Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
Nejat Society
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
© 2003 - 2024 NEJAT Society. nejatngo.org
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Three Decades Of MEK Lies About Iran—–Meet The Neocon’s Favorite Terrorist Group

Follow the Money

Why Argentina is in the War Party’s sights

The brouhaha over an alleged 1994 Iranian plot to bomb a Jewish community center in Argentina, of all places, has been in and out of the news for years. Hysterical headlines, fantastic allegations, simmering intrigue, a mysterious suicide that some are claiming was a murder – it all sounds like a fourth-rate made-for-television thriller. That may be because its source – the weird neo-Marxist cult known as the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), which seems to have bought half the Congress and any number of well-known political figures and pundits – is prone to melodrama of the crudest sort.

An Iranian exile group headed up by a woman who calls herself the “President” of Iran, the MEK has an extensive international network, with its fanatic members running a bewildering array of frontgroups – the Iranian American Community of North Texas, the National Council of Resistance, Iran Zamin Cultural Association, the Organizing Committee for Convention for Democracy in Iran, the Human Rights Center in Wisconsin, Association of Iranian Women in America, to name a few. These groups ceaselessly lobby for two main causes: 1) Getting the group delisted as a terrorist organization, and 2) Moving the West to attack Iran.

They succeeded in their first goal, at least here in the US, with Hillary Clinton’s decision to take the MEK off the list of terror groups after a very well-financed and persistent campaign. MEK was listed in the first place because they had launched attacks on US assets and personnel in the late 1970s, murdering six Americans. MEK supported the Iranian revolution that brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power, only breaking with the regime when Tehran decided to release the US embassy hostages – and after being decisively defeated in subsequent elections.

MEK launched terrorist attacks on the Islamist regime, killing scores of civilians in bombings, and establishing a base in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, whose regime sheltered and supported them. They played a key role in suppressing revolts against Saddam’s rule, brutally suppressing a Shi’ite rising in the south and a Kurdish rebellion that resulted in the death of thousands.

After Saddam’s fall, they began their rebirth into a “pro-democracy” exile group, reportedly with aid from the Israelis. When a number of neoconservative organizations in the US took up their cause, MEK became the Iranian analogue of the Iraqi National Congress, the group headed up by international intriguer Ahmed Chalabi who provided the Bush administration – and New York Times reporter Judith Miller – with much of the erroneous “intelligence” that led the US to invade Iraq.

Over the years, MEK has carried out a persistent campaign to foment a similar US invasion of Iran, their mainstay being various attempts to document Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program. Virtually all of these attempts have been debunked as either outright forgeries or else half-truths based on outdated and dubiously sourced information. Their only success has been the revelation of the Iranian nuclear facility at Natanz, and even there they didn’t garner the intelligence on their own: it was reportedly given to them by the Israelis.

Now they have tried a different tack: accusing Tehran of sponsoring an international terrorist conspiracy, one tentacle of which is the alleged 1994 plot to bomb a Jewish community center in Argentina. And their neoconservative cheerleaders have taken up the cry, with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Israel Project, and the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, all promoting MEK’s indictment.

That indictment was summarized and published by Argentina’s chief prosecutor, Alberto Nisman, who relied exclusively on MEK “experts” to justify his charges against top Iranian officials supposedly involved in the attack on the Jewish center. The head of the National Council of Resistance “intelligence” division, Reza Zakeri Kouchaksaraee, testified that a 1993 two-hour meeting resulted in a decision to bomb the center: he gave the meeting date as August 14. Another National Council of Resistance official, Hadi Roshanravani, gives the date as August 12.

How did MEK know about this alleged meeting, and even the precise agenda, when none of these “experts” were in Iran at the time, nor did they work for or have any contact with the Iranian government when the alleged plot was hatched? Nisman does not say in his report: he only cites MEK-affiliated “defectors” who defected well before the bombing took place. MEK has long traded on its supposed secret connections to mysterious sources inside Iran, but this claim has worn rather thin over the years as their “revelations” turn out to be utter junk. Nisman, however, swallowed them whole in this case, citing no evidence for his charges other than MEK’s bare assertions.

Nisman cites yet another Iranian defector, Aboghasem Mesbahi, who repeats MEK’s claims. Mesbahi’s credibility may be measured by his statements to the 9/11 Commission averring that Iran was behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon: he knew this because he read secret messages in newspapers.

So what’s really behind the international campaign trying to link Iran to the bombing, which killed 85 people and injured 300?

The evidence points to hedge fund chief Paul Singer, one of the richest men in the world, whose financial interests and devotion to Israel combine to produce what can only be characterized as a singular obsession.

In 2001, Argentina defaulted on its debt payments, the inevitable result of years of big government programs, incompetence, and outright corruption. But that didn’t deter Singer from buying up Argentina’s bonds on the cheap. His plan: to pursue Argentina in court and demand full payment. A court victory – which he achieved in the summer of last year, when the Supreme Court ruled in Singer’s favor – would reward him with over $2 billion in pure profit. The “vulture,” as financial publications like Forbes describe Singer and other investors who buy up bonds of desperately poor countries in hopes of making a killing, is now free to seize Argentine’s assets around the world. Argentina is also forbidden to settle with other bondholders who may be willing to accept partial payment until Singer and his fellow vultures are paid in full.

Singer helped found the American Task Force Argentina (ATFA), which has been running newspaper ads in support of Singer’s legal efforts as well as demonizing Argentina as part of a vast Iranian terrorist network operating throughout South America. Singer gave half a million dollars to The Israel Project, which has been frenetically promoting this conspiracy theory. FDD, which has signed on to the anti-Argentina campaign in a big way, received over $3 million from Singer. A whole panoply of Republican members of Congress in the forefront of the anti-Argentina jihad – including presidential candidate Marco Rubio,who introduced a resolution in the Senate demanding an investigation into Argentina’s alleged ties to Iran — have been beneficiaries of Singer’s largesse. AIPAC, which has been more circumspect in is promotion of the Jewish center bombing “connection” to Iran, has been similarly rewarded: its fundraising arm was given over $1 million by Singer and his associates.

