Washington, DC – Today, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion regarding aspects of cost sharing in NIAC’s defamation lawsuit against Seyyed Hassan Daioleslam. In the appeal, NIAC won on several issues, overturning aspects of the lower court’s previous rulings, and resulting in a more favorable outcome for NIAC.
While NIAC objected to the decision of the court that it should pay a fraction of the discovery costs, it is Mr. Daioleslam who must pay the large majority of the costs for his legal fishing expedition. This further accentuates the larger outcome of the case, in which Mr. Daioleslam backtracked from his accusations against NIAC and instead hid behind the argument that NIAC could not prove that he knew his allegations against NIAC were false.
In short, Mr. Daioleslam further discredited his accusations against NIAC by backtracking from them once confronted in court. As this legal process draws towards a close, it is also clear that Mr. Daioleslam’s self-avowed efforts to “destroy NIAC” have patently failed. Over this period, NIAC has grown rapidly in terms of budget, membership and political influence. The Iranian-American community’s political participation is at its height, and the US and Iran are closer than ever to resolving their disputes peacefully, much thanks to the efforts of NIAC and its membership.
Further background on the case:
NIAC brought the lawsuit against Daioleslam in response to his false accusations that the organization was a lobbyist for the Iranian Government. Once in front of the court, Daioleslam had the opportunity to make his case for the truth. Instead, he changed his tune and did not seek to argue that his accusations were correct and truthful. He essentially abandoned the truth and instead argued that NIAC could not prove that he knew what he was saying was false, i.e. malicious. While we believe the evidence clearly showed that Daioleslam knew he was lying, based on his systematic disregard for the truth, neglect of readily available information that contradicted his conspiracy theories, declaration that he aimed to “destroy NIAC” in order to “bring down Obama,” as well as his support for the Mujahedin-e Khalq terrorist organization, the judge felt this didn’t meet his standard and denied us the opportunity to take Daioleslam in front of a jury.
Judge Bates provided Defendant with unfettered access to all of NIAC’s computer systems, and yet Defendant was unable to produce a single shred of evidence to substantiate his false allegations. Daioleslam retreated from his outrageous claims when challenged to back them up in court and instead hired a million-dollar defense team backed by pro-war neo-cons and engaged in creating false and nonexistent discovery issues to facilitate exorbitant costs for NIAC. Ultimately Defendant filed a motion for cost sharing, seeking to shift Defendant’s wasted efforts in discovery to NIAC. Judge Bates found no evidence that NIAC intentionally destroyed electronic documents or manipulated electronic documents improperly despite Defendant’s misrepresentations to the Court of the contrary.
How did Daioleslam–a self-described independent journalist–put together a million-dollar legal defense team?
He didn’t.
It has been revealed that the Middle East Forum–a neoconservative group at the center of the push for broad sanctions and war–financed Daioleslam’s legal efforts as part of a campaign to prevent anti-war Iranian-Americans from having a voice in Washington DC.
That group’s reactionary founder, Daniel Pipes, is one of the most outspoken advocates for war with Iran and an aggressive critic of efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear challenge peacefully. Pipes has called for the U.S. to “empower Iranians” by working with the Mujahedin-e Khalq. In 2009 he famously said Iranians should vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and reject the Green Movement to make war more likely. Pipes’ most recent work, in addition to his legal campaign on behalf of Daioleslam against NIAC, has focused on trying to prove that President Obama is a “closet Muslim.”
The legal team financed by Pipes’ organization attempted to bury NIAC in a long and cumbersome discovery process. As part of that process, they leaked NIAC emails and documents to neoconservative reporters ideologically opposed to NIAC’s anti-war agenda. Yet, even after combing through all of NIAC’s emails and documents in the discovery process, they could not produce a single shred of evidence to support any of Daioleslam’s false accusations.
The fact that a multimillion-dollar legal team could not find a single piece of evidence that NIAC has lobbied for the Iranian government is a public vindication against this outrageous accusation. This should discredit once and for all the politically motivated attacks against NIAC and expose the true aim behind these smears: to silence Iranian Americans who oppose war and crippling sanctions.
NIAC Statement
Washington, DC – Today, Judge John Bates issued a cost sharing opinion in NIAC’s defamation lawsuit against Seyyed Hassan Daieoleslam. Although Daieoleslam failed to demonstrate that his accusations against NIAC 
were true, Judge Bates ordered that NIAC bear some of the discovery costs. NIAC has already filed an appeal of this order.
