Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

BBC on the Mujahedin-e-Khalq

 “…for the last forty years, our thought has been trapped in hollow structures of language, a stale, dead but immensely successful rhetoric. This has represented, in my view, a defeat of the intelligence and of the will.” — Harold Pinter Here is the neocon’s preferred ‘democratic’ alternative for Iran. Their vision of a Brave New World would make Aldous Huxley shudder. In a way I feel sad for the individuals in the organization as it is clear their leadership is allowing them to be used as pawns in order to forward their personal interests. Once they have served their purpose, the pragmatic neocons will be quick to look dissociate themselves from an organization with such a profoundly fanatic bent. Imperial powers always prefer weak and colorless surrogates with no constituency of their own, so that they are easier to control.

 

In certain respects the MeK appear to me like a reincarnation of the The Assassins of Hasan bin Sabah.

 

 One Response to “BBC on the Mujahedin-e-Khalq”

 

naj Says:

April 3rd, 2007 at 6:18 pm

Well, at least Hassan Sabbah had a romanic air around his Alamout and his doped followers! These dudes are simply pathetic and delusional, with their president elect in exile!!!!

They have no popular ground in Iran!

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Washington’s Covert War inside Iran

Much attention has been given to the Bush Administration’s preparations for possible war against Iran as well as its drive to impose sanctions. Meanwhile, a less noticed policy has been unfolding, one that may in time prove to have grave consequences for the region. There is a covert war underway in Iran, still in its infancy, but with disturbing signs of impending escalation. In the shadowy world of guerrilla operations, the full extent of involvement by the Bush Administration has yet to be revealed, but enough is known to paint a disturbing picture.

The provision of aid to anti-government forces offers certain advantages to the Bush Administration. No effort needs to be expended in winning support for the policy. Operations can be conducted away from the public eye during a time of growing domestic opposition to the war in Iraq, and international opinion is simply irrelevant where the facts are not well known. In terms of expenditures, covert operations are a cost-effective means for destabilizing a nation, relative to waging war.

There is nothing new in the technique, and it has proven an effective means for toppling foreign governments in the past, as was the case with socialist Afghanistan and Nicaragua. In Yugoslavia, U.S. and British military training and arms shipments helped to build up the secessionist Kosovo Liberation Army from a small force of 300 soldiers into a sizable guerrilla army that made the province of Kosovo ungovernable. The very chaos that the West did so much to create was then used as the pretext for bombing Yugoslavia.

According to a former CIA official, funding for armed separatist groups operating in Iran is paid from the CIA’s classified budget. The aim, claims Fred Burton, an ex-State Department counter-terrorism agent, is “to supply and train” these groups “to destabilize the Iranian regime.” (1)

The largest and most well known of the anti-government organizations is Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), operating out of Iraq. For years MEQ had launched cross-border attacks and terrorist acts against Iran with the support of Saddam Hussein. Officially designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department in 1997, and disarmed of heavy weaponry by the U.S. military six years later, Washington has since come to view MEK in a different light. Three years ago, U.S. intelligence officials suggested looking the other way as the MEK rearmed and to use the organization to destabilize Iran, a recommendation that clearly has been accepted. (2)

Accusing MEK of past involvement in repressive measures by former president Saddam Hussein, the current Iraqi government wants to close down Camp Ashraf, located well outside of Baghdad, where many of the MEK fighters are stationed. But the camp operates under the protection of the U.S. military, and American soldiers chauffeur MEK leaders. The Iraqi government is unlikely to get its way, as the MEK claims to be the primary U.S. source for intelligence on Iran. (3)

U.S. officials “made MEK members swear an oath to democracy and resign from the MEK,” reveals an intelligence source, “and then our guys incorporated them into their unit and trained them.” Reliance on the MEK began under Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld with the direction of Vice President Dick Cheney, and soon MEK soldiers were being used in special operations missions in Iran. “They are doing whatever they want, no oversight at all,” said one intelligence official of the MEK’s American handlers. (4)

The Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), is another organization that conducts cross-border raids into Iran. Israel provides the group with “equipment and training,” claims a consultant to the U.S. Defense Department, while the U.S. gave it “a list of targets inside Iran of interest to the U.S.” Aid to guerrilla groups, the consultant reports, is “part of an effort to explore alternative means of applying pressure on Iran.” (5) It has been noted that PJAK has recently shown an impressive gain in capability during its operations, both in terms of size and armament, a fact that can surely be attributed to Western support. (6)

