Mujahedin Khalq Terror group

Iraqis united: Get Out of Here, Curse You

According to Iraqi al-Qanun independent news agency, 750 people participated in a seminar titled ‘Get Out of Here, Curse You’ on Tuesday. Academics, intellectuals, activists, elders and elders of the province of Diyala gave their support to the government’s decision to expel the Mojahedin-e Khalq from Iraq and that the MEK must obey Iraqi law. The participants agreed that the land occupied by the MEK should be restored in order to revive the economic and agricultural prosperity of the region.

Director of the greater Khalis region, Abdul-Jabbar Ahmed al-Obeidi, said many victims of MEK terrorism have filed complaints with Iraq’s Judiciary.

Secretary General of the Association of Justice to defend the victims of Mojahedin Khalq in Iraq, Dr. Nafie Isa, described how the MEK used occupied land to attack Iraq’s citizens. He said the media should expose the MEK’s crimes and interference in the internal affairs of Iraq and support the efforts of the government to expel the MEK by the end of 2011.

many victims of MEK terrorism have filed complaints with Iraq’s Judiciary.

The Mayor of Khalis, Uday Alkhaddran, described how the MEK launch false accusations and create anonymous groups on the Internet which have no reality on the ground in the province of Diyala.

The police chief of Diyala province, Brigadier General Jamil Kamel Shammari, stressed that the UN Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply to the MEK. He also stressed that under Iraqi law MEK terrorists cannot be granted political asylum in Iraq.

Brigadier General Jamil Kamel Shammari, stressed that the UN Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply to the MEK.

The seminar exposed the names of fake groups created by the MEK and foreign intelligence services in order to condemn the government of Iraq. Participants reiterated their support to remove the MEK, as a terrorist organization which participated in killing Iraqi civilians, from Iraq in its entirety by the end of 2011.

Iraqi al Qanun news, Khalis, Iraq,Translated by Iran Interlink

November 3, 2011 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Iraqis Rally to Protest at MKO Presence in Diyala

A large number of the people staged a rally in Northern Iraq on Tuesday to protest at the presence of the anti-Iran terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) in their country, and called for the expulsion of the terrorist group from Iraq’s soil.

"Expulsion of the MKO from Iraq is a demand of all people that should be respected and obeyed," Mayor of al-Adhim town in Diyala province, Abdul Jabbar Ahmed al-Obeidi, said during the rally.

According to a report by the Middle-East Association for Defending the Victims of Terrorism, over 750 academic, political and tribal figures of the Diyala province took part in the rally.

Al-Obeidi said that the Iraqi population of the province want the fertile lands under the MKO occupation to be freed and given back to the people and farmers for the agricultural and economic development of the province.

The Baghdad government has assured Iranian officials and people that it is determined to expel the MKO from Iraq by the end of 2011.
The MKO has been in Iraq’s Diyala province since the 1980s.

Iraqi security forces took control of the training base of the MKO at Camp Ashraf – about 60km (37 miles) north of Baghdad – in 2009 and detained dozens of the members of the terrorist group.

The Iraqi authority also changed the name of the military center from Camp Ashraf to the Camp of New Iraq.

The MKO, whose main stronghold is in Iraq, is blacklisted by much of the international community, including the United States.
Before an overture by the EU, the MKO was on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. Yet, the MKO puppet leader, Maryam Rajavi, who has residency in France, regularly visited Brussels and despite the ban enjoyed full freedom in Europe.

The MKO is behind a slew of assassinations and bombings inside Iran, a number of EU parliamentarians said in a recent letter in which they slammed a British court decision to remove the MKO from the British terror list. The EU officials also added that the group has no public support within Iran because of their role in helping Saddam Hussein in the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988).

Many of the MKO members abandoned the terrorist organization while most of those still remaining in the camp are said to be willing to quit but are under pressure and torture not to do so.

A May 2005 Human Rights Watch report accused the MKO of running prison camps in Iraq and committing human rights violations.
According to the Human Rights Watch report, the outlawed group puts defectors under torture and jail terms.

The group, 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 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 also argue for the MKO to be taken off the US terror list.