A $2 billion payoff – and the smiting of Israel’s principal enemy: that’s the double-barreled motive behind Singer’s anti-Argentina holy war.

Ideology and moolah have always coincided in the world of the neoconservatives: remember Richard Perle’s Trireme Partners, a “security” firm set up to profit off the Iraq war? And of course, as Rand Paul pointed out, Dick Cheney’s connection to Halliburton – and the windfall profits they made off the invasion of Iraq – are emblematic of the neocons’ ability to make mucho dineros off their penchant for conquest. The links of key neoconservative activists with big military contractors like Lockheed-Martin are a matter of longstanding public record.

Not that these people aren’t sincere in their belief that war is indeed the answer: they just aren’t averse to making a few billion in profit along the way.

When prosecutor Nisman committed suicide a day before he was supposed to formally present his charges of a “cover up” by Argentina of Iran’s alleged culpability in the bombing plot, the hysterics in neoconservative circles reached fever pitch. The same people who denounce any arguments that they are trying to push us into war as a kooky “conspiracy theory” were quick to evoke a conspiracy by the Argentine government to commit murder. Yet Nisman’s death was clearly self-inflicted: a gun he had borrowed from an associate was found next to his body, and there were no signs of a struggle or forced entry. No evidence has emerged to show that he was killed by something other than his own hand: but evidence, or the lack of it, has never stopped the neocons from constructing elaborate arguments touting their own “theories.”

And they have no lack of means to publicize these theories: the campaign to tar Iran with the “terrorist” brush is fueled by the multi-millions of billionaires like Singer, Sheldon Adelson, and Norman Braman, whose insistence on 100 percent loyalty to Israel in the candidates and causes they support is remaking the political discourse in the US when it comes to foreign policy.

The forces driving us to war with Iran have billions of dollars to spend. They represent a minority of the population – but that doesn’t deter them. Their strategy is to present both sides of the same coin to the American people, come election time, and then ask them to make a “choice” – a Republican who will take us to war against Iran, or a Democrat who will take the same road.

So what can stop them? If the deck is stacked, how can we prevent the next war in the Middle East – which promises to make the Iraq war look like a mere skirmish?

The answer is a mass mobilization by the American people against the drive to war – and, no, that’s not a pipedream. We did it when President Obama decided he wanted to bomb Syria and then gave Congress the last word. Congressional switchboards were soon inundated with calls opposing a new war one-hundred-to-one. Members of Congress who said they would vote yes for war backed down, and those on the fence came over to our side – until it was clear the administration wouldn’t have the votes. Obama backed off in the face of massive opposition: and, yes, Antiwar.com was a big part of that memorable mobilization.

We did it before – and we can and will do it again.

But we can’t do it without your help.

You can see, from the above, how outgunned we are when it comes to financial resources. The War Party has billions, and money is no object. But I’ll let you in on a little secret: they need those billions, and more, because they represent nothing and no one but themselves. Their support is almost exclusively in Washington, D.C., and New York City, the political and media centers that profit from perpetual war. We, on the other hand, have the overwhelming majority of the American people on our side – if only we can rally them to the banner of peace in time.

Paul Singer’s billions are feeding America a diet of lies. Our answer to him and his confreres is the unalloyed truth – and we don’t need billions, or even millions, to educate the American people about the forces pushing us into war. We just need a basic minimum to keep this web site going.

We’ve been fighting the War Party’s lies since 1995, with the invaluable help of our readers and supporters – and we’ve been doing it on a shoestring budget! What we spend in an entire year is what groups like the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the American Enterprise Institute spend in less than a week.

We need your help to counter the well-financed lies that are poisoning the national discourse around foreign policy issues. Your tax-deductible donation goes to counter the Paul Singers, the Sheldon Adelsons, and their friends in what Dwight Eisenhower called “the military-industrial-congressional” complex – and every penny counts.

Today is the first day of our Spring fundraising campaign, and I’m on pins-and-needles, as I am every time we have to go through this process. We’re asking for your vote of confidence – your vote for a more peaceful world. And I believe we deserve that vote of affirmation – because this is the one and only self-sustaining and relatively successful institution the peace movement has. Please help us continue our work on behalf of the cause of peace and liberty. Please make your tax-deductible donation today.

NOTES IN THE MARGIN

You can check out my Twitter feed by going here. But please note that my tweets are sometimes deliberately provocative, often made in jest, and largely consist of me thinking out loud.

I’ve written a couple of books, which you might want to peruse. Here is the link for buying the second edition of my 1993 book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement, with an Introduction by Prof. George W. Carey, a Foreword by Patrick J. Buchanan, and critical essays by Scott Richert and David Gordon (ISI Books, 2008).

You can buy An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard (Prometheus Books, 2000), my biography of the great libertarian thinker, here.

by Justin Raimondo,

May 11, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Congressman Tom Cotton Makes Allies of Radical Marxist Muslims

Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.; shown) is not only the darling of the neonconservatives and war hawks, but he also seems to be making a play to get in the good graces of “an Iranian dissident terrorist group.” Here’s the story as reported by Nick Hankoff for Voices of Liberty on May 8:

On Wednesday, Cotton participated in a panel called “After Iran Nuclear Framework Agreement, Now What?” organized by the Organization of Iranian American Communities (OIAC) in a Senate meeting room. The OIAC, through spending millions of dollars lobbying, is responsible for getting an Iranian dissident terrorist group removed from the State Department’s official list of terrorist organizations in 2012 by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

That would be the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), a group that assassinated half a dozen Americans in Iran and targeted many others in the run up to the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The MEK was founded with Marxist, feminist, and Islamic tenets and incorporated cultish tendencies including personality worship of its husband-wife founders, forced divorces for elderly women, and a forbiddance to marry for young women.

The revolutionary group considers itself a government-in-exile, ready to return to Iran once the current regime is overthrown. The MEK has no measure of support from the Iranian people.