Jundallah (God’s Brigade) is an extremist Sunni organization operating in Sistan-Balochistan province that has been launching armed attacks, planting explosives, setting off car bombs, and kidnapping. Based in Pakistan, it is unclear if this group is connected with the Pakistani organization of the same name, which has ties with Al-Qaeda. (7) Jundallah denies that it has any links to either Al-Qaeda or to the U.S. But Iranian officials claim that a recently arrested Jundallah guerrilla has confessed that he was trained by U.S. and British intelligence officers. There is no way to verify that such a confession has actually taken place, nor its reliability as it may have come as a result of coercion, but the claim would not be inconsistent with U.S. policy elsewhere in Iran. (8)

It is probable that in the coming months the Bush Administration will expand support for anti-government forces in order to more effectively destabilize Iran and gather intelligence. Already U.S. Special Forces are operating in Iran collecting data, planting nuclear sensors, and electronically marking targets. Separatist forces have cooperated in those efforts. “This looks to be turning into a pretty large-scale covert operation,” comments a former CIA official. U.S. and Israeli officials are establishing front companies to help finance that covert war. (9) To fully capitalize on ethnic discontent along Iran’s periphery, the U.S. Marine Corps has commissioned a study from defense contractor Hicks and Associates on Iran and Iraq’s ethnic groups and their grievances. (10)

That these separatist organizations clearly engage in terrorism hasn’t deterred the Bush Administration from backing them. The potential for baneful consequences is considerable. CIA support for the anti-Soviet and anti-socialist Mujahedin in Afghanistan spawned a worldwide movement of Islamic extremism. Western support for ethnic secessionists shattered Yugoslavia and the invasion of Iraq fired the flames of ethnic discord and made a shared life impossible. It remains to be seen if the Bush Administration can succeed in achieving its goal of effecting regime change in Iran. That process could have devastating consequences for the people of Iran. Those officials in the Bush Administration who advocated and implemented covert operations “think in Iran you can just go in and hit the facilities and destabilize the government,” explains a former CIA official. “They believe they can get rid of a few crazy mullahs and bring in the young guys who like Gap jeans, [and] all the world’s problems are solved. I think it’s delusional.” (11)

Gregory Elich is the author of Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit. Gregory Elich is a frequent Global Research contributor.

http://www.amazon.com/Strange-Liberators-Militarism-Mayhem-Pursuit/dp/1595265708

 

________________________________________

NOTES

1. William Lowther and Colin Freeman, “US Funds Terror Groups to Sow Chaos in Iran,” Sunday Telegraph (London), February 25, 2007.

2. “Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK or MKO), Global Security.org Syed Saleem Shahzad, “Sleeping Forces Stir in Iran,” Asia Times, June 26, 2003.Gian Marco Chiocci and Alessia Marani, “Iranian Mujaheddin Gather Funds in Italy,” Il Giornale (Milan), October 2, 2006.

1. Ernesto Londono and Saad al-Izzi, “Iraq Intensifies Efforts to Expel Iranian Group,” Washington Post, March 14, 2007.

2. Larisa Alexandrovna, “On Cheney, Rumsfeld Order, US Outsourcing Special Ops, Intelligence to Iraq Terror Group, Intelligence Officials Say,” The Raw Story, April 13, 2006.

3. Seymour Hersh, “The Next Act,” New Yorker, November 27, 2006.

4. James Brandon, “PJAK Claims Fresh Attacks in Iran,” Global Terrorism Analysis, March 6, 2007.

5. Ali Akbar Dareini, “Explosion Kills 11 Members of Iran’s Elite Revolutionary Guards,” Associated Press, February 14, 2007.

6. Broadcast, Islamic Republic of Iran News Network (Teheran), February 17, 2007.

7. Richard Sale, “Cat and Mouse Game Over Iran,” UPI, January 26, 2005.

8. Guy Dinmore, “US Marines Probe Tensions Among Iran’s Minorities,” Financial Times (London), February 23, 2006.

9. Julian Borger and Ian Traynor, “Now US Ponders Attack on Iran,” The Guardian (London), January 18, 2005.

Center for Research on Globalization By Gregory Elich 23 March 2007

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

U.S. support for terrorism targeting Iran

TEHRAN, April 23 (MNA) — Apparently the U.S. and British authorities have become so desperate for an alibi that they have readily embraced the assertion of the infamous anti-Iranian Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO), which is listed as a terrorist group by Britain, the United States, and the European Union.