NIAC brought the lawsuit against Daieoleslam in response to his false accusations that the organization was a lobbyist for the Iranian Government. Once in front of the court, Daieoleslam had the opportunity to make his case for the truth. Instead, he changed his tune and did not seek to argue that his accusations were correct and truthful. He essentially abandoned the truth and instead argued that NIAC could not prove that he knew what he was saying was false, i.e. malicious. While we believe the evidence clearly showed that Daieoleslam knew he was lying, based on his systematic disregard for truth, neglect of readily available information that contradicted his conspiracy theories, declaration that he aimed to “destroy NIAC” in order to “bring down Obama,” as well as his support for the Mujahedin-e Khalq terrorist organization, the Judge felt this didn’t meet his standard and denied us the opportunity to take Daieoleslam in front of a jury.
Judge Bates provided Defendant with unfettered access to all of NIAC’s computer systems, and yet Defendant was unable to produce a single shred of evidence to substantiate his false allegations. Daieoleslam retreated from his outrageous claims when challenged to back them up in court and instead hired a million-dollar defense team backed by pro-war neo-cons and engaged in creating false and nonexistent discovery issues to facilitate exorbitant costs for NIAC. Ultimately Defendant filed a motion for cost sharing, seeking to shift Defendants wasted efforts in discovery to NIAC. Judge Bates found no evidence that NIAC intentionally destroyed electronic documents or manipulated electronic documents improperly despite Defendant’s misrepresentations to the Court of the contrary.
How did Daieoleslam–a self-described independent journalist–put together a million-dollar legal defense team?
He didn’t.
It has been revealed that the Middle East Forum–a neoconservative group at the center of the push for broad sanctions and war–financed Daieoleslam’s legal efforts as part of a campaign to prevent anti-war Iranian-Americans from having a voice in Washington DC.
That group’s reactionary founder, Daniel Pipes, is one of the most outspoken advocates for war with Iran and an aggressive critic of efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear challenge peacefully. Pipes has called for the U.S. to “empower Iranians” by working with the Mujahedin-e Khalq. In 2009 he famously said Iranians should vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and reject the Green Movement to make war more likely. Pipes’ most recent work, in addition to his legal campaign on behalf of Daieoleslam against NIAC, has focused on trying to prove that President Obama is a “closet Muslim.”
The legal team financed by Pipes’ organization attempted to bury NIAC in a long and cumbersome discovery process. As part of that process, they leaked NIAC emails and documents to neoconservative reporters ideologically opposed to NIAC’s anti-war agenda. Yet, even after combing through all of NIAC’s emails and documents in the discovery process, they could not produce a single shred of evidence to support any of Daieoleslam’s false accusations.
The fact that a multimillion-dollar legal team could not find a single piece of evidence that NIAC has lobbied for the Iranian government is a public vindication against this outrageous accusation. This should discredit once and for all the politically motivated attacks against NIAC and expose the true aim behind these smears: to silence Iranian Americans who oppose war and crippling sanctions.
However, NIAC strongly disagrees with the decision to share the costs of this process. NIAC should not bear any responsibility for Daieoleslam’s failure to produce any evidence to back up his egregious claims as well as his grotesquely disproportionate and wasteful discovery tactics. As such, NIAC anticipates that a D.C. Circuit panel will recognize that Judge Bates’s cost-shifting orders contained multiple errors and therefore should be reversed or vacated.
Yesterday I posted a blog titled Hassan Dai: Unrepentant Fraud, exposing the self-proclaimed “progressive” activist. It quickly became Iranian.com’s hottest topic. Hassan Dai entered panic mode.
Dai falsely accused me of working for NIAC and refused to address the points in my article. Then he reposted his comment word for word. And finally, in a comedic act of desperation, Dai posted a blog four hours after mine with an old recycled article to distract from the attention my piece was getting.
As I told Mr. Dai, Iranians do not like liars and frauds, and sooner or later he is going to have to come clean to the Iranian people.
Mindful of the fact that at least he did comment on my article and does read these blogs, this may be the perfect (and perhaps only) opportunity to ask Mr. Dai the questions he has long avoided answering. After all, this is a man who prides himself on being transparent and responsive to questions.
Since Dai constantly avoids answering questions about his links with Masoud Rajavi’s Mujaheddeen (MEK) cult, and friendly TV hosts don’t press him on it, I’ll begin with unanswered questions on this topic.
1. You were in Iraq, but you have never disclosed how long you were in Iraq and for what purpose. Please clarify this for us.
2. Members of your family, such as your brother and sister, have held (and perhaps continue to hold) important positions in the MEK organization, as spokesman and other roles. Was your time at Camp Ashraf solely for visiting them? How much time in total did you spend at Camp Ashraf?