Cotton’s cozying up to the “MEK-fronting OIAC” is particularly troublesome in light of the fondness President Obama seems to have for the same gang. Consider this facet of the story told by The New American’s Alex Newman in 2012:

After a multi-million dollar lobbying campaign that unlawfully enlisted top members of the bipartisan U.S. political class, the Obama administration decided that the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MeK), an Islamo-Marxist terror cult notorious for murdering Americans, should no longer be on the State Department’s list of designated terrorist organizations. Experts say the decision paves the way to begin openly showering U.S. taxpayer money on the anti-American outfit in its bid to overthrow the Iranian regime.

The controversial decision to formally "delist" the organization came in the wake of reports charging that the federal government was already arming and training the cult-like Iranian MeK in violation of U.S. terror laws. The purpose of the alleged support, according to multiple sources, was to help wage a proxy war against Iran. Criticism of the administration’s recent decision, however, erupted quickly and forcefully.

Newman also briefly outlines the MEK’s origins and mission:

Also known as the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran, the MeK was founded in an effort to advance a hybrid system incorporating communism and Islam. It officially landed on the U.S. government’s terror list some 15 years ago for perpetrating numerous terror attacks against civilians and more than a few senior American military personnel. The group was also allied with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, helping him to wage a brutal war against Iran while suppressing dissidents within Iraq.

In fairness, Senator Cotton may be ignorant of the MEK’s militant and terroristic intent. In fact, perhaps his alliance with the group may be an example of an enemy of his enemy being his friend.

Both Cotton and the MEK oppose any agreement between Iran and the United States. Cotton was the chief architect of a controversial letter co-signed by 46 other senators and sent to the government of Iran explaining that any treaty between the two countries would require congressional approval.

For its part, as Hankoff reports: “The female co-founder of the MEK, Maryam Rajavi, has said that toppling the government in Iran is the best shot the US has at defeating the Islamic State.” He adds that, “Cotton has said bombing Iran would last no longer than how long proponents of the 2003 Iraq War promised.”

Hankoff and Newman both point out that Cotton’s not the only neocon to feel comfortable in the company of MEK.

“It’s possible Tom Cotton is (willfully?) ignorant to the leftist, tyrannical values and aspirations of the MEK. But like Howard Dean, Rick Perry, Rudy Giuliani, and many other politicians, there are big opportunities to work together for mutual political growth and enrichment,” Hankoff writes.

Newman confirms this collaboration, reporting:

Despite federal statutes defining as a felony the provision of any “material support” to designated terrorist organizations, the MeK managed to buy die-hard support from numerous senior U.S. politicians and former officials on both sides of the aisle. Advocates for the terror cult range from neo-conservative terror-war cheerleaders like Rudy Giuliani and Michael Mukasey to liberals like Howard Dean and Gen. James Jones. Former White House Chief of Staff Andy Card, ex-CIA and FBI bosses, and many others jumped on the pro-MeK bandwagon, too.

In light of Cotton’s admitted alliance with MEK, where is the outrage from conservatives? Where is the call for Cotton to renounce any association with the group, especially considering that to continue their relationship would be a felony and a violation of federal law prohibiting such cooperation?

Hankoff puts it this way, “Neocons and Marxist-Islamist terrorist cultists joining together to undermine US-led international negotiations to prevent war with Iran. Politics makes strange bedfellows.”

Calls for comment by Senator Cotton’s office made by The New American were unreturned at press time.

by  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.,   The New American

May 11, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The Well-Funded Exile Group’s Desperate Attempts to Sabotage Diplomacy on Iran

A month ago, intense negotiations in Lausanne, Switzerland, resulted in a framework for a final nuclear deal between six world powers and Iran. As negotiators from Iran and the P5+1 (China, France, Russia, the United States and United Kingdom, plus Germany) continue nuclear talks to reach a comprehensive deal before the end of June, opponents of diplomacy and potential détente have intensified their efforts to derail any accord.

Prominent in this effort is exiled Iranian dissident organization, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK or MKO, also known as the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, or PMOI) which was classified as a terrorist organization by the EU until 2009 and by the United States until 2012. MEK is bitterly opposed to the current Iranian government and seeks its overthrow.

The cult-like organization has spent vast sums of money to lobby political elites on both sides of the Atlantic for recognition as an alternative to the current Iranian government. Since a negotiated, multilateral deal with Iran would effectively bury prospects of Western-led regime change in Iran, the MEK is attempting to leverage its extraordinary influence to sink talks.

Regime change in Iran, by any means, is the only item on the MEK agenda. Like experienced salesmen, its members employ different tactics to “sell” this approach to various audiences.

In testimony before the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Trade last month (delivered via videoconference from Paris), Maryam Rajavi, the self-proclaimed “president-elect” of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which serves as the MEK’s front office, suggested the best way for Western nations to combat the threat posed by ISIS is to oust the regime in Iran. Of course, no reference was made of the fact that Iran was one of the first countries to commit blood and treasure to the fight against ISIS. Nor did Rajavi mention that, when ISIS first overtook Mosul in the summer of 2014, the MEK hailed the militant group and its supporters as “part of a popular revolution against the Maliki regime” in Iraq, which the MEK views as an Iranian pawn. Once the U.S. military joined the fight against ISIS, however, it became politically untenable to defend or minimize its crimes. So, the MEK quickly changed its tune, suddenly portraying ISIS as Iran’s creation.

Exploiting local political sensitivities in Europe, the MEK has chosen a different tactic to advocate for government overthrow. To European audiences, the MEK has emphasized Iran’s human rights issues, such as the high number of executions in the country, as well as issues to do with women rights and infringements on religious liberty. In mid-April, MEK operative Firouz Mahvi, a member of NCRI’s so-called “Foreign Affairs Committee” and a fixture at the Brussels-based European Parliament (EP), sent an e-mail to parliamentarians (MEPs) calling on them to adopt an urgent resolution on capital punishment in Iran. The proposed resolution would have almost certainly led to the cancellation of a scheduled visit by members of the Majles, the Iranian parliament, to Brussels. In fact, this very thing happened last year: following the adoption of a different resolution on Iran critical of its human rights record, the Majles delegation cancelled a planned trip in protest.

Inter-parliamentary dialogue is one of the only institutionalized platforms for interaction between officials from the EU and Iran. For progress in EU-Iranian relations to occur, whether on the nuclear issue or otherwise, it is essential to keep Iranian conservatives at the table.