A spokesman of this group, which vegetates in the shadow of the U.S. Army at Camp Ashraf in Iraq, said that Iran’s capture of 15 British military personnel, who illegally entered Iran’s territorial waters on March 23, was planned in advance.

But David Stringer of the Associated Press immediately realized that he owed it to his readers to mention that the MKO spokesman offered no evidence to support his claims. This group, along with the old Iranian monarchists, like their financiers in the White House and Downing Street, need no evidence to fabricate stories.

It should be noted that three years ago, U.S. intelligence circles suggested rearming the MKO and using it to destabilize Iran, a recommendation that has apparently readily been implemented. The implementation of this plan makes the U.S. government complicit in the terrorist acts that have been carried out inside Iran. The New York Times recently revealed that the camp operates under the protection of the U.S. military and that U.S. troops chauffer MKO operatives.

Another organization that carries out cross-border attacks on Iranian villages is the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), which is supported with equipment and training by Israeli special forces. This group receives its “lists of targets inside Iran” from U.S. intelligence agents.

A third terrorist organization that operates on the border between Iran’s Sistan-Baluchistan Province and the countries of Pakistan on the southeast and Afghanistan on the northeast is Jundallah (God’s Brigade), an extremist Sunni group. Jundallah has been launching armed attacks on the civilian population, planting bombs, and kidnapping travelers. The group has its bases in Pakistan and apparently is funded, trained, and armed by the U.S. and British armies in Afghanistan and in the Iran-Pakistan border regions.

According to Greg Elich of www.GlobalResearch.ca, U.S. and Israeli officials are setting up front companies to help finance future covert activities in Iran. An old adage comes to mind when thinking about how the CIA armed and financed Osama bin Laden and the Mujahedin in Afghanistan during the 1980s to undermine the Soviet Union: History repeats itself; the first time is tragedy, the second time is farce.

It is now common knowledge that U.S. special operation forces in Iraq have been given the task of kidnapping Iranian diplomats and officials in Iraq and the countries where U.S. intelligence agents operate freely. For example, U.S. forces led a commando-type, helicopter-borne raid in Irbil, northern Iraq, and grabbed five Iranian diplomatic liaison personnel in January 2007.

These special units, operating without the permission of the Kurdish authorities, reportedly used stun guns against the men while seizing office computers, ransacking and intentionally destroying the property inside, and taking down the Iranian flag from the rooftop of the raided building as a demonstration of animosity and disrespect toward the Iranian people. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani as well as one of the country’s most powerful Shia leaders condemned the raid, calling it an attack on Iraq’s sovereignty.

Furthermore, the United States refused to allow any communication with the detained officials until the incident involving the 15 British sailors and marines was brought into a process of negotiation. The U.S. was pressured to agree to allow the Iranian government to communicate with the Iranian captives, a promise yet to be fulfilled.

An Iranian diplomat, Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary of the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, who was kidnapped in Iraq by U.S. forces and held for over two months, was released earlier this month. Mr. Sharafi told Iran’s state news agency IRNA that he was subjected to torture “day and night”. He said, “I was kidnapped on a Baghdad street while shopping by officials who had Iraqi Defense Ministry ID cards and were riding in U.S. forces vehicles.”

Mr. Sharafi said he was taken to a military base near Baghdad airport and questioned in Arabic and English. “The CIA officials’ questions focused mainly on Iran’s presence and influence in Iraq. When faced with my responses on Iran’s official ties with the Iraqi government, they increased the torture,” he stated.

Apparently, this is the customary method that the United States government, which likes to brag about its ‘love of democracy and concern for human rights’, treats foreign detainees and kidnapped individuals.

What respect for human rights!

Where are the human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International, to expose and condemn Washington’s routine practice of human rights violations?

Earlier this year, former Iranian deputy defense minister Alireza Askari, who was in Turkey to attend a conference, disappeared into thin air, and his family in Tehran has not heard from him since. Iranian officials said Askari was kidnapped by Western agents.

These attacks, not highly nor widely publicized in the U.S. press, are part of the covert front of the U.S. and British forces.

 

 

Professor Paul Sheldon Foote’s comment on the article:

 

America’s worst enemies are not in the Middle East. America’s worst enemies are the neo-conservative (admirers of Trotsky and of Machiavelli) traitors who support America’s terrorist enemies: MEK (MKO, PMOI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran). When will the major American media expose the long history of the Rajavi Cult in terrorist operations, from killing American military officers and Rockwell International employees to working on secret terrorist missions with the American military?