3. Mindful of your ties to the highest levels of the MEK, how many times in total have you met Maryam Rajavi?
4. Do you believe the MEK has ever engaged in terrorism and what was your reasoning for lobbying for their delisting?
5. Do you consider the MEK to be a cult?
6. The MEK is infamous for practices such as forcible divorce and breaking up of families. You divorced your first wife, and it’s been said you no longer have contact with her or your son. Was the divorce and prohibition from contacting your son related to your time with the MEK?
I have seen the panic and emotional reactions you exhibit when asked about your MEK ties on television. Perhaps for once you can summon the courage to answer these questions for people. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be afraid of. At a separate time, we will explore your deep financial and political ties with pro-war Neocon racists. You have a lot to answer for, but let’s take this one issue at a time.
By Kourosh Ighani
If you ask US Iranians to identify their community’s loudest mouthpiece for Neocon-MEK disinformation, chances are Hassan Dai would place high on the list. And it seems like almost every month something new appears to reaffirm that view.
Dai’s latest blunder came in the multiple orgasms he had covering a report linking two anti-MEK activists to Iranian intelligence. The report by the Library of Congress was leaked to Neocon Bill Kristol’s Washington Free Beacon. The MEK’s online operation immediately distributed the report with its own interpretation, and Hassan Dai followed suit a day later.
But Dai’s excitement was to be short lived. In what appears to be an unprecedented move by the Library of Congress, they retracted the report for inaccuracy, as its findings were revealed to trace back to the MEK.
In the aftermath of the embarrassment, the Library of Congress has distanced itself from the report and most of the report’s online occurrences have been pulled (fringe Neocon publications notwithstanding.)
Dai’s piece has yet to be withdrawn, and no corrections have been issued.
Publishing bogus stories using faulty sources is nothing new for Mr. Dai. The real story here is Dai’s emergence as the instrument of choice by the MEK and Neocons to spread their message in the Iranian community. If the MEK takes up an issue today, Dai can be expected to echo it tomorrow.
Dai’s latest misinformation debacle follows explosive revelations just weeks earlier exposing his deep financial ties with pro-war, pro-MEK, anti-Iranian racists like Daniel Pipes who coordinated and directed his attacks inside the Iranian community.
It is important to keep perspective however; by himself, Hassan Dai is a nobody. But for Rajavi and his Neocon sponsors, he serves a useful purpose. Daniel Pipes is happy to use Dai as a smelly brown megaphone to serve his ends, only to toss aside like a roll of toilet paper when its usefulness has reached its end. With Dai’s “journalistic” blunders piling up, it won’t be long before the Neocons turn to someone else to do their dirty work.
Statement on Lawsuit Against Hassan Daieoleslam
| Neo Cons, Mojahedin Khalq fail to Silence the Moderate Middle |
Friday, September 14, 2012
By: NIAC Press Release
The court ruling yesterday in NIAC’s lawsuit against Seyyed Hassan Daieoleslam granted NIAC victory on its central demand, while falling short on other objectives.
NIAC brought the lawsuit against Daieoleslam in 2008 in response to his slander and defamation against the organization and its co-founder, Trita Parsi. Our objective with the lawsuit was two-fold.
First, to challenge Daieoleslam’s false accusations that NIAC lobbied for the Iranian government in court and force the defendant to prove his case or concede.
On this crucial issue, NIAC prevailed. Once in front of the court, Daieoleslam had the opportunity to make his case for the truth. Instead, he changed his tune and did not seek to argue that his accusations were correct and truthful. Instead he essentially abandoned the truth and instead argued that NIAC could not prove that he knew what he was saying was false, i,e malicious. By that, he conceded this very essential point and is on notice that what he is saying is false and therefore would be acting with malice if he continues to make the same false, baseless and defamatory allegations.
The defendant’s shift is understandable mindful of the fact that after reviewing thousands of NIAC emails and documents, he could not point to a single shred of evidence indicating that NIAC served as a lobby for the government in Iran.
The judge points to this as well in his ruling, writing that “Nothing in this opinion should be construed as a finding that defendant’s articles were true. Defendant did not move for summary judgment on that ground.”
The second objective with the lawsuit was to change the nature of the political culture in the Iranian-American community, away from the slander, defamation and character assassination campaigns favored by some, and towards a more open and truthful discourse. Our hope was that by challenging the maliciousness and defamation, the culture would shift in a democratic direction.
On this point, our efforts fell short. The standard was for us to prove that Daieoleslam acted with malice, that is, not just that he was not speaking the truth, but that he knew he wasn’t speaking the truth.