Realizing the issues at stake and familiar with the MEK’s modus operandi, the parliamentary majority read the situation correctly: The MEK’s push for a resolution on capital punishment had little to do with genuine concern for the human rights of Iranians, and everything to do with ongoing attempts to sabotage the nascent EU-Iran dialogue.

When their plan failed, MEK associates, this time under the guise of the dubious “Iranian Refugee Association in Belgium” (it has neither an e-mail address nor a website) launched a call for MEPs to boycott the May visit from the Iranian delegation. While the call was not heeded by Polish conservative Janusz Lewandowski , chair of the EP delegation for relations with Iran, other MEPs fell into the MEK’s trap. For example, Beatriz Becerra, a Spanish MEP from the centrist Alliance of Liberals and Democrats of Europe (ALDE) challenged her colleagues to raise new legislation in the Iranian parliament, which is said to limit the sexual and reproductive health rights of Iranian women, with delegation members. She also tabled a written question on the issue to the Council of the EU and the European Commission. Becerra may be a well-intentioned defender of women rights, but her aggressive advocacy on behalf of the MEK and Maryam Rajavi certainly does more harm than good.

Another common MEK strategy is to hold public hearings in the EP, like the one organized last month on religious freedom in Iran by the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group. ECR is a strange mix of seemingly respectable mainstream parties such as British Conservatives and fringe right-wing outfits, such as the Dutch Calvinist party (which until recently forbade women from becoming members) and the Islamophobic, anti-immigrant Danish People’s Party. When it comes to foreign policy, what binds these disparate forces together is their fervent support for Israel, extreme hostility to Palestinians and hardline hawkishness on Iran. In the recent past, even after the election of Iranian president Hassan Rouhani, the ECR tried to block the first official visit of European parliamentarians to Tehran. The bid failed and the delegation visited Iran in mid-December 2013.

In light of this, it is unsurprising the ECR yielded the floor to Sanabargh Zahedi, chair of NCRI’s so-called “Judicial Committee.” Presenting himself as an “Islamic scholar,”  even though there was no evidence of his scholarship on Islam or any other field for that matter, Zahedi asserted that, “unless all countries put improvement of human rights as a pre-condition to doing business and trade with this regime, we will not see any real progress in any area, including the nuclear issue.”

None of this is to say that human rights in Iran should not be a matter of grave concern. [..]

Still, there are more effective ways to address these crucial issues than calling for regime change, undermining nuclear negotiations, or following the agendas of those with obvious ulterior motives. Ultimately, the nuclear deal and the possibility of engagement with Iran hold a better promise for achieving real progress in the human rights sphere than any delusions about  “regime change.” This is certainly how respectable human rights organizations and activists see it.

Hadi Ghaemi, director of the New York-based International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran welcomed last month’s Lausanne agreement as an important step toward creating better conditions for discussing human rights with Iran. Those in the West who genuinely care about the human rights of Iranians would do well to listen to these voices rather than let themselves become puppets in the MEK’s destructive schemes.

Eldar Mamedov, Muftah.org

May 10, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Not The Onion: Tom Cotton Befriends Radical Marxist Muslim Cult

How badly does Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) want to squander a deal with Iran over its civilian nuclear program? Bad enough to become the fastest rising star of the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party, yes, but this week the freshman senator went even further than sending a letter to the Iranian government.

On Wednesday, Cotton participated in a panel called “After Iran Nuclear Framework Agreement, Now What?” organized by the Organization of Iranian American Communities (OIAC) in a Senate meeting room. The OIAC, through spending millions of dollars lobbying, is responsible for getting an Iranian dissident terrorist group removed from the State Department’s official list of terrorist organizations in 2012 by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

That would be the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), a group that assassinated half a dozen Americans in Iran and targeted many others in the run up to the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The MEK was founded with Marxist, feminist, and Islamic tenets and incorporated cultish tendencies including personality worship of its husband-wife founders, forced divorces for elderly women, and a forbiddance to marry for young women.

The revolutionary group considers itself a government-in-exile, ready to return to Iran once the current regime is overthrown. The MEK has no measure of support from the Iranian people.

Its possible Tom Cotton is (willfully?) ignorant to the leftist, tyrannical values and aspirations of the MEK. But like Howard Dean, Rick Perry, Rudy Giuliani, and many other politicians, there are big opportunities to work together for mutual political growth and enrichment.

Here’s a tweet heralding the alliance between Cotton and the MEK-fronting OIAC:

For Cotton and the MEK, prospects of their shared enemy in Iran reaching a nuclear deal inspires outrageous rhetoric. The female co-founder of the MEK, Maryam Rajavi, has said that toppling the government in Iran is the best shot the US has at defeating the Islamic State. Cotton has said bombing Iran would last no longer than how long proponents of the 2003 Iraq War promised.

A little more on the MEK: Prior to giving themselves up to Americans in the immediate aftermath of the 2003 US invasion in Iraq, the group was financed by Saddam Hussein (remember the reason for invading, his support for terrorists?). Since then their anti-imperialist leanings have given way to promoting “human rights,” and they’ve dropped their anti-Israel schtick for a partnership with the Mossad, Israel’s secret intelligence service. Through American intelligence officers, NBC News and Seymour Hersh have each concluded that the MEK carried out assassinations on five Iranian nuclear scientists after training with Mossad.

Neocons and Marxist-Islamist terrorist cultists joining together to undermine US-led international negotiations to prevent war with Iran. Politics makes strange bedfellows.

by Nick Hankoff, VoicesofLiberty.com

May 9, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran Interlink Weekly Digest

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest – 95

++ Paris this week saw the start of the court case against leading MEK member Mehdi Abrishamchi on terrorism charges. Several former MEK members staged a picket in support of the prosecution.