 

Ardeshir Ommani, Mehr News, April 23, 2007

http://www.mehrnews.com/en/NewsPrint.aspx?NewsID=475131

 

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

NIAC rebuts MKO and FrontPage Magazine’s untruths and fabrications

Washington DC – The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) has been the target of several erroneous, maliciously defamatory opinion pieces by Kenneth Timmerman and Hassan Daioleslam in Frontpage Magazine. The articles are riddled with inaccuracies, misquotations, incorrect links and references to figures that played no role in NIAC’s inception, operations, or its development over the years.

The two articles are written by a neoconservative author (Kenneth Timmerman) and a Marxist Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MKO) supporter (Hassan Daioleslam), whose group has been identified by the State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (Daioleslam’s article was initially published on a MKO website prior to be being used by Frontpage magazine).

The real reason for their unprovoked attacks on NIAC seems to be to silence an independent Iranian American voice opposing war with Iran.

Proponents of war between the US and Iran seek to equate opposition to a US-Iran war with lobbying for the Iranian government. This, however, is erroneous and disingenuous. In fact, the causality is likely reversed: War would strengthen the Iranian government, just as it did in 1980 when Saddam Hussein’s Iraq invaded Iran. NIAC’s position on this issue is clear: War between the US and Iran would devastate the region, be counter to US national interests, undermine America’s position in the region, strengthen rather than weaken the Iranian regime and lead to tremendous loss of innocent life on both sides.

As NIAC’s activities have grown and become increasingly effective at preventing a US-Iran military confrontation, naturally it has attracted the ire of people who support war. By deliberately providing a false choice between the Iranian government and the MKO, the authors assert that the Iranian-American community cannot adhere to alternative positions, independent of the Iranian government or the MKO’s militant agenda.

Opposing a military engagement with Iran has been on NIAC’s agenda since its members cast their votes in near unanimous numbers against a military confrontation. Concerned about the devastating potential for the loss of life that would stem from a war with Iran, NIAC and the Iranian American community have stepped up efforts to prevent a war. For the past 12 months, NIAC has worked to stimulate debate to include a variety of perspectives from Iranian Americans, to the dismay of certain groups on the far left and far right. Much indicates that Mr. Diaoleslam and Timmerman are sensing their influence waning and resorting to desperate misinformation tactics.

NIAC continues to promote the interests of the Iranian-American community and ensure that a multitude of voices are heard in debates held in Capitol Hill concerning US-Iran relations. NIAC believes that fringe elements in the community should not be allowed to continue to monopolize the discussion over this issue, and by that, misrepresent the multitude of views of the Iranian-American community.

Still, though NIAC disagrees with Mr. Diaoleslam and Timmerman’s support for a US-Iran war, we welcome their inputs into the debate. We are, however, dismayed that instead of intelligently contributing to the discussion with facts and reasoning, they have relied on defamation, intimidation, and personal attacks.

A list of Timmerman and Diaoleslam’s numerous misleading and false assertions can be found below.

 

Mr. Timmerman’s article in FrontPage Magazine, April 23, 2007

Mr. Timmerman’s article accuse Dr. Parsi of violating Federal Law by acting as an intermediary between Iran and the United States during a 2003 Iranian proposal to the US for negotiation. A Washington Note article is referenced to support the author’s dubious claim. However, the article only indicates that Mr. Parsi, as an advisor to Congressman Ney, was aware of the Congressman’s role in passing the 2003 proposal from a Swiss diplomat to Karl Rove and the Bush Administration. The authors ignore the fact that nothing in the Washington Note article asserts that Mr. Parsi was directly involved in the transfer of the proposal. Rather, the Washington Note article only reveals that Congressman Ney received and delivered the proposal to Karl Rove and the Bush Administration. Mr. Timmerman’s transparent misconstruing of these facts is very disturbing (and perhaps revealing).

Mr. Timmerman speculates about NIAC’s sources of funding. However, there is no need for speculation since, as a 501 c (3) non-profit, NIAC’s financial records are available to the public. They are a part of the public record and are available to anyone interested. NIAC’s funding comes primarily from Iranian American donors and respected foundations like the Ploughshares Fund, Tides Foundation, the Open Society Institute and the National Endowment for Democracy. NIAC does not accept any funding from any government agency, including those of Iran and the US.