November 3, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Iran Claims U.S.-Sponsored MKO Terrorists Conceived Saudi Ambassador

Since news broke that there was an alleged plot by Iran to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Adel A. Al-Jubeir (left), and destroy a number of embassies, Iran has adamantly denied the accusations. Likewise, skeptics questioned whether the plot could have been staged by Iran, who would have had little to nothing to gain from such an endeavor, and claimed that the plot was uncharacteristic of Iranian terror. Others have asserted that the entire plot was in fact manufactured by American law enforcement agencies as an impetus for war against Iran. Adding yet another layer to this news story, Iran has come out and said that the plot was in fact planned by the French/Iraqi-based Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK), which is actually funded and supported by the United States.

Last week, the United States charged American-Iranian Mansour Arbabsiar, a used car salesman, for his role in an alleged plot to murder Ambassador Adel Al-Jubeir and attack Saudi installations in the U.S. in a plan reportedly plotted earlier this year. According to the Justice Department, Arbabsiar conspired with Gholam Shakuri, a member of Iran’s Qods Force — an arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Iran immediately denied the accusations, with the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast declaring, “These attitudes, which are based on the age-old and hostile policies of the American-Zionist axis, are a ridiculous show in line with a scenario that aims to divide and that emanates from enemies of the region.”

A number of experts across the globe came forward and questioned the claims that the plot had been sponsored by the Iranian government. They argued that the Qods Force is far too methodical and effective in its choice of proxies to have chosen a used car salesman and member of a Mexican drug cartel. Others assert that it is unlikely that Iran would sponsor such an act of terror as it does not serve Iranian interests in any way.

Iran has now raised accusations against another party, which they claim to be responsible for hatching the plot. The British paper The Guardian reports, “Tehran has pointed the finger at a dissident group it considers a ‘sworn enemy’ in an attempt to distance itself from US accusations that the Islamic regime in Iran conspired to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington.”

According to Iran’s news agency Mehr, one of the two suspects that the United States asserted was involved in the plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador is a “key member” of MEK. "The person in question has been travelling to different countries under the names of Ali Shakuri/Gholam Shakuri/Gholam-Hossein Shakuri by using fake passports, including forged Iranian passports," said Mehr.

MEK has been declared a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department. Listed as number 28 on the Department’s list of terrorist organizations, MEK has been responsible for terrorism against both the United States and Iran for years.

Yet MEK was considered by the Brookings Institution as a prime candidate for U.S. backing to remove the Iranian government. A 2009 report by the Brookings Institution, entitled “Which Path to Persia?” reads:

Perhaps the most prominent (and certainly the most controversial) opposition group that has attracted attention as a potential U.S. proxy is the NCRI (National Council of Resistance of Iran), the political movement established by the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq). Critics believe the group to be undemocratic and unpopular, and indeed anti-American.

In contrast, the group’s champions contend that the movement’s long-standing opposition to the Iranian regime and record of successful attacks on and intelligence-gathering operations against the regime make it worthy of U.S. support. They also argue that the group is no longer anti-American and question the merit of earlier accusations. Raymond Tanter, one of the group’s supporters in the United States, contends that the MEK and the NCRI are allies for regime change in Tehran and also act as a useful proxy for gathering intelligence. The MEK’s greatest intelligence coup was the provision of intelligence in 2002 that led to the discovery of a secret site in Iran for enriching uranium.

In the 1970s, however, MEK was responsible for the death of three American officers and three civilian contractors in Iran. The group also voiced significant support for Iran’s taking of hostages during the Iranian hostage crisis, and some reports indicate that members of the group celebrated the 9/11 attacks, though the organization publicly condemned the attacks.

MEK has conducted a number of other terrorist attacks as well, but most have been excused because they were directed against the Iranian government. In 1981, MEK bombed the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party, killing approximately 70 officials. The organization has also taken credit for dozens of Iranian civilian and military attacks between the years 1998 and 2001.

Still, the United States has reportedly supported the organization. In a 2008 New Yorker article entitled “Preparing the Battlefield,” Seymour Hersh revealed,

“The M.E.K. has been on the State Department’s terrorist list for more than a decade, yet in recent years the group has received arms and intelligence, directly or indirectly, from the United States. Some of the newly authorized covert funds, the Pentagon consultant told me, may well end up in M.E.K. coffers. “The new task force will work with the M.E.K. The Administration is desperate for results.” He added, “The M.E.K. has no C.P.A. auditing the books, and its leaders are thought to have been lining their pockets for years. If people only knew what the M.E.K. is getting, and how much is going to its bank accounts — and yet it is almost useless for the purposes the Administration intends.”