++ More responses are rumbling through the Commentariat in reaction to Maryam Rajavi’s speech to Congress. The underlying theme is ‘how on earth did they end up bringing Maryam Rajavi to speak?’ Most concluded that this exposes high levels of financial corruption at the top levels of the US political system. But in that respect only America and Israel are paying the price because Iran is able to use this situation to its favour in the negotiations. By itself the event is a comedy – “bringing the representative of ISIS to talk against ISIS”. Some point out that Maryam Rajavi didn’t even attempt to say anything about ISIS to show any expertise. Worse than that she announced that to fight ISIS you need regime change in Iran fronted by the MEK; which will take the credit and take power. Rajavi complains that nobody should believe there are differences between Sunni and Shia because both Iran and ISIS are both after power. Then immediately follows that by demanding regime change in Iran to give power to the MEK! That, according to her and completely missing her own irony, is the way forward. Even the Americans acknowledge that the only effective force pushing back ISIS in Iraq is the Iranian backed militias alongside the Iraqi army. Some analyses conclude that the presence of Rajavi shows the utter weakness of the Israelis and the Americans. The Israeli lobby and its sub class have been brought so low and powerless as to play this card.

++ The Mohammadi family have written to state that they have not and will not give up on their struggle to make contact with their daughter Somayeh. They, along with other families, are asking ‘where is this so-called international community, where are the human rights organisations? How come, when it comes to the Mojahedin they can do what they want? Why are these organisations so useless?’

++ The MEK is preparing for its annual show in Villepinte celebrating the start of its terrorist campaign inside Iran and again the Commentariat is exposing the MEK saga of buying both audience and speakers.

++ Ehsan Bidi from Albania says the MEK has changed its tactics this week. Now MEK commander Afshin Ebrahimi is asking ex members “why are you still here?” He is encouraging them to leave Albania illegally. Bidi says this makes it even more obvious that they want to establish a base in Albania. The MEK has brought money, forces and have bought land and property there for a reason.

++ Mir Bagher Sedaghi from Setaregan Assoc in Switzerland published a short article asking ‘Is Rajavi as great as she thinks she is, or is she just daft?’ The article quotes Rajavi claiming victory “because the agents of Iran’s Intelligence ministry – Daniel Benjamin and Robert Ford – who tried to stop Maryam Rajavi speaking to Congress failed and we won.”

In English:

++ Fallout from Maryam Rajavi’s appearance by video conference in the US Congress continued this week. Some former MEK members wrote in English to congratulate Robert Ford and Daniel on their stance.

Daniel Larison in The American Conservative writes “The refusal of these former officials to play along with some hawks’ disturbing admiration for the MEK is appropriate, but it is unfortunate that it should be necessary. The attention and praise lavished on the MEK in recent years by former officials, retired military officers, and politicians has been an embarrassing spectacle. Now the strange infatuation that many hawks have with the “former” terrorist group is spilling over into the regular business of Congress. As if to underscore how misguided inviting Rajavi was, a copy of the cult leader’s testimony shows that she intends to use her time to argue for regime change in Iran. Ali Gharib comments: But more to the point, the MEK has always had only one goal: the overthrow of the Iranian regime. For decades, it has tried to shoehorn regional and geopolitical dynamics into its aim, irrespective of any salient connections.”

Atwiw.com’s take on the event is even more blunt. After unpicking the MEK’s attempts to buy respectability, the jokey article concludes: “So, hey, if you’ve ever wanted to testify before Congress but there’s no discernible reason why they should invite you to do so, plus maybe you’ve got some unsavory things in your past that could complicate matters, don’t worry! Just fork over a few tens of thousands to your favorite congressperson and you could soon find yourself offering your “expertise” (or irrelevant ranting, but whatever, you bought your time fair and square) to our nation’s top legislators! Good luck!”

Mazda Parsi in Nejat Bloggers argues that the “Appearance of the self-claimed president of National Council of Resistance, Maryam Rajavi in a hearing in US Congress indicates the absurdity of the claim of fighting against terrorism. Although the credibility of this so called leader is questionable getting support among some US congressmen for her presence in the congress is interesting and creates doubts in everybody’s mind.”

++ Also in America, Eli Clifton writing in Lobelog reveals that ‘Tom Cotton Allies Himself with the MEK’. “It appears that Cotton, who has quickly displaced Lindsey Graham as the Senate’s most hawkish member, has decided that it is necessary – perhaps even politically desirable – to make common cause with a group that has committed serious human rights abuses, allied itself for some two decades with Saddam Hussein, and carried out terrorist acts, including against U.S. citizens and servicemen – all in the interests of sabotaging an Iran nuclear agreement.”

 

++ On the subject of the nuclear negotiations Akbar Ganji’s article in the Huffington Post suggests ‘Why Tehran Fears the Iraqization of Iran on Nuclear Inspections’. In a well-argued piece he analyses Iran’s mistrust of American intentions. “Iranian leaders are deeply concerned about the IAEA inspection regime, and are afraid that Iran will meet the same fate as Iraq’s, right before its invasion in 2003, when the agency demanded inspecting even Saddam Hussein’s palaces. The IAEA searched everywhere and found no evidence of a nuclear program, yet Iraq was invaded… Ayatollah Khamenei and the military leaders believe that, beginning with the day after signing the final agreement, Israel and the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq will surely declare every single military site as “suspect,” claiming that the Islamic Republic is secretly trying to make nuclear bombs there. If Iran does not allow inspecting the “suspect” sites, Israel and MEK will declare victory, and if Iran does allow the inspection, the agency may eventually demand to inspect even Khamenei’s bedroom.”

++ Iran Interlink believes ‘Maryam Rajavi and her cult brand prove too toxic for The Hill’ after an article by long term MEK supporter Struan Stevenson omitted to mention either Maryam Rajavi or the MEK.

May 9, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Tom Cotton Allies Himself with the MEK

Freshman Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) garnered two profiles this week, one in The Wall Street Journal and another in The New York Times, highlighting his efforts to disrupt normal Senate procedure in hopes of adding “poison pill” amendments to the Corker-Cardin bill that, if passed, would give Congress a say in any comprehensive agreement reached between the P5+1 and Iran.

But in a Senate meeting room Wednesday, Cotton, seated alongside Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), may have outdone himself by joining a panel hosted by the Organization of Iranian American Communities (OIAC), a front group for the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK or MKO).

Cotton and Tillis were not alone. They were joined on the OIAC panel by former Ambassador to Morocco Marc Ginsberg, Senior Belfer Center fellow (and United Against Nuclear Iran advisory board member) Olli Heinonen, former Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert G. Joseph, and the former director of the National Counter Proliferation Center, Joseph R. DeTrani.

The MEK, which has worked hard – and spent a lot of money — to gain respectability in Washington since its armed units surrendered to U.S. forces in Iraq in 2003, is believed to have been responsible for the killing of six Americans in Iran between 1973 and 1976. Exiled following a power struggle in the early years of the Islamic Republic, the group fought alongside Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war. Following a lengthy lobbying and legal campaign that included the payment of substantial honoraria to prominent U.S. politicians and retired national-security officials, the MEK was removed from the State Department’s terrorism list in 2012.

The group, along with its numerous fronts in the U.S. and Europe, describes itself as Iran’s democratic government-in-exile but has little to no support within its homeland, according to independent Iran experts.

A 2005 report by Human Rights Watch detailed the group’s cult-like control over its members and a record of human rights violations designed to severely punish dissidents or would-be deserters.

But Cotton and the MEK share a common agenda when it comes to the nuclear negotiations with Iran. In a controversial video appearance from her Paris headquarters before the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on counterterrorism last week, the group’s co-leader, Maryam Rajavi, recommended that the best way to defeat the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq was to pursue regime change in Iran. And, in January, Cotton, a protégé of Bill Kristol of the Emergency Committee for Israel, told an audience at the Heritage Foundation:

Certain voices call for congressional restraint urging Congress not to act now, lest Iran walk away from the negotiating table, undermining the fabled yet always absent moderates in Iran. But the end of these negotiations isn’t an unintended consequence of congressional action. It is very much an intended consequence — a feature, not a bug.

Neither Cotton nor the MEK, in other words, thinks there should be any negotiations with the Iranian government.

It appears that Cotton, who has quickly displaced Lindsey Graham as the Senate’s most hawkish member, has decided that it is necessary – perhaps even politically desirable – to make common cause with a group that has committed serious human rights abuses, allied itself for some two decades with Saddam Hussein, and carried out terrorist acts, including against U.S. citizens and servicemen – all in the interests of sabotaging an Iran nuclear agreement.

As Rajavi herself might say, “Quel enfant terrible.

By Eli Clifton

May 9, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Maryam Rajavi and her cult brand prove too toxic for The Hill

Struan Stevenson has written an article for The Hill titled ‘Iraqi pipe dreams’ which attacks both the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Iraqi government led by Al Abadi. But in spite of the usual hyperbolic tone, driven by his support for the remnants of the former Saddam regime, the article has not a single mention of the Mojahedin Khalq or Maryam Rajavi.

For those who know his background, this absence is significant. It indicates very strongly that the Rajavi brand has become so toxic that it is better to omit it completely. It’s not as though Stevenson has dropped the MEK though. His biography admits he is currently President of the Mojahedin Khalq’s lobby group ‘European Iraqi Freedom Association (EIFA)’. Before this he spent a decade in his former position as an MEP advocating for the MEK and its destructive role in Iraq as chairman of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Iraq. Here he misused the parliamentary system to recruit other MEPs to his side by using the MEK’s deceptive blend of fact and fiction, aided by the MEK’s financial incentives and its neoslave labour. Several times he hosted Maryam Rajavi in parliament to pass the message of ‘violent regime change’ against both Iran and Iraq.

Now, although the MEK has publicised Stevenson’s article and other writings in its websites, he has not been able to reciprocate by giving them desperately needed publicity in one of America’s top political publications. Apparently The Hill has drawn the line at that kind of propaganda stunt.

May 9, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Maryam Rajavi

Maryam Rajavi, ludicrous testimony in a “historic hearing”

Appearance of the self-claimed president of National Council of Resistance, Maryam Rajavi in a hearing in US Congress indicates the absurdity of the claim of fighting against terrorism. Although the credibility of this so called leader is questionable getting support among some US congressmen for her presence in the congress is interesting and creates doubts in everybody’s mind.

The support is basically due to multi—million dollar lobbying campaign over years which includes paying good money for speaking and providing first class flights plus fancy hotel for those congressmen who support this terrorist organization.  These are the true motivation behind supporting this cult like group.

The hearing was hosted by Congressman Ted Poe, chairman of the congressional subcommittee on the threats posed by ISIS. Why did Poe and the Republican majority on the terrorism subcommittee decide to invite Maryam Rajavi while main victims of ISIS terror acts are mostly among Iraqi Yazidis.  However, no one of the Yazidi community was invited to the hearing!  The reason is crystal clear since we know that Yazidis do not have such financial resources to attract any congressman.

“Poe received $17,900 in campaign contributions from supporters of the MEK between 2009 and 2014, according to an analysis I conducted of campaign finance data,” Eli Clifton writes. ”Surprisingly, nearly half—or $8,600—of the total flowed into his campaign while the group was still on the State Department’s terrorism list between 2009 and its delisting in 2012.”

Clifton adds,” In 2013 and 2014, the group also paid for $19,671 in travel expenses (including business-class plane fare) for Poe’s travel to MEK events in France.”

Indeed, it is so unusual to have Maryam Rajavi to testify in a hearing about ISIS.  It is as if bringing Stalin to testify about Fascism, or asking Hitler to testify about Nazism. It seems money is everything in the US Politic. “Money talks” is an appropriate phrase here. 

Shaylyn Hynes, a spokeswoman for Poe, told Joshua Keating by email that Rajavi has a “long history of speaking against what she calls ‘Islamic fundamentalism,’” and “can speak to how ISIS’ ideology is both similar to and different from the mullahs leading Iran.” Asked if there were any concerns given the MEK’s history, Hynes replied, “the administration does not consider them a terrorist group and neither do we.”

Hynes might be right to say that Rajavi has a “long history of speaking against what she calls ‘Islamic fundamentalism,’” but he should notice that “actions speak louder than words”.  In other words, this does not mean that she herself is a moderate Muslim or she is pro-democracy.  As it has manifested in her cruel treatment of its own members.

As Sean Nevins of Mint Press News asserts, “the MEK is a kind of cult, according to the FBI, Human Rights Watch, the Rand Corporation, and just about every other organization which has investigated the group.” He correctly writes that the MKO is “precisely the kind of organization that should not testify about Islamic extremism.”