While we believe the evidence clearly showed that Daieoleslam knew he was lying, based on his systematic disregard for truth, neglect of readily available information that contradicted his conspiracy theories, declaration that he aimed to “destroy NIAC” in order to “bring down Obama,” as well as his support for the Mujahedin-e Khalq terrorist organization, the Judge felt this didn’t meet his standard and denied us the opportunity to take Daieoleslam in front of a jury and help democratize the political culture in the Iranian-American community.
While we regret that such a milestone could not be achieved for the Iranian-American community, we are content that in the court of law he could not and did not defend his false accusations.
In regards to cost-sharing of the expense of the discovery, we disagree with the court’s ruling and retain the option to challenge and appeal the decision.
These past four years have been challenging and burdensome. NIAC is a small organization, with a small budget and a small legal team. Our only card was that we knew – and we proved – that truth was on our side. Daieoleslam, on the other hand, had the support of a broad network of well-funded pro-war figures. He was represented by Sidley Austin, one of the largest law firms in the world and the main counsel on his legal team was President George W. Bush’s lawyer in the White House.
But precisely because he didn’t have truth on his side, Daieoleslam tried to shift the focus of the court away from the central charge and instead overwhelm NIAC with legal expenses by filing an endless stream of motions.
The order of the judge also puts Daieoleslam on notice. While he claimed not to have known that what he was writing was false, he no longer can hide behind that excuse going forward. He is on notice and will pay the consequences of further defamation.
In the past ten years, NIAC has helped transform the Iranian-American community from being politically apathetic and vulnerable to becoming dynamic and in ownership of their own destiny. We have helped the community stand up against the voices of war, stand up for their rights in face of discrimination, and stand up for the values that make America strong. NIAC will continue to serve the interest of the Iranian-American community, particularly at this moment when the risk of war is increasing, repression in Iran is intensifying and the suffering of the Iranian people is reaching intolerable levels.
Washington, DC – On April 30, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) filed a lawsuit against Hassan Daioleslam in response to his defamatory articles about NIAC. Daioleslam, who has been identified by former members of the terrorist-listed Mujahedin organization as a member of the group’s executive committee, has since early 2007 mischaracterized NIAC’s anti-war and pro-diplomacy activities as serving the interest of the Iranian government. His writings have mostly appeared on right-wing blogs and in neo-conservative outlets.
NIAC welcomes a substantive debate on issues concerning Iranians Americans. It has repeatedly asked Daioleslam to engage in a constructive dialogue, but despite NIAC’s efforts, Daioleslam has continued to do nothing but defame NIAC through defamation, slander misquotations and false linkages to entities and figures that have played no role in NIAC’s inception, operations or development.
The decision to pursue legal action against Daioleslam has been motivated by NIAC’s strong conviction that the undemocratic practice of using defamation and character assassination to achieve political ends must be eradicated in order for the Iranian-American community to fully mature politically and play a strong role in American democracy.
“The Iranian-American community desires and deserves to play a positive role in American democracy,”said Alex Patico, co-founder of NIAC.”But practices such as slander and defamation do not belong in a democracy. The rule of this great democracy is that freedom of speech comes with great responsibility. You simply cannot lie and slander with impunity.”
Disagreements on matters of policy are natural and healthy, but personal attacks merely detract from healthy debate, chill the energies of well-meaning participants, and distort the process. If such attacks are not grounded in truth, the process suffers even further.
In Iran, like in most on-democratic countries, defamation and character assassinations are often treated as a legitimate part of politicking. In the United States, some Iranian Americans still operate under that assumption, despite having become a part of a country where such tactics are legally prohibited.
NIAC is not the only entity slandered by Mr. Daioleslam. He has a track record of attacking and defaming any individuals in the US who advocate a non-military path towards resolving tensions between the US and Iran. Besides NIAC, Daioleslam has also attacked Professor Vali Nasr at Tufts University, Robin Wright of the Washington Post, foreign policy experts Ray Takeyh of the Council on Foreign Relations and Suzanne Maloney of the Brookings Institute to name a few.
NIAC welcomes a fair debate on the merits of war and peace, but Mr. Daioleslam’s tactics do not serve such a debate and are not legitimate components of it. They are not only destructive, but illegal.
“Our hope is that the lawsuit will not only put an end to the defamation activities of Hassan Daioleslam, but also the general practice of defamation, slander and rumor making in the Iranian American political culture,”said Trita Parsi, NIAC President.”Our community will never live up to its full potential in America unless these undemocratic practices are put aside.”
National Iranian American Council