Hersh also appeared on National Public Radio and indicated that the United States had trained a number of MEK members.

There has been an effort in the United States to remove MEK from the list of terrorist organizations, presumably so that the federal government could provide even more funding to the group.

For some, information such as this is enough to convince them that the entire war on terror is fraudulent and should be approached with skepticism. One popular blog wrote of the war on terror:

From the beginning, even for those wanting to believe the fairy tale that 9/11 was carried out by cave dwellers carrying box cutters directed by Osama Bin Laden, who by all accounts was dying or already dead from kidney failure in 2001 — "unfortunate blunders" in US foreign policy can still be blamed for the creation and perpetuation of the ubiquitous, unceasing terror organization known as Al Qaeda. However, in light of recent events in Libya, Syria, Iran, and Algeria, there is exposed a truth, many have known for over 10 years, and many more are catching onto now — that the "War on Terror" is an absolute fraud, started, fueled and simultaneously fought against by the same handful of corporate-financier interests for the sole purpose of spreading Wall Street and London’s hegemony across the globe.

According to Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it is this type of fraud that has led the U.S. government to accuse Iran of the plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador. Comparing it to assertions that Iraq maintained weapons of mass destruction, Ahmadinejad said that the U.S. simply “fabricated a bunch of papers” to support its claims at the time. “Is that a difficult thing to do?” he asked.

by Raven Clabough – The new American

October 30, 2011 0 comments

Iran

Saudi Envoy plotter a member of Paris based MKO

Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said Interpol has requested information about a alleged suspect wanted over US allegations of an assassination plot, but suggested the name was too common to pinpoint the individual.

Salehi said there are 150 names similar to the one requested by Interpol for the alleged plot to kill the Saudi envoy to Washington.

"There are 150 Gholam Shakuris (in Iran). Interpol sent us a question about this name, and our investigation showed a certain Gholam Shakuri who lives in the United States and is a member of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO)," Salehi was quoted by Saudi newspaper Asharq al-Awsat as saying in Saudi Arabia.

The United States alleges Gholam Shakuri co-conspired with an Iranian-American car salesman, Manssor Arbabsiar, to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

While Arbabsiar is in US custody, US officials say they believe Shakuri is in Iran and they have called on Tehran to turn him over to face charges.

Iran has strongly denied any involvement in the alleged plot.

It has also suggested that the Shakuri being sought is part of the terrorist MKO, a Paris-based Iranian exile group, that aims to overthrow the Islamic Republic and has so far staged hundreds of terrorist operations inside and outside Iran.

Both Iran and the United States consider the group to be a terrorist organization.
Salehi made the comments in an interview with Asharq al-Awsat during a visit to Riyadh for the Tuesday funeral of Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz.

In the exchange, the Iranian foreign minister again denied that his country plotted to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir.

"We reject these accusations. There is no justification for Iran, which is a brotherly country to Saudi Arabia, to do such an act. It’s an American accusation – they want to create divisions between Muslim countries and specially the two most important countries in the Islamic world, Saudi Arabia and Iran," he said.

He also noted that Arbabsiar had pleaded not guilty in a New York court this week to the charges, and ridiculed the idea that Iran would engage such a character in the alleged plot.

Even before the plot claims, the ties between the two regional rivals were strained over Saudi Arabia’s military assistance to Bahrain to put down pro-democracy protests by peaceful demonstrators.

Iran and Saudi Arabia have had some differences during the last three decades after the establishment of the Islamic Republic in Iran as Riyadh is considered a main US ally and always tries to materialize the US interests in the region.

On the opposite, Tehran is an arch foe of the White House and represents independent nations who do not sway under the pressure of any superpower. It is seeking its own national interests and many world states have pinned hope on its success and progress as an independent, Muslim power.

