var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-38337040-1']); _gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); (function() { var ga = document.createElement('script'); ga.type = 'text/javascript'; ga.async = true; ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();
Pentagon Report on Iranian Intelligence agents Who Collaborated with NIAC

Iranian American Forum, 5 Jan. 2013

The Pentagon report names two individuals as Iranian intelligence agents. NIAC worked with them and organized a Congressional briefing for them. Also, NIAC worked with editor of Iraninterlink, identified by the report as VEVAK's website

The Library of Congress has released a report prepared by Pentagon on Iranian intelligence ministry, their techniques in recruiting agents in Europe and the US and in infiltrating US academic institutions and Iranian-American organizations. The 64 page unclassified report published by Washington press and Farsi media names two individuals as the agents of Iranian secret services. Both persons have collaborated with National Iranian American Council (NIAC) led by Trita Parsi, a Washington based advocacy group viewed by many Iranians to be the Mullahs' lobby in US. The government press in Tehran calls NIAC the "Iran lobby in US."

The Pentagon report names London based Massoud Khodabandeh and his wife Anne Singleton as the recruits of Iranian intelligence services. (pages 26-27). NIAC's internal documents obtained during a defamation lawsuit, (that NIAC lost) show close collaboration between NIAC and these two individuals. In 2008, NIAC organized a Congressional briefing in Washington for these Iranian agents and paid their travel fare but the US Homeland Security intervened and stopped them from boarding the London flight to Washington.

Furthermore, the report identifies several websites such as Iran Interlink as being operated by the Iranian intelligence agency. (p. 41) NIAC also collaborated with H. Sobhani, editor of Iran Interlink. Sobhani wrote an article and labeled Daioleslam a terrorist. Then, Trita Parsi and NIAC used this article in a large scale campaign against Daioleslam to discredit him and eventually use it in the defamation lawsuit. Parsi further instructed numerous friendly websites to use Sobhani's article and smear Daioleslam.

This new credible revelation by the Pentagon and the Library of Congress about NIAC's collaborators raises serious questions about US National Security as NIAC maintains intimate relations with US government. For example, in a series of troubling emails the State Department officials coordinated a joint lobby in Congress to raise funds for an initiative that would allegedly facilitate better relation between Iran and the US.

In another series of emails, the US Consular official based in Dubai asked NIAC to help the Consulate in its outreach program towards Iranians. The American official suggests funding NIAC through a detour in order for the funds to be untraceable.

In a third example, complicity between the State Department and NIAC is beyond comprehension.   In a series of emails, a State official asked Trita Parsi about the Iranian regime's motivations in foreign policy and how best the US can approach the regime. Parsi burst into an emotional defense of Tehran and presented the regime as a victim of US belligerent policies. Strangely enough, the State Department official agreed with Parsi. 

NIAC is the administration's main interlocutor on Iran issues, US embassies continue to invite Parsi to speak at events organized and sponsored by their embassy, he is invited to brief the State Department officials, teach classes for them (paid for) and most prominent State's officials speak at NIAC's event.

US government may think that they have found a back alley doorway to the Iranian regime.  In reality, it could be Tehran’s Ayatollahs who have found a back alley door to the State Department!

* According to a press report, the Library of Congress has announced that "The report was pulled for revisions after the Division staff  identified a passage that should have been caveated but was missed in the initial reviews,"