"When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." Poet James Whitcomb Riley
I asked Bruce if he could prove NIAC members loved Iran and he answered:
"No I can't prove they love Iran."
Here's my reaction to his blog and his answer above;
I did not think you could. And that is precisely what I implied by asking you the question. It was a rhetorical question, after all.  
You claim all those who joined NIAC did it out of love for Iran. Since love is an emotion and a mental activity it cannot be easily proven. Thus, whether the members indeed love Iran or their membership is due to other factors cannot be proven by the payments of their fees. So, your statement is either a self-projecting one or merely based on a the false premise that since NIAC's activities have something to do with Iran therefore those who join it must love Iran. That is your assumption that they love Iran is lacking hard evidence.
However, when it comes to NIAC you stop short of applying the same line of reasoning. You apply two different "logical" conclusions simply because you assume you are right. Iranians who are aware of NIAC's activities in the past decade and a half or so and oppose it or even despise it believe that if NIAC members attack you as vehemently as the regime's cyber agents do, if they censor you like the regime censors you, if they associate with the regime officials, if they oppose every opposition group out there, then one can conclude they are regime's lobbyists. Otherwise, what is the purpose of their activities?
You may also argue the regime does not pay NIAC or it does not even approve of NIAC's activities, but then again your argument is a baseless and an emotional one without any "hard evidence." Payments can be made in all sorts of ways. But that is not the real issue here. 
That being said, quite a few non-Iranian individuals have asked me about the recent "unsigned" nuclear "deal." My response is that the Iranians I know oppose this "deal" or any other deals with the regime in Tehran because they oppose the regime and not necessarily because they know what's in the agreements. And I add, because of the nature of the current regime, Iranians feel they have been betrayed and are getting the short end of the stick. I sometimes give them its Persian version, "choobeh do sar ...!"
Now, based on the information that we are exposed to, I believe Faramarz's short analysis is the closest we can get to the truth.    
Last but not least, the way NIAC was established also supports Faramarz's analysis. However, in their zeal to try to promote and prove themselves as loyal servants of the their adopted Iranian masters, they alienated Iranians in general and Iranian-Americans in particular. And in the process, underestimated Iranians which, contrary to what you claim, points to their stupidity and not vice versa. 
They also underestimated the regime in Tehran and ended up getting the short end of the stick. Or the Persian version of it. 
Here's an excerpt from the link I posted above:
"NIAC was officially launched in 2002 as a 501c3 nonprofit organization. During the consultation in 2001 to create NIAC, Trita Parsi admitted the legal difficulties he faced. A pure lobbying organization would not be attractive to the Iranian-American community and could not raise tax-exempt donations. On the other hand, a 501C is limited in the amount of Lobbying it can legally perform.
In 2002, Parsi, Bob Ney and two Washington lobbyists Roy Cofee and David DiStefano worked together over nine months to create a parallel organization to NIAC that would carry out the lobbying activities while NIAC Continued to work within the Iranian community to provide the necessary recruits for a lobbying campaign of this scale."