October 30, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

The MEK’s Propaganda Machine

The National Interest will be running on Monday a response to Raymond Tanter’s missive on behalf of the Iranian cult/terrorist group Mujahedeen-e-Khalq. Given that Tanter goes out of his way to raise my name a couple of times, it would be appropriate for me as well to point out a couple of the more glaring misdirections in his piece.

Tanter’s premise, as reflected in his title, is that anything bad you ever heard about the MEK is a product of propaganda from the Iranian regime. Evidently this means that anyone, either inside or outside of Iran, who has ever been critical of the group must have been brainwashed by the propaganda. If that were true, those responsible for U.S. public diplomacy have a lot of valuable lessons to learn from the Iranians; their propagandists must be doing something right.

The Iranian regime flings propaganda as freely as any other regime. And it certainly has had a lot of unfavorable things to say about the MEK. Some of those things may be exaggerated or even outright lies. But one could erase completely everything the Iranian regime has ever said on this subject, and there would remain the large, long, sordid record of what the MEK has done, what it has stood for, and the abhorrent cult it still is. The record extends from the days it was killing Americans while opposing the shah, through when it was in league with the clerical regime and supporting further anti-American acts such as the hostage-taking at the U.S. embassy in Tehran, through the long period during which it was working for the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein. The record is not based just on what is said by the State Department or an intelligence agency or any governmental component with a policy to support, much less on anything the Iranian regime might say. If you want a recent independently reported portrait of the group, see, for example, this article by Elizabeth Rubin.

Tanter tries to smear critics and criticism of the MEK, including some of the contents of an open letter to which I was a signatory, by saying it “resembles regime propaganda against the MEK.” The MEK has conducted terrorism and other violent acts against U.S. interests and against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Is it any surprise that some of the critical things said about the group from the standpoint of U.S. interests resemble some of what the Iranian regime puts out? (And if it’s not brainwashing, then just what is Tanter suggesting is the reason for the resemblance?)

One of the respects in which Tanter’s piece diverges most widely from reality is his attempt to argue that the MEK has any support to speak of within Iran. He notes that the group was the source of some revelations about Iran’s nuclear program. True—and we ought to remember our reliance on the accident of this weird sourcing when we think about how much confidence we ought or ought not to have in our knowledge of this program—but what does that have to do with popular support? It only takes one person to serve as a source. The most telling indication of the MEK’s unpopularity in Iran, as pointed out in the aforementioned open letter, is that the Iranian regime uses that unpopularity as a way to discredit the democratic opposition in Iran, by trying to associate it with the MEK. For the same reason, the leaders of the Green Movement have emphatically said that they want nothing to do with the MEK. Tanter also mentions attendance at pro-MEK rallies in the United States as a measure of support, without mentioning that the MEK campaign has resorted to such measures—used in a rally outside the State Department this summer—as padding attendance by busing in homeless people who don’t know squat about the MEK or Iran but come for the free food.

Tanter precedes a reference to me with the odd statement that “Intelligence communities are targets of Iran’s disinformation.” Odd because I have been out of the intelligence business for more than six years, and anyone who views my thinking as having any connection with judgments that an intelligence agency would reach today will be disappointed and wasting their propaganda resources. Tanter later mentions me again as someone who ought to be concerned about the “political motivation” for having the MEK on the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, or FTOs. It is true that the listing process is not immune to policy considerations, but that has been much more a matter of avoiding the listing of a group that really ought to be on the list (the Provisional Irish Republican Army of fifteen years ago is the example that comes to mind), than of including on the list a group that should not. Not listing someone means simply not initiating the listing process. Listing a group requires a lengthy process of review by the Departments of State, Justice, and Treasury and the intelligence community, according to the criteria specified by law.

Tanter seems to believe that a group has to have committed terrorist acts within the previous two years to be kept on the list. Not true. (Having been directly involved in the laborious process of compiling the required administrative records for the initial listings after enactment of the law in 1996 that created the FTO list, I know a thing or two about this subject.) Two years used to be the interval between recertifications of listed groups, and it is now the period after which a group can petition for delisting. But no terrorist acts have to have been committed during that period; retaining the capability and presumed intent to commit them is sufficient to stay on the list. If performing terrorist acts recently was a requirement to stay on the list, many of the 49 groups currently on the list would have to come off. Lebanese Hizballah, for example, probably would be one of them. I expect that many of the pro-MEK campaigners would be among the first to scream if that happened.

There is indeed a large amount of political influence that is being exerted in an effort to affect a decision about the FTO list, and it is almost all coming in the form of the large and well-funded campaign to delist the MEK. In fact, the campaign is extraordinary, and nothing remotely resembling it has ever been waged on behalf of any other group on the FTO list. Whatever is being said in the opposite direction is only a modest reaction to the pro-MEK campaign itself. Here is what I said on the subject two months ago, after that rally outside the State Department:

The secretary of state should pay no heed to what Melvin Santiago and the other hungry homeless outside her office window are saying, or to what the high-paid hired guns are saying, about the MEK. Nor does she need to pay any attention to what people like me are saying about the group. She should keep the windows closed and just pay attention to the terms of the law and to what officials in the departments and agencies involved say about whether the terms of the law still apply in this case.
If Raymond Tanter really wanted to inform us about political influence being exerted on what ought to be administrative and legal decisions, he could shed more light on the campaign of which he is a part. In particular, he could help us understand where all that funding is coming from. It evidently is coming from quarters who would like to stoke ever more tension and animosity between the Iran and the United States. I have a guess who that might be, but so far it is only a guess.

Paul R. Pillar, The National Interest

October 30, 2011 0 comments

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Iraqi MP: MKO will be expelled by year end

The anti-Iran terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) will be expelled from Iraq by the end the year, Iraqi lawmaker said. Uday Awwad, the Sadrist Iraqi MP

Uday Awwad, the Sadrist Iraqi MP, insisted that Iraqis “will witness the MKO expelled from the country this year”, Habilian Association (families of 17,000 Iranian terror victims) news website quoted Iranian Rasa News Agency as reporting.

Insisting on the cult’s expulsion, Awwad criticized Iraqi politicians who support the terrorist MKO and want them remain in the country.

“It is surprising that some Iraqi lawmakers and political parties support the MKO while the cult is accused of shedding Iraqis’ blood,” he added.

“The presence of our neighbours’ opposition groups is illegal according to the Iraqi constitution. Therefore, the MKO must leave Camp Ashraf and Iraq soon,” Awwad insisted.

As well as assassinating more than 12,000 Iranians, the MKO is responsible for over 25,000 Iraqi lives. The cult’s members are now residing in Camp Asharaf in Iraq’s Diyala Province. Contrary to the US will, Iraqi officials want to expel the terrorist cult.

October 22, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Former Insider exposes MEK link with CIA and Mossad

Mark Dankof Interview with the Habilian Association: On Israel, the MEK, and Iran

Mark Dankof: "The Mujahedeen-e-Khalq: The Intersection of the CIA-Mossad-Saudi Nexus Against Iran"

The Habilian Association of Iran talks to American conservative and Taft-Buchanan Republican Mark Dankof about Israel, American foreign policy in the Middle East and Asia, and the role of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK/MKO/PMOI) in both. A past Republican Party District Chairman in Seattle, Washington; U. S. Senate candidate in Delaware in 2000 for Howard Phillips’s Constitution Party; and radio voice in recent years with Lebanese-American Mark Glenn of The Ugly Truth, Dankof also serves as a Lutheran clergyman in San Antonio, Texas and theological graduate student. His last academic degree’s thesis will deal with the subject of Christian Zionism and the latter’s role in shaping a pro-Israel American foreign policy. Mr. Dankof’s recent appearances on Iran’s Press TV are augmented by his opinion-editorials, which include, “The Red Ladies: Sara Flounders and Debra Sweet,” “Mark Dankof’s Final Word on Michael Collins Piper’s ‘Final Judgment’ on Israel and the Assassination of JFK,” “The Bank Markazi Blacklist Proposal: Straight out of the McCollum Memorandum and the FDR Playbook for War,” “2012 Options for The Real Right: But is it Too Late? ,” and “Rapture Rick Perry of Texas: Israel’s Stealth GOP Presidential Candidate? “

Habilian Association: Tell us about Intelligence collaboration between the MKO and the Israeli Mossad over Iran’s nuclear case.

Mark Dankof: Information from non-classified sources is circumstantial but overwhelmingly strong. Dr. Paul Sheldon Foote of Cal-State Fullerton, probably the leading authoritative source in the United States on the MEK, and its presently functional relationship with the Israeli Mossad and elements in the American intelligence community, has publicly stated via his own sources that the MEK is the leading tool of Israeli intelligence and American Neo-Conservatives in the latter’s espionage agencies in launching acts of destablization and violence directed at Iran’s current government and conducted illegally within Iranian borders. Foote identifies the PJAK, the offshoot of the Kurdish separatist PKK, and the Jundallah, as the other elements in this dangerous game. The MEK’s fingerprints in Tehran are joined by what seems to be a cooperative relationship with PJAK directed against the Iranian government in efforts launched from northeast Iraq and the Qandil Mountains and directed against Iranian Azerbaijan. And suspicious terror activities in Khuzestan and Diyala Provinces in recent years seem to be augmented by bomb blasts and terror killings in Balochistan Province in Iran where it appears that the MEK’s partner-in-crime is the Jundallah based in Pakistan. But again, the Hidden Hand is comprised of the obvious, bigger ultimate players and assets. The increase in PKK attacks on Turkey since May 2009 coincides exactly with the corresponding time frames of the Turkish government’s public beefs with Israel over the Mavi Marmara shoot-up and other formal Erdogan government protests against the actions of the Netanyahu regime in Gaza and elsewhere. What does this tell any of us? But for the Israeli Mossad, the American CIA, the British MI6, and their respective Commanders-in-Chief, the operative concept is “plausible deniability.”

Mainstream American governmental and media sources confirm publicly that the MEK is the source of the information being used by pro-Israeli American Neo-Conservatives to argue for a military attack on Iran to preemptively strike the latter’s alleged weaponized nuclear program and its supposed desire to use it against Israel. It is noteworthy that this “information” contradicts the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report prepared by the 16 intelligence agencies of the American national security establishment regarding Iran and its nuclear program. Worse yet, there have been repeated allegations in the international press corroborated by Israel’s critics in the American intelligence community that these MEK-generated reports and the lies in them being repeated incessantly by every War Party news agency from CNN to Fox News, World Net Daily, The Weekly Standard, NewsMax, and National Review, are in fact nothing more than the Israeli government’s brokering of deliberate agitation-propaganda to the voluminously gullible and ignorant consumers of these well-packaged charades which employ the MEK as the broker. I believe Philip Giraldi of the Council for the National Interest and Buchanan’s The American Conservative, and former CIA station chief in a couple of different places over the years, is among those making this charge. In essence, it would appear to be the case beyond a shadow of a doubt that the MEK is playing the same Judas Goat role for the American and Israeli intelligence establishments that the Iraqi National Congress (INC) and Ahmad Chalabi did with their brokered nonsense before the last American invasion of Iraq that Saddam Hussein possessed “Weapons of Mass Destruction.” This is a critical angle to this present story involving the MEK. Why should the people of the United States and honest policy makers in Washington (all 10 of them?) now believe sources on Iran in 2011 with every motive for lying and a past record of doing so, especially in the last ten years?

After the last assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist in Tehran, Newsweek magazine all but confirmed the role of the Mossad and the MEK in that murder (and the previous episodes as well). The coverage was preposterously positive regarding these killings. To put into perspective just how this ruthless game is played, your readers may find it interesting that when the late Sidney Harman owned Newsweek, his wife was California Democratic Congressman Jane Harman, a member of the House Intelligence Committee. According to Pat Buchanan, Mrs. Harman was overheard on an American National Security Agency (NSA) wiretap assuring some Israelis at the other end of the conversation that she would use her considerable and covert influence on Capitol Hill to have American prosecutors drop their espionage case against Weissman and Rosen of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) for illegally obtaining classified National Security Council (NSC) documents on Iran from one Larry Franklin, so-called NSC expert on Iran. This is just one example of how American financial, political, and media power always seems to intersect when it comes to the subject of Israel. And since Israel and the MEK are now full business partners in directing their animus at Iran, the MEK will draw an increasingly free pass in the American media and government, as long as they are doing the Mossad and Israeli Lobby’s bidding.

All of this of course, increases the moral bankruptcy of this policy mix exponentially, when considered in conjunction with the clearly established fact that Israel is the weaponized nuclear monolith of the Middle East; has never and presumably will never submit to any form of international inspection of its nuclear program, not to mention its known stockpile of every biological and chemical warfare agent known to humanity; while the Zionist State’s policies in Occupied Territories and Gaza, as evidenced by its military assault on the civilian Mavi Marmara humanitarian flotilla in international waters in May of 2009, and the earlier Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, are the acts of an increasingly desperate entity led by a criminal cabal of sociopaths. If the United States is worrying about nuclear weapons in the hands of the wrong people, it should start with taking a hard look at our leading “ally” in the region. But the money trail will keep that from ever happening. . . .

Habilian Association: What do you know about further Israeli support for Mujahedin-e Khalq, I mean financially, logistically…?

Mark Dankof: One presumes that the Israeli and American money trails going to and from the MEK are closely guarded black-operational intelligence secrets not necessarily even known in details and numbers by the denizens of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. Or shall we say, at least not known to anyone on those Committees of Alleged Oversight not in the back political and financial pocket of the Israeli Lobby. That in and of itself, raises a related issue—the amount of PAC money going into American elections from approximately 30 PACS known to have direct or disguised links to the Israeli monolith in this country, as chronicled by Janet McMahon and Hugh Galford of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA).
One recent news article is most suggestive, however. That is Elizabeth Rubin’s New York Times op-ed of August 13th, “An Iranian Cult and its American Friends.”

This article, in the most Corporate Establishment, pro-Zionist newspaper in America (along with The Washington Post), underscores that the MEK is exactly what the Habilian Association, Mark Dankof, Ed Blanche of The Middle East desk in Beirut, and the RAND Corporation say it is: a totalitarian cult which not only possesses a warped ”Islamic-Marxist” ideology that is inherently contradictory, but is led by Miryam and Masoud Rajavi in a fashion reminiscent of that which governed the Reverend Jim Jones’ leadership of his demonic religious cult at Jonestown a generation ago in Guyana. Even more significantly, the Elizabeth Rubin expose provides a laundry list of people in the American military, intelligence, and political establishments who are fraudulently working to have the MEK removed from the State Department terrorist organization list and subsequently legitimized. This would be bad enough, but they are doing it for money—plenty of it, to the tune of $25,000 to $50,000 a speaking engagement on the MEK’s behalf. (see the excellent RAND Corporation report on the MEK at RAND_MG871 MEK PAPER )

Most critically, Rubin’s essay is potent for what it doesn’t say, and is patently obvious to anyone familiar with the subject: These paid American denizens of pro-MEK activities and plans have Israel’s fingerprints all over them. The names in her article overlap with the Israeli oriented think tanks Inside the Beltway, and the Israeli money on Capitol Hill documented by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA). One does not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what is going on here. This is ultimately the Israeli Lobby and the government of Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman at work for apocalyptically nefarious purposes.

The Elizabeth Rubin New York Times expose also mentions the “millions” at the disposal of the MEK for its current public relations campaign in the United States, using these bought-and-paid for players in the American establishment. It begs the question: Where do Miryam and Masoud Rajivi and the MEK get this kind of money? On what basis does Elizabeth Rubin cite the ambiguous but potent term “millions” to describe their financial power? How many “millions” are we talking about specifically? And what rag-tag “Islamic-Marxist” cult presently camped out in Paris and Camp Ashraf can have “millions” to dispense on political hired guns in America without major outside sources of funding? And who are these outside sources of this kind of cash? Oil and banking come to mind as possible places to look. Beyond that, one doesn’t have to look too much further to find Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Israel Lobby in the United States, and international oil consortiums, as the chief targets of suspicions as to who and what really constitutes the force behind the attempted renovation of the MEK’s image and fortunes in the West.

Rubin’s New York Times piece of August 13th is also noteworthy for what it doesn’t mention or explain: The MEK’s most well-heeled and connected American power broker is the Iran Policy Committee of Dr. Raymond Tanter of Georgetown University, his colleague Clair Lopez of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the assortment of Israeli oriented think tanks and individuals who shadow the Iran Policy Committee, including the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) strongly linked to Dr. Tanter. This picture is abundantly clear, despite the reticence of The New York Times, at least to this point, to cover the real players and angles in the story.

