Home » Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force » Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief

Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief

Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief in Opposition to Administration Terror Policy

December 19, 2006 03:07 PM Posted By News <http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsblog.org%2F>



Questions & comments 1

Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief in Opposition to Administration

Terror Policy Recently, ACSBlog highlighted

<http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsblog.org%2Fequal-protection-and-due-process-alleged-provider-of -material-support-to-terrorists-challenges-designation.html> the case of Rahmani v. U.S., in which the Ninth Circuit held that a person charged with material support of a terrorist organization may not challenge the State Department’s designation of the organization as terrorist. An amicus brief, filed by Congressmen Bob Filner (D-CA) and Tom Tancredo (R-CO) argues that, by designating the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) as terrorists, the designation which is at issue in this case, the State

<http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.altshulerberzon.com%2Fnews%2FRahmani_final_final.pdf> Department

exceeded its power under federal law.

According to the brief, Congress feared that, in enacting the law which allows the government to designate terrorist organizations and prosecute those who support them, it would abridge First Amendment rights by allowing the State Department to designate groups for purely political reasons. Such political opponents of the State Department would then be unable to raise funds from donors unwilling to risk a criminal conviction. Accordingly, the statute permits the government to only designate organizations who engage in certain violent practices, such as highjacking, assassination or use of a weapon of mass destruction. The brief argues that MEK engages in none of the practices permitting terrorist designation under the statute. Instead, its designation as a terrorist organization was part of a strategy to advance foreign policy goals:

In May 1997, Iran elected Mohammad Khatami, a reform-minded political moderate, as President. The U.S. regarded the change in leadership as an opportunity to reopen dialogue with Iran. As the group that the Iranian regime viewed as its most serious internal threat, Robert Collier, Exonerated in Terror Case, 4 Brothers Still Locked Up, S.F. CHRON., Jan. 25,

2005, at A1, the MEK was a natural pawn, and Iran reportedly demanded the designation as a prerequisite for engaging in diplomatic talks with the U.S., see James Morrison, Embassy Row: Backing Resistance, WASH. TIMES, July 27, 2006, at A14. In October 1997, the State Department complied with Iran’s demand and included the MEK on a list of designated FTOs. Shortly thereafter, a senior Clinton administration official indicated that the designation was intended as a “goodwill gesture” to Khatami and the Iranian regime.

This “politically motivated” designation, according to the brief, is not permitted under federal law. The brief concludes that MEK is a “legitimate political resistance,” similar to the “Northern Alliance in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, the African National Congress in apartheid-era South Africa, and Jewish armed resistance gruops in Nazi-controlled Europe.”

Written By:Paul Sheldon <http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.yahoo.com%2Fgroup%2Ftraitorsusa%2F> Foote

On January 9, 2007 11:51 PM

These representations about the Iranian Communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) omit that this terrorist group murdered American military officers and Rockwell International employees. The MEK committed many atrocities in Iraq in 1991, such as the massacre of large numbers of unarmed Kurds. The MEK committed a terrorist act in New York City. In September 2002, President Bush’s background paper for his remarks to the

United Nations listed the MEK as one of three Saddam Hussein-supported terrorist groups operating in Iraq. Hence, the MEK was a pretext for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. In 2003, American and coalition forces attacked Camp Ashraf, Iraq and killed some of the MEK terrorists.



Paul Sheldon Foote





Paul Sheldon Foote

You may also like

Leave a Comment