Jeremiah Goulka, author of “The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq: A Policy Conundrum,” a report published by the Rand Corporation in 2009, told MintPress, “At the MEK camps, there’s a whole set of practices that are all textbook out of cult theory – sleep deprivation, make-work projects… forced celibacy, forced divorce, [and] gender segregation.”

Nevins also interviews Masoud Banisadr, a former member of the MKO, who had served as the group’s representative to the United Nations and the U.S. Banisadr confirmed that forced divorces were common in the group. Banisadr told MintPress: “All members were forced to divorce their spouses, and later they have to send their children abroad to Europe and United States to be adopted by supporters and other members.”

This is Eli Clifton’s description of the MKO: “The group has long faced criticism from Iran specialists and rights groups such as Human Rights Watch that it has devolved into a cult based on devotion to Maryam and her long-missing husband, Massoud Rajavi. According to numerous accounts, the group exerts a high degree of control over its followers, going so far as to mandate divorces and celibacy for their soldiers.”

According to the report by Julian Pecquet  the congressional correspondent at Al Monitor, “Other lawmakers, including ranking member William Keating, D-Mass., ignored Rajavi and directed their questions only at the other witnesses. Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., who also isn’t a committee member, was the only one to challenge her to explain why the United States should put its trust in a group that was kicked out of Iran in the early 1980s and fought alongside Saddam Hussein against Tehran.

"Over the past 30 years, the United States has been drawn into some serious diplomatic and military dead-ends in the Mideast by mistakenly backing individuals and organizations claiming popular support, which turned out to be exaggerated and somewhat manufactured," Davis told Rajavi. "Would you please tell us about the role of the [MEK] … and its place in the current Iranian political life?"

Rajavi’s reasoning in responding to Davis just included the same old fallacy that “regime’s "fear" of the group and its efforts at "demonizing" was a strong indication of the MEK’s "strength." However, her claim has been numerously rejected by international investigated report that clearly acknowledge that MKO has hardly any support among Iranians. 

By the way, could the event organizers really define the enemy and the threat of ISIS by listening to the MKO cult leader? In conclusion, what can be achieved by listening to the MKO’S cult leader? Can the threat of ISIS be eliminated?

Mazda Parsi

May 7, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Maryam Rajavi

US Envoy Becomes Next to Refuse Attending House Hearing Due to MKO Leader’s Attendance

Former US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford joined former State Department counter-terror official Daniel Benjamin as a second witness that refused to testify at a House hearing because of the presence of the leader of the anti-Iran Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO also known as MEK, PMOI and NCRI) in the meeting.

“I didn’t want to be on a panel with the MEK. I was shocked they invited the MEK. What the MEK has to do with the ISIL, I don’t have a clue,” Ford told FP.

“I told the committee to put me on a panel without the MEK or I wouldn’t appear,” the former envoy stressed.

The April 29 hearing, in front of a House subcommittee on terrorism and nonproliferation, will focus on the threat from the ISIL, which has overrun much of Syria and Iraq. Among the invited speakers is Maryam Rajavi, president of the Paris-based National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which is the umbrella organization for groups that include Mojahedeen-e-Khalq (MKO), the foreign policy reported.

Earlier, former State Department counterterror official Daniel Benjamin balked at sharing the spotlight with terrorist group’s leader.

Daniel Benjamin, formerly the State Department’s counterterror coordinator, also was slated to testify at the House hearing. But on Monday, Benjamin declared that “I will not appear at a hearing” about the ISIL with the MKO’s leader, because “I know of no substantive expertise that the MKO has developed on the ISIL.” News of Benjamin’s cancellation was first mentioned on Twitter by ALM Congress Pulse.

In an email to Foreign Policy, Benjamin noted that the MKO’s “exclusive focus” of concern has for decades been Iran. “So one has to wonder what the purpose of Rajavi’s presence on this panel is,” said Benjamin, who is now director of an international studies program at Dartmouth University.

“Being delisted as a Foreign Terrorist Organization — a decision I took part in — doesn’t mean that this group … has suddenly … become trustworthy or worthy of engagement,” he said.

Meanwhile, in a follow-up interview with Foreign Policy, Benjamin — who had a role in the State Department’s decision to delist the MEK — criticized the House panel for agreeing to let Rajavi testify by video. He said that is not a perk that is offered to US witnesses.

“Why won’t she travel here to testify?” Benjamin asked.

"MEK offered me tens of thousands of dollars to speak on its behalf, but i turned down the request," he underlined.

“This is still a group that has American blood from killings in the 1970s on its hands and killed many other innocents as well. That has never been apologized for,” the former senior American official stressed.

The Obama administration believed the MKO was providing misinformation in an effort to derail recent nuclear talks with Iran. During negotiations the MKO insisted Tehran was building underground nuclear facilities, an assertion dismissed by the State Department.

The MKO, founded in the 1960s, blended elements of Islamism and Stalinism and participated in the overthrow of the US-backed Shah of Iran in 1979. Ahead of the revolution, the MKO conducted attacks and assassinations against both Iranian and western targets.

The group started assassination of the citizens and officials after the revolution in a bid to take control of the newly-established Islamic Republic. It killed several of Iran’s new leaders in the early years after the revolution, including the then President, Mohammad Ali Rajayee, Prime Minister, Mohammad Javad Bahonar and the Judiciary Chief, Mohammad Hossein Beheshti who were killed in bomb attacks by the MKO members in 1981.

The group fled to Iraq in 1986, where it was protected by Saddam Hussein and where it helped the Iraqi dictator suppress Shiite and Kurd uprisings in the country.

The terrorist group joined Saddam’s army during the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988) and helped Saddam and killed thousands of Iranian civilians and soldiers during the US-backed Iraqi imposed war on Iran.

Since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, the group, which now adheres to a pro-free-market philosophy, has been strongly backed by neo-conservatives in the United States, who argued for the MKO to be taken off the US terror list.

The US formally removed the MKO from its list of terror organizations in early September, one week after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sent the US Congress a classified communication about the move. The decision made by Clinton enabled the group to have its assets under the US jurisdiction unfrozen and do business with the American entities, the State Department said in a statement at the time.

In September 2012, the last groups of the MKO terrorists left Camp Ashraf, their main training center in Iraq’s Diyala province. They have been transferred to Camp Liberty. Hundreds of the MKO terrorists have now been sent to Europe.

Earlier this month, the managing editor of Veterans Today from Atlanta said the number of Iranian terror victims is “in effect almost six 9/11’s,” but these attacks never got enough coverage in international media.

Jim W. Dean said even now, very few people know the scale of the Iranians who were killed in terrorist acts. “I would imagine your maimed casualties would also be high, and those statistics should be publicized as well.”

He went on to say that despite this great number of terror victims, “Iran did not crank up a huge War on Terror that slaughtered countless thousands of innocents, as happened with the Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld gangsters and their army of helpers.”

The US political analyst underscored that the story of Iranian victims of terror, “with all of its gory details,” still has to be brought to the international audience. “The Western media blackout shows they fear their audiences wanting to know more about why this was being covered up and eventually figuring out that these were offensive Western Intel operations during peacetime.”

"You have been maligned in Western media as a longtime supporter of international terrorism, but we know that hiding the history of Iran having been the top victim of terrorism was part of the false propaganda," he continued.

“Suppressing publicity of your being the major victim of terrorism at the time played a key role in falsely casting Iran as a major terror threat to everyone else,” Dean continued. “This is what people remember as it was an organized campaign in the Jewish controlled media for years and years.”

Regarding the presence of Iranian terrorist groups such as MKO in the US and their role in anti-Iran policies, Jim Dean said, “They have no negative profile here whatsoever. They are presented as oppressed freedom fighters and that is all the public ever hears.”

He pointed out that American people would be shocked, if Iranian terror victim groups and families were constantly touring the American college campuses and the church networks on speaking tours. “But the Zionist Lobby, the NeoCons and Christian Zionists would fight any attempt to do this, but that would be good as it would show they fear exposure.”

The US veteran went on to say that Iran should not act alone in exposing the state sponsors of terrorism, “as the victims of terror are now manufactured on an industrial scale, most of it state-sponsored terrorism, and the guilty parties naturally dread having this exposed.” “This is why I feel Iran is in a unique position to be the tip of the spear for efforts to uncover the long sordid history of state-sponsored terrorism and to publicize it on a continual basis to challenge the various nations involved to hold their leaders and operational organs responsible.”

“Their goal to destabilize target countries to protect their own nations will not be believable once the truth is out that these were purely offensive operations straight out of the Cold War operations manual, where anything could be done to hurt ‘the other side’ and be done with immunity, despite there being no state of war existing.”

He also made a reference to the Zionists’ killing of Iranian nuclear scientists and said, “Unfortunately, we see old tactics being reused, the ones with a track record of being successful and low risk.” “The killing of a few scientists would not have much effect on a major program. Personnel losses get replaced. And with 20/20 hindsight, we see from the 18 months of nuclear talks with Iran that neither Israel nor Britain ever disclosed any hard evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program.”

He finally said that he saw Iran nuclear deal as “an offering of good will from Obama,” and that “he wants to turn the corner on the sordid past of US diplomacy and start a new era.” “The average American is not aware of how our CIA and British intelligence basically hijacked your country and terrorized it under the Shah for a long time. No reparations for that flagrantly offensive act have ever been discussed here.”

May 6, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The Backlash Against the MEK’s Fans in Congress

The enthusiasm of some hawks in Congress for the Mujaideen-e Khalq (MEK) has started to create a bit of a backlash. The Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee invited the cult’s leader, Maryam Rajavi, to testify remotely as part of a panel on ISIS. That prompted one former State Department official to withdraw from the meeting entirely. Robert Ford, the former ambassador to Syria, has also said he won’t take part in a panel that includes Rajavi:

“I didn’t want to be on a panel with the MEK. I was shocked they invited the MEK. What the MEK has to do with the Islamic State, I don’t have a clue,” Ford told FP. “I told the committee to put me on a panel without the MEK or I wouldn’t appear.”

The refusal of these former officials to play along with some hawks’ disturbing admiration for the MEK is appropriate, but it is unfortunate that it should be necessary. The attention and praise lavished on the MEK in recent years by former officials, retired military officers, and politicians has been an embarrassing spectacle. Now the strange infatuation that many hawks have with the “former” terrorist group is spilling over into the regular business of Congress. As if to underscore how misguided inviting Rajavi was, a copy of the cult leader’s testimony shows that she intends to use her time to argue for regime change in Iran. Ali Gharib comments:

But more to the point, the MEK has always had only one goal: the overthrow of the Iranian regime. For decades, it has tried to shoehorn regional and geopolitical dynamics into its aim, irrespective of any salient connections.

The plan to bring down ISIS by toppling Iran’s government, then, is little more than the latest chapter of group’s 50-year history of monomaniacally trying to install itself atop the Iranian government.

This obviously has nothing to do with combating or understanding ISIS, and allowing her to speak at such a meeting just lends a totalitarian cult a platform from which it can promote its own warped agenda. Inviting Rajavi demonstrates exceptionally poor judgment, and her testimony will make a farce of the proceedings tomorrow. It would be one thing to invite a representative of this awful group if it had anything useful to contribute to the subject being discussed, but of course it doesn’t. The invitation to Rajavi is simply a way for hawks on this subcommittee to flaunt hostility to Iran and to indulge the fantasy that the MEK speaks for the Iranian opposition.

By Daniel Larison

May 5, 2015 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Posts

  • Italian legislators fooled by MEK’s polished presentations

    July 18, 2026
  • The Rhetorical Style and Polemical Language of the MEK

    July 15, 2026
  • Death of Lindsey Graham, notorious hardliner against Iran

    July 13, 2026
  • Nejat Society Albania’s 2026 Peace Delegation

    July 11, 2026
  • When Reality Does not Fit the MEK’s Narrative

    July 11, 2026
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Youtube

© 2003 - 2025 NEJAT Society . All Rights Reserved. NejatNGO.org


Back To Top
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip