August 23, 2007 by DKShideler |
910 Group | 23:02:55 | |
Back in July we wrote about The National Iranian American Council Mr. Mohammad Navab, a member of NIAC, (see here,here, and here) and indicating that he was also a board member of the Campaign Against Sanctions And Military Action In Iran (CASMII). Today, we received a comment from Mr. Navab: (see here):
Dear all
Thank you for your efforts towards the well being of this great nation. I, like you wish to see the best continuing for this phenomenal country (the most interesting in human history) and the people of other countries. One clarification that needs to be made though is that I am not a member of CASMII and I would highly appreciate this correction to be made in your analyses.
With thanks and best wishes,
Mohamad Navab
The IP and Email address both trace back to UCLA, where Mr. Navab teaches, so I’m relatively comfortable saying its him. Thinking that perhaps we had made a mistake when we identified Mr. Navab as a CASMII board member, and wishing to correct, I returned to the link we had provided to the CASMII site where Mr. Navab’s name was found, and found this: Access Denied.
Well, I thought, that’s odd. With a little help I found A google cache here:(captured as .PDF here, with additional pages here and here). Mr. Navab had served as a board member of CASMII when our article was written. Mr. Navab has now been removed from CASMII’s website and is no longer listed as a Board member. It seems that Mr. Navab has chosen to distance himself from CASMII, and he picked a good time to do it. From CASMII this week, “Friendly American Encounter with Revolutionary Guard“.
An American peace delegation which visited Iran recently has described a striking friendly encounter with some three hundred members of the Revolutionary Guards. In a statement, the head of the delegation has strongly debunked the US administration’s decision to label these soldiers as terrorist and has called on Americans to oppose a new war of aggression.
Of course the evidence that IRGC has assisted in the killing of American soldiers is overwhelming. So we were pleased to hear that Mr. Navab has chosen to no longer be with the CASMII Board of Directors, and we congratulate him on that decision.
4 Comments
»
CASMII and NIAC are the same thing - regime apologists sponsored directly and indirectly by the Iranian regime and oil mafia.
[...] Islamic Republic apologist Mohammad Navab, currently on board of directors of NIAC (National Iranian-American Council) - well known apologists for the Iranian regime and Islamic fundamentalism, has apparently resigned from CASMII where he was serving as a director! [...]
Regarding the kudos given to Dr. Navab for the decision he made, I am reminded of two different historical precedents that may be relevant. The name of this blog group is Center for Vigilant Freedom. It may hark back to the famous quote “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance,” which I have often cited and which contains a good deal of wisdom. There is also, however, the more dubious American tradition of the “vigilance committee” (or “vigilantes”) which has variously been used to describe abolitionists, pro-slavery advocates, groups of citizens living on the virtually lawless American “frontier” and others. We should keep in mind that “Vigilance committees, by their nature, lacked an outside set of checks and balances leaving them open for excesses and abuse.” Indeed, Dr. Navab unfortunately found himself the victim of the same kind of unchecked abuse of freedom that afflicted victims of the red scare of the McCarthy era. Any individual, no matter how free of malice or blame, can find it very difficult to stand up to a campaign of innuendo, rumor-mongering and attacks on one’s reputation — even if the charges are groundless or utterly fabricated. Dr. Navab is in fact a patriot — both of the United States and of his home country of Iran — but he has a career and a family to protect as well. Gloating over success in silencing someone is the mark of a faction that relies on intimidation and pressure, rather than rathional argument. CASMII has regularly been accused of being a supporter of the current government of Iran, despite its every effort to make crystal clear its endorsement of human rights, democratic process and the rule of law. For some people, it seems, only bombs are a legitimate way to settle international disputes — anything else bespeaks weakness or treason. This is why the 20th century saw more bloodshed and mayhem than any century in history. Peace and reconciliation has always been a hard sell, while belligerence and hate find many supporters. Dr. Navab is a gentle man, as well as a gentleman. The triumph of his erstwhile detractors is nothing to applaud; his stepping back from the harsh spotlight is lamentable, if totally undertandable.
As we pointed out in our article above, in the same week which Mr. Navab made the decision to leave CASMII, that organization linked a story, ” Friendly American Encounter With Revolutionary Guard,” the organization by which the Iranian regime exports terrorism, cows its populace into submission, and which has been implicated in the killing of American soldiers in Iraq. This is one of the reasons we are of the opinion that CASMII is not an organization of pacifists but rather has chosen to root for the other side. No one has silenced Mr. Navab, only commented as to the company he freely kept. As for the McCarthy “Red Scare”, I’d point out that you’ll win many supporters for such a comparison here, especially amongst those of us who have read the “Verona” documents. I would also suggest that “the 20th century saw more bloodshed and mayhem,” not because countries tolerated no recourse in international affairs but war, but rather because their first response was appeasement to evil, until such time as only war would undo what appeasement had wrought.
Our initial article contained little in the way of intimidation or pressure, remarking simply the organizations to which Mr. Navab and others were a part, and the stances displayed by those organizations. If by stating in clear terms how support for those organizations is perceived by some of his fellow Americans changed his views on the matter than that is neither innuendo, rumor-mongering nor an attack of any kind. Mr. Navab’s comment here at Vigilant Freedom was that of a gentleman, which is why we chose a complimentary tone, and updated our audience about his decision as he had requested.