Mr. Timmerman equates opposition to a US-Iran war with support for the Iranian government. Nothing could be further from the truth. NIAC believes that Iranian Americans are double-stakeholders in attempts to avoid war – as Americans, they don’t want to see a single American life lost, and as Americans of Iranian descent, they don’t want to see their friends and family in Iran getting bombed. The images of the devastation in Iraq should serve as a deterrent against prospective wars in the region. In this, NIAC agrees with the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations that diplomacy, not military confrontation should be the way to resolve US-Iran tensions. Misconstruing the Iraq Study Group and NIAC’s opposition to war and preference for diplomacy as “lobbying for the Iranian government” reveals more about Mr. Timmerman’s agenda than that of NIAC.

Mr. Timmerman references a February 17, 2007 C-SPAN interview as he identifies Mr. Parsi as a sympathizer of the Iranian government. On the contrary, during the interview, Mr. Parsi noted that if Iran is involved in killing American troops in Iraq, then that is a very serious accusation that “needs to be dealt with.” He later identifies Iranian Americans as “primary victims of the [Iranian] regime.” Finally throughout the interview, Mr. Parsi insists that the US should follow the Iraq Study Group’s recommendation to pursue diplomacy with Iran, a strategy that is advantageous to US interests.

Mr. Timmerman attacks Bruno Pellaud for asserting at NIAC and the New America Foundation’s conference on Capitol Hill on February 17, 2007 that the IAEA has found no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran. Although NIAC is not responsible for the views of the speakers at its conference, we feel Mr. Pellaud, as a former IAEA Deputy Director, is an important authority on this issue whose voice is useful to this debate. We disagree with Mr. Timmerman’s efforts to stifle the debate by attacking those who disagree with him. We also find it unfortunate that Mr. Timmerman conveniently ignores other speakers at the conference who openly criticized the Iranian government, including Matthew Levitt, Senior Director at the Washington Institute on Near East Policy and former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis in the Bush Administration, who spoke extensively about “Iran’s support for terrorism.”

While NIAC disagrees with Mr. Timmerman’s support for war, it welcomes an open and exhaustive debate on this issue. In fact, Timmerman was invited to NIAC and the New America Foundation’s conference on Capitol Hill, where he actively participated on the record in the discussions. We believe that it is important to discuss these crucial issues in the open rather than resorting to personal attacks and defamation.

 

National Iranian American Council

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Human torches

in Mojahedin Khalq Organisation, Rajavi cult

 

 … The self burnings proved, for those yet in doubt, that MKO preserved the characteristics of both a terrorist group and a cult. Following the classic techniques of cults, Mojahedin relies on psychological manipulation and brainwashing to mesmerize the insiders to follow the orders. Singer and Lalich* define cults as organizations that feature "coordinated programs of coercive influence and behavioral control," many religiously or politically oriented and increasingly centered on New Age self-improvement techniques. Cults use motivational psychology to create closed controlling environments where cult members have little opportunity for free thinking. Some cults control all aspects oftheir members’ lives, including where members work and live, members’ social companions, members’ sexual companions, and even the members’daydreams. Cults achieve complete control through a program of deliberate isolation plus psychological reward and punishment. Cult members mechanically serve the cult leadership’s goals and fantasies, and in some cases, commit self-destruction for his or her cause…

To view the Documentary click here

Download Human torches
Download Human torches

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Zebari says Iraq government has decided to expel MKO from Iraq

Visiting Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said here Wednesday evening " Iraq government has decided to expel members of the terrorist group Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) from the country."

In a joint press conference with his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki, Zebari said, " Iraq government has set up a committee to uphold the decision."

He said, "We have negotiated with several European countries to settle the expelled MKO members."

Concerning the sad event of detaining Iranian diplomats in Iraq, Jalal Sharafi, Zebari said a committee has been established to investigate the case from different aspects.

 

The outcome of investigation will introduce all those who were involved in the event, the Iraqi foreign minister added.

 

Responding to a question concerning kidnapped Iranian diplomats in Iraq, Zebari said, " our government will do its best to release the Iranians and we hope they can be freed soon and return to their families."

The Iraqi foreign minister also said, " We should not make a connection between freedom of Iranian diplomats and Iran’s participation in Sharm al-Sheikh conference."

Iran’s foreign minister responding to a question said, " Iraqi government is responsible for protection of kidnapped Iranian diplomats’ life."

Concerning Sharm al-Sheikh conference, Mottaki said, " There are certain ambiguities in this concern, but we are going to consider the case, especially after Mr. Zebari’s elaboration on the matter and we will declare our stance soon."

 

IRNA –  April 26,2007

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
European Union

EU nations agree to notify groups on terror list

EU nations agree to notify groups, individuals why they are on terror list

LUXEMBOURG: European Union nations decided Monday they will inform groups and individuals when they are placed on the EU terror list.

The move came in the wake of last year’s EU high court ruling which ordered the 27-nation bloc to give rights to all parties on the list.

Those listed will now be able to request the reasons why they are on the list and why their assets are frozen, officials said on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue.

Monday’s changes did not scrap any names or groups from the list, officials said. The list includes 60 groups and individuals, with people like Osama bin Laden, Hamas and al-Qaida. The decision was taken without debate during a meeting of EU foreign ministers talks here.

A panel of EU experts reviews the list every six months behind closed doors, but its decision in 2002 to freeze all European assets of an exiled Iranian resistance movement led to a court case at the EU’s Court of Justice filed by the group.

The EU court annulled the decision to freeze the assets of The People’s Mujahadeen of Iran, also known by the acronyms PMOI and MEK, and ordered the EU to give all parties on the list a fair hearing.

It was the first time an appeal to the EU’s terror list was successful at the EU court.

EU legal experts have argued that the court’s ruling did not imply it had to remove the group from its list, an interpretation the PMOI has strongly opposed.

The group said in a statement Monday that the changes in the EU’s procedures "are simply cosmetic changes to circumvent the court ruling." The U.S. also lists the group as a terrorist organization.

The EU governments had asked the group to submit a legal reply to the ruling to state why it should not be on the list.

The mujahedeen were originally set up in the mid-1960s to oppose the U.S.-backed dictatorship of the late Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

At the time, a Marxist splinter group within the PMOI carried out several attacks on Iranian security forces in which six U.S. advisers died. This was cited by the U.S. State Department as justification for placing the mujahedeen on its terror list in the mid-1990s.

After the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the shah, the group was exiled to Iraq, from where they carried out cross-border raids during the 1980-1988 war between the two countries. Several thousand of its members were disarmed by U.S. forces after Saddam’s overthrow in 2003 and restricted to an army camp near Baghdad.

The list, set up after the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, is done in secret by a special committee of security representatives from each member state.

 

The Associated Press  –  April 23, 2007

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iraq

US Agrees with Iraqi Control over MKO

Iraqi security minister said the MKO was a source of unrest in Iraq.

Shirvan al-Vaeli, Iraq’s security minister, said in an interview with London-based Al-Hayat that "the MKO had created security crisis in Iraq."

"Initial agreements have been reached between Iraqi government and the US, which is responsible for protecting MKO members in Iraq, on the issue of how to protect these people," he added.

"Some European countries as well as Iran, which have pardoned some MKO members, are ready to accept them."

Quoting this report, IRNA said:

"National Security minister of Iraq said that around 4000 MKO members in Iraq would possibly be transferred to Europe in a near future.

According to Shirvan al-Vaeli, whose comments were published on Wednesday, some European countries have announced preparedness to accept MKO members.

In addition to these countries, Islamic Republic of Iran has also pardoned MKO members, this Iraqi official added.

He said the MKO was a source of insecurity in Dyala province in Iraq.

Currently, the US forces are protecting MKO members in Camp Ashraf in Dyala province.

Although the US has always claimed to be watching all activities of MKO, preventing them from conducting political and military operations, Iraqi government and Iraqi political figures say the MKO has created unrest in Dyala.

Camp Ashraf, MKO’s main base in Iraq, has been a place for political meetings with anti-Iranian Arab groups since the invasion to Iraq in 2003.

It should be noted that Iraqi Interim Government ordered the expulsion of MKO in 2003 but Americans have so far prevented the execution of this order.

 

A-Hayat, London, April 25, 2007

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Dick Cheney

Dick Cheney is legally bound by the U.S Constitution

Rep. Dennis Kucinich on April 24, 2007 introduced a resolution to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate.  The third article of the resolution presents evidences that Dick Cheney has been fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran and making contacts with anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK).

Article III  In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

M(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

MMM(A)”For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.

MMM(B)”But we’ve also made it clear that all options are on the table.”January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney. 

MMM(C)”When we—as the President did, for example, recently—deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.”January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.

MMM(D)”But I’ve also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.”February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.

M(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States, as evidenced by the following:

MMM(A)”I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.”Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

MMM(B) Iran indicated its”full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council.’’ IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007. 

MMM(C)”… so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.”Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

 M(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:

 MMM(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.

 MMM(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.

 MMM(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.

 MMM(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.

 MMM(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.

 M(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran.

 However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S Constitution’s adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force. 

 Rep. Dennis Kucinich, April 24, 2007

http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/int3.pdf

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts