute to Israel’s security” and would make peace efforts harder.

“I think it embitters the Palestinians in a way that could end up being very dangerous,” he said.

It “could” be dangerous??

In the following passage about Israeli demolition of private Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem, the N.Y. Times correspondent reveals her unfamiliarity with the real situation for Palestinians in East Jerusalem:

When it comes to demolitions, Jerusalem’s City Hall says it applies the law equally in all parts of the city, regardless of religion or race. But officials acknowledge that the process of obtaining a building permit is costly and complicated. Most Palestinian residents do not qualify.

First, the Jerusalem municipality does NOT tear down Jewish homes, period.  It doesn’t really have to since Jews easily qualify and obtain construction permits.  Kershner errs when she says “most” Palestinians do not qualify.  NO Palestinians qualify.  As far as I know, if there has been a single approval of a Palestinian permit in decades I’d be shocked.  This is Jewish racism.  This is apartheid, Israel-style.  Yes, I said it–apartheid, and I stand by it.  If the shoe fits, wear it.

Related posts:

1. Dersh: Zionism Came to Rid ‘Holy Land of Disease’
2. ADL Calls Obama Mentor ‘Black Racist’
3. Samantha Power Advocates 82nd Airborne Occupy Tel Aviv

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, inciting goyicide (Flash 90)

Readers of this blog will recall the post I wrote about the good Rabbi Yitzchak Shapira, who wrote a 200-page book arguing, among other things, that it was permissible to kill goyim, including children and even babies, who endangered Jews.  Rav Shapira doesn’t explain how a goy baby could endanger a Jew, but if it was a Palestinian baby I’m sure he could think up one.  In fact, here is some of the Jewish ethicist’s ramblings on that precise subject:

…It is permissible to kill gentile [read "Palestinian"] babies “because their presence assists murder, and there is reason to harm children if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us … it is permissible to harm the children of a leader in order to stop him from acting evilly … we have seen in the Halakha that even babies of gentiles who do not violate the seven Noahide laws, there is cause to kill them because of the future threat that will be caused if they are raised to be wicked people like their parents.”

This goes way beyond pre-emption.  Shapira is advocating killing Palestinian babies who don’t even pose a threat to a Jew and who he can’t possibly know in the future will do so.  This is pre-emptive religious war on steroids.

The rabbi creates a golem (Biderman)

Now, word comes from Haaretz’s Akiva Eldar that the estimable Jewish ethicist, through his yeshiva, actually receives state funding for his efforts at promoting goyicide:

Lior Yavne, who oversees research at the Yesh Din human rights organization, checked and found that in 2006-2007, the Ministry of Education department of Torah institutions transferred over a million shekels [$250,000] to [Shapira's] Od Yosef Hai yeshiva in Yitzhar.

The Ministry of Social Affairs has allocated over 150,000 shekels to the yeshiva since 2007…And what can they [students] learn with the help of public funding from the head of the yeshiva, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira? According to selected items published last week in the media, the boys can learn that Teitel is not only innocent, but also a real saint.

Their spiritual leader stated in his book, Torat Hamelekh that “a national decision is not necessary in order to permit the shedding of blood of an evil kingdom. Even individuals from the afflicted kingdom can attack them.”

“The commandments in the book do not suffice only with gentiles; you can also find in them approval to attack leftist professors: every citizen in the kingdom opposing us who encourages the [Palestinian] fighters or expresses satisfaction with their actions is considered a pursuer and his killing is permissible,” wrote the rabbi.

This, of course, is a justification for the vigilantism of settler militias which routinely terrorize and even murder Palestinian civilians, as it is a justification for killing fellow Jews.  There is Israeli law against precisely this sort of incitement.  That it is not enforced against the rabbi-ethicist indicates how hollow Israeli authority is when it comes to tamping down right-wing hatred and violence.  Shapira is not only vindicating Jack Teitel’s bombing attack against Prof. Zev Sternhell, he is telling wannabe Judean terrorist to “kill more of ‘em.”

We shouldn’t be at all surprised that one of the good rabbis talmidim took upon himself to build his own crude Qasam rocket which he fired at a neighboring Palestinian village.  His teacher, Rabbi Shapira, provides a fine moral example for him.

I have not yet done so, but how much would you like to bet that American Jewish settler funders also support Od Yosef Hai Yeshiva in Yitzhar?  If so, that means your tax dollars and mine are subsidizing this racist genocidal filth.  Not to mention the Israeli state itself which implicitly endorses his murderous hatred by providing a $300,000 state subsidy for his yeshiva.  The yeshiva is, by the way, a legally registered UK charity.

I was raised to be a good Jewish boy.  I respected rabbis as spiritual and sometimes even holy men.  But I have to admit I find it repulsive that there are some Jews who call this man “Rabbi” and defile the title and rabbinic tradition by doing so.

A word about the accompanying Biderman cartoon: Haaretz reported during Operation Cast Lead the religious indoctrination offered by the IDF’s rabbinical corps which justified killing Palestinians.  It wasn’t a pretty picture by any means.  Earlier today, the IDF acknowledged that a group of soldiers refused to carry out orders to dismantle an illegal outpost.  Turns out that an inordinate percentage of IDF officers are now ideologically committed settlers who have imbided the Kool Aid offered to them during the Gaza war.  They’re perfectly willing to kill Gazans.  But a funny thing happened on the way.  They’re no longer willing to follow orders when they affect Jewish settlers.

The image connotes that the IDF rabbis created a golem during Cast Lead, one who was indoctrinated into believing there is no value higher than a Jewish life and that a Palestinian life is markedly inferior.  This soldier will eagerly do the right-wing settler rabbis’ bidding.

Related posts:

1. Pro-Settler Rabbi Tells IDF Troops Vatican and Hezbollah Conspire to Exterminate Jews
2. Radical Settler Rabbi Bribes IDF Soldiers to Disobey Orders
3. Settler Rabbi, Hamas Journalist Propose Gaza Ceasefire

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

…The Palestinians have put forward a plan to seek United Nations Security Council recognition for a Palestinian state in the lands won by Israel in 1967 without Israeli agreement. Palestinian officials said they have announced the idea in an attempt to break the impasse in peace talks.That initiative suffered a setback on Tuesday…Carl Bildt, the foreign minister of Sweden, which holds the European Union presidency, was not encouraging. He told reporters in Brussels on Tuesday that a bid for international recognition of a state not yet formed would be “somewhat premature.”

The United States and Israel have already signaled their disapproval of the Palestinian initiative. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said on Monday that the United States supports “a Palestinian state that arises as a result of a process between the two parties.” The prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, has warned that a unilateral move by the Palestinians would “unravel” existing agreements.

I’d like to ask Mr. Kelly how and when a Palestinian state can arise out of a process of negotiation when Israel doesn’t want such a process or an outcome and does everything in its power to prevent it from happening AND the U.S. administration appears powerless to do anything to stop it?

Palestinian laborer prays at site of Gilo settlement construction (Reuters)

The beauty of the initiative is that it bypasses the obstinacy and recalcitrance of the Netanyahu government and immediately places it under enormous international pressure to be more forthcoming.  And even if it refuses, pressure will gradually mount as the incipient Palestinian state gains added support and legitimacy over time.  It will serve the purpose of gradually eroding the general Israeli position and the Occupation itself.

What are the alternatives?  Here is an example of what we can expect from Israel behaving with impunity in the face of feeble U.S. and EU opposition:

U.S. ‘dismayed’ at Israel plan to build 900 homes beyond Green Line

The plan – named “Gilo’s western slopes” – will account for a significant expansion of the neighborhood. The planned 900 housing units will be built in the form of 4-5 bedroom apartments, in an effort to lure relatively well-off residents.

The plan was initiated by the Israel Land Administration, and has received an initial green light, but on Tuesday the authorization was finalized.

The additional housing units are only part of the planned expansion of Gilo. In fact, the majority of apartments slated to be built in Jerusalem in the coming years will be located in Gilo. Other building plans in various stages of approval include some 4,000 new housing units in Gilo and adjacent areas.

We could view this as a comic opera with Israel trotting out new settlements whenever it wants to step on the toes of any party having enough temerity to suggest an approach disfavored by that nation.  But it isn’t comic when it destroys the chances of a viable Palestinian state and continues the murderous status quo.  I think we have to declare Israel persona grata in the international community.  Unless the world becomes serious, Israel will never learn a lesson other than obduracy.

This will mean the Obama administration will have to stop with half measures like settlement freezes.  It will have to go to final status negotiatons and threaten Israel with withholding economic and military aid as Joe Klein suggested last week in Time.  While they’re at it, it would an added statement if the administration directed the IRS to review the tax-exempt status of the numerous pro-settler American Jewish fundraising operations funding Judean militias which murder Palestinians.

Mr. Obama: it’s time to put up or shut up.

Related posts:

1. Steve Walt: Obama’s Policy Options With a Recalcitrant Israel
2. Friedman Advises Obama to Wash His Hands of Israel-Palestine
3. Obama’s Cuba Policy, Triumph of Realism

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

NIAC has sued an Iranian, Hassan Daioeslam, for slander.  The case just survived a ruling requiring discovery and depositions.  The defendant in the case is a member of the executive committee of Mujahadeen al-Khalq, an Iranian group named by the U.S. Treasury as a terrorist entity, because it seeks the violent overthrow of the Iranian regime.  Apparently, Daioeslam and his cohort have obtained documents from NIAC which prove…what, I’m not sure.  But neocons will tell you breathelessly that they prove that Trita Parsi is a pawn of the Iranian mullahs, doing their bidding in a valiant effort to allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.  The Daioeslam-FrontpageMagazine crowd goes farther and claims that Parsi is a Revolutionary Guard spy and/or  paid foreign agent working to subvert U.S. policy on behalf of the murderous mullahs.

Here’s a the gist of Lake’s claims (and do note the degree to which quotations are fragmented and truncated and accusations are unsupported):

Shortly before Barack Obama took office, leaders of a prominent Iranian-American group in Washington began to fret.

If the new president were to tap former Middle East envoy Dennis Ross to oversee the nation’s Iran policy, they feared their long-running effort to persuade American officials to lift sanctions could wind up in tatters. Patrick Disney, acting policy director of National Iranian American Council (NIAC), summed up the strategy: “Create a media controversy” concerning Mr. Ross, whose support for a tough line on Iran was well-known.

“Those groups that feel comfortable being more aggressive in opposing Ross publicly (possibly Voters for Peace, [Friends Committee on National Legislation] , Physicians for Social Responsibility, others) will do so,” Mr. Disney wrote in an e-mail obtained by The Washington Times, “while others who may have less latitude on the matter will declare their preference for a more agreeable envoy.”

Mr. Ross was appointed anyway and wound up on the National Security Council. But the episode highlights NIAC’s emergence as a major player in Washington and leading voice for engaging Iran and ultimately lifting U.S. sanctions.

Note the unsupported claim that NIAC supports “lifting sanctions” against Iran.  NIAC opposes any NEW sanctions against Iran.  Frankly, I’m pretty sure NIAC (along with almost every other serious Iran analyst) thinks existing sanctions are counter-productive.  But it does not support “lifting sanctions” as described in Lake’s report.

As for opposed Ross’ entry into the government, welcome to the party.  There were literally scores of organizations, blogs and Middle East experts lobbying furiously against Ross (including me).  Are we all agents of the Ayatollahs.

Another unsupported claim:

Now a lawsuit has brought to light numerous documents that raise questions about whether the organization is using that influence to lobby for policies favorable to Iran in violation of federal law.

There seems to be a willful inability for neocons like Lake to distinguish between a policy that “favors Iran” and one that favors the U.S.  NIAC’s policies are not designed to favor the current Iranian government.  In fact, NIAC is opposed to the current government.  But they oppose violent regime change and that is what irks the necons.  NIAC’s positions favor the best long-term interests of Iran-U.S. relations–that is, the greatest good for the greatest numbers of everyday Iranians (not the mullahs).

In the following passage, Lake actually does accurately characterize Parsi and NIAC’s views in such a way that this directly contradicts his prior breathless statements about NIAC’s agenda of subverting U.S. policy:

Mr. Parsi, a green card holder, has become more critical of Iran’s government since its disputed June 12 presidential elections, urging President Obama to condemn human rights abuses in Iran and to implement a “tactical pause” in efforts to arrange negotiations. But Mr. Parsi’s history suggests a continuing commitment to changing U.S. policy on Iran…

First, Parsi doesn’t want to “change” U.S. policy on Iran.  He wants an effective, productive policy on Iran that resolves conflict, including the current nuclear impasse.  This is precisely what Barack Obama’s policy is.  So there is very little daylight between the two.  The only difference is that NIAC does not support new draconian sanctions against Iran nor does it support a military attack on Iran.  Though Obama doesn’t currently support either option, he hasn’t ruled them out.  That’s it.  Those are the only differences.  So to say that Parsi is committed to changing U.S. policy is at best a distortion, at worst an outright lie.

Lake also mischaracterizes how he obtained the NIAC documents.  He claims they were “made public” as the result of the defamation suit against Daioeslam.  They weren’t “made public.”  They were transferred to Daioeslam who then gave them to Lake.  Actually, Lake is making the documents public out of ideological animus toward NIAC and a desire to support a hard-core neocon position on Iran.

In the following passage, Lake provides little support for the claim that NIAC has violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act:

Law enforcement experts who reviewed some of the documents, which were made available to The Times by the defendant in the suit, say e-mails between Mr. Parsi and Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations at the time, Javad Zarif – and an internal review of the Lobbying Disclosure Act – offer evidence that the group has operated as an undeclared lobby and may be guilty of violating tax laws, the Foreign Agents Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws.

Lake offers a single internal e mail written by a junior NIAC staffer saying that the latter believed that he and a colleague spent more than 20% of their time lobbying and that therefore they should consider registering as lobbyists.  This is not a memo written by Parsi, the leader of the group.  There is no evidence of what his opinion was on the subject.  And the opinion offered by the junior staffer was not a legal opinion since he is not a lawyer.

The Washington Times muckraker finds further proof of Parsi’s divided allegiance in an entirely different group the latter founded 13 years ago when reformist Mohammed Khatami was Iran’s president.  The earlier group did have as part of its mission to advance Iranian interests and remove U.S. sanctions according to Lake.  Keep in mind, the earlier group’s mission was formulated during an entirely different time in Iran’s political history.  Besides, the earlier group no longer exists.  So Lake would have you believe that Trita Parsi is violating federal law because he is allegedly adhering to the mission of a group that no longer exists and which was created to respond to the reformist movement in Iranian politics which has not been in power for five years.

Here Lake confuses Parsi’s desire to “open up opportunities for trade” with a desire to undermine U.S. sanctions policy:

As early as December 2002, however, Mr. Parsi envisioned that his nonprofit would join with a full-fledged “grass-roots lobby” to push for an end to sanctions on Iran.  He wrote in a memo to Roy Coffee, a former aide to then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush: “Although the mission of the proposed lobby should be to improve relations between the U.S. and Iran and open up opportunities for trade, the initial targets should be less controversial issues such as visas and racial profiling/discrimination.”

In the neocon universe, if you attempt to improve U.S.-Iran relations you are a traitor to U.S. interests and a stooge of Iran.  If you foresee a time when U.S. and Iranian companies would pursue commercial interests, then you’re as good as a smuggler crossing the Straits of Hormuz in a cigarette boat.

This is how Lake describes the lawsuit defendant, who is a confirmed Iranian anti-regime revolutionary:

An Iranian-American journalist from Arizona named Hassan Daioleslam…

How does Daioeslam qualify as a “journalist?”  Why, he writes for Frontpagemagazine don’t ya know.  Why no mention of his affiliation with Mujahadeen al-Khalq?  That would complicate things a bit for Lake, wouldn’t it?  He’d have to explain why he’s relying on an informant who is a leader of an Iranian terrorist group.

Not until the end of his article does Lake say of the evidence for one of his claims, that Parsi arranged meetings between Iran’s UN ambassador and members of Congress:

…The case is not definitive. Two lawyers who read some of the same documents said they did not provide enough evidence to conclude that Mr. Parsi was acting as a foreign agent. Neither of the lawyers agreed to be quoted by name.

A fair journalist would have acknowledged this from the very beginning of the piece and not made such an unequivocal claim in the beginning.  But neither Lake’s nor the Washington Time’s job is to use standard practices of professional journalism like fairness and balance.

Once again at the end of his article he provides this comment from a Congressmember who totally disputes the notion that Parsi was engaging in lobbying when the member met with the Iranian ambassador:

Mr. Gilchrest, a Maryland Republican who left office in 2009, said he remembered meeting with Mr. Parsi but did not consider him a major player in his efforts to meet Iranian officials.

“Trita was one person that we would use as a source of information. But I would not say we viewed Trita as a lobbyist,” Mr. Gilchrest said. “He was a small part of our circle who wanted to meet with Iranians.”

Here, Lake offers further evidence of NIAC’s alleged lobbying activities:

NIAC boasted about the media campaign in a grant application to private foundations for a proposed “U.S.-Iran Media Resource Program.”

The application said NIAC “succeeded in putting Iran’s 2003 Grand Bargain offer onto national headlines,” noting that Mr. Parsi’s efforts had generated 37 “pieces of analysis,” a feature on CNN and 80 newspaper mentions.

The application credits NIAC for thwarting what Mr. Parsi said was “the Bush administration’s push for a military confrontation with Iran.”

So NIAC’s publicizing the Iranian “Grand Bargain” in the U.S. media constitutes lobbying?  I’ve written about the Grand Bargain.  Should I register as a lobbyist?  And you’ll note that the closest Lake gets to proving NIAC actually had any impact on U.S. policy toward Iran is Lake’s characterization of NIAC as “taking credit” for influencing policy.  The reporter doesn’t even provide any documentary evidence or a quotation from the application that supports the claim.

Besides, the Bush administration refused to attack Iran for reasons having little or nothing to do with NIAC.  George Bush decided that such an attack was not in U.S. interests.  Believe me, he didn’t listen to NIAC’s views in making that decision.  There were far more important voices he was listening to like his own father and members of his father’s inner circle like Brent Scowcroft.  Who knows, maybe Condi Rice actually had something sobering to say on the subject to counter the pro-war rumblings of Dick Cheney.

Unfortunately, Lake also neglects to mention that Daioeslam conspired with neocon regime-change hawk, Kenneth Timmerman in a campaign to smear Parsi: The former wrote an e mail to the latter during the presidential campaign with that in mind:

“I strongly believe that Trita Parsi is the weakest part of the Iranian web…I believe that destroying him will be the start of attacking the whole web. This is an integral part of any attack on Clinton or Obama.”

It was their hope thereby to damage the realist approach to U.S.-Iran relations and thereby aid and abet the drumbeat to military force, if not war.  Instead of worrying about whether Trita Parsi is a mullah mole Eli Lake should be asking himself why his neocon friends supporting regime change are conspiring with Iranian dissidents who support terror.

Related posts:

1. Whew! Gregoire Ahead for Washington Governor for First Time
2. Israel Lobby Smears Obama Intelligence Appointee
3. Israeli Consul Smears J Street

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Awn gave a terrific talk that focussed mainly on the history of the Shia-Sunni split and the cultural, political and religious differences between the two sects.  Along the way though, he covered all the main stops on the Middle East tour including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Iran nuclear impasse, topics I blog about regularly.

I asked Awn about the nexus between religion and politics and how that fuels the Israeli-Arab conflict.  He replied with some interesting comments which reflect closely my own feelings.  He believes that the Israeli-Arab conflict is essentially political, rather than religious.  Not that there isn’t a religious element to the conflict.  But that political extremists on both sides exploit religion as an accelerant in the conflict.

Awn pointed out that Osama bin Laden isn’t particularly interested in the Israeli-Arab conflict nor even in toppling the west or establishing a Muslim caliphate.  What he really wants to do is topple the Saudi regime, which is largely a political goal.  He shamelessly exploits the Israeli-Palestinian conflict while not caring a whit for the plight of the Palestinians.  Similarly, Awn feels that Americans make a serious mistake when they claim that bin Laden wants to destroy the U.S.  The 9/11 attacks were an attempt to get U.S. forces out of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.

The real danger in political conflicts like the Israeli-Arab dispute is that religion will be injected into it and raise the level of hysteria.  Political violence is bad enough.  But adding religion and turning it into sacred violence infinitely raises the stakes.

So as troubling as Jack Teitel or Nidal Hassan are, Dean Awn views them and their religious fanaticism as symptoms of a conflict that is political.  He does not view religion as the root cause nor should we.

In the “you shall know them by their enemies” department, you can be assured of Dean Awn’s bona fides knowing that the fake anti-jihad “expert,” “Hugh Fitzgerald” has attacked him in Frontpagemagazine, certainly the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval if there ever was one.

Related posts:

1. After Obama Victory, What to Expect in Middle East
2. Endowment for Middle East Truth Funds Massive ‘Obsession’ DVD Distribution
3. From Mumbai to Hebron, Hate Speaks the Same Language Regardless of Religion

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.