Perhaps the most spicy and inflammable aspect of the story of Dr. Raymond Tanter, Clair Lopez, and the Iran Policy Committee involves the explosive divorce of Raymond Tanter from his ex-wife, Constance Tanter. Mrs. Tanter alleges a most incredible tale of international intrigue that resulted in the targeted demise of her marriage, career, and personal life, up to and including the specific charge that at the direction of her ex-husband, the MEK and Clair Lopez forcibly held Constance Tanter captive; transported her against her will to Paris, France; and subjected the Georgetown University professor’s wife to a coercive interrogation in the French capital designed to extort a signed capitulation to a divorce settlement characterized by Mrs. Tanter as literal robbery at gunpoint. If Constance Tanter is telling the truth, Madam Rajavi was personally present for her interrogation and forced capitulation to a dictated divorce decree introduced into the American court system after the fact.

Constance Tanter: Targeted by Raymond Tanter, Israeli Intelligence, and the MEK/MKO/PMOI in divorce settlement proceedings?

Are the charges true? Outsiders who have heard the allegations are at one level incredulous, yet uncommitted because of the cultic history of the Rajavis chronicled by Ed Blanche of The Middle East and other internationally credible sources.

One thing is crystal clear: Mrs. Tanter is taking her allegations to The New York Times and other outlets who have already covered the MEK’s activities up to this point. Her allegations are buttressed by a thick file of papers, diary notes, photostatically reproduced copies of Iran Policy Committee documents, and a complete list of the Iran Policy Committee’s e-mail contacts by name and accompanying e-mail addresses. That list represents a virtual Who’s Who of the American Neo-Conservative, pro-Zionist Right; major figures in the Israeli government and intelligence community; MEK assets around the globe; and major players in a number of world governments and media outlets who seem to have more than a passing involvement with what Elizabeth Rubin terms, “An Iranian Cult.” This story continues to unfold.

Habilian Association: What’s the role of Israel in the Iranophobia project and the creation of a false dichotomy between Iran and its neighboring countries? What would Israel find beneficial in playing a role in this ?

Mark Dankof: This one is easy. Any Internet search on the Iranophobia and Islamophobia projects internationally leads straight to Israel and its assets in the American Neo-Conservative Right. The Center for American Progress report is among those that lead straight to the key players in the creation, funding, and dissemination of the Iranophobia and Islamophobia seeping out of Daniel Pipes, Pamela Geller, Frank Gaffney, Kenneth R. Timmerman, Stephen Emerson, and the Israeli foundations, PACS, and media outlets. This is a no-brainer. The way these jokers spun the Breivik murders in Norway is a primer for the way they do business in virtually everything else. I keep waiting for these kosher Ken and Barbie Dolls to explain Zionism’s history with the United States going back to the relationship of the Meyer Lansky Crime Syndicate to the Jewish Haganah’s blowing up of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the Lavon Affair, the Kennedy Assassination, the USS Liberty attack, the PROMIS affair, the Pollard spy case, and the recent AIPAC spy cases. Frankly the Pipes, Geller, Gaffney, Emerson crowd reminds me of the old Colt 45 malt liquor TV commercials in the United States, where the guy sitting at the cafe table by himself in the middle of the bullfighter ring is oblivious to the real wars taking place all around him that constantly get closer to enveloping him while he quietly sips his drink. The pro-Zionist American Right and Left are just like this: focusing on an exaggerated and falsified threat, while ignoring the major player in the destruction of their national security, culture, political integrity, and economy. It is pathetic.

This is a $42 million dollar industry, the production and dissemination of the constant stream of anti-Iranian, anti-Islamic propaganda in the United States and Europe. Someone is paying for it, and finds it profitable to continue paying for it.
By the way, the classic example for our discussion is this: Who produced and paid for the anti-Iranian propaganda film, Iranium, being promoted by Eric Cantor, Sam Brownback, Joseph Lieberman, and the usual suspects on Capitol Hill? I don’t yet have the facts, but the promotional film available on the Internet is connected to Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. The television spokesperson for the film is none other than Clair Lopez of the Iran Policy Committee and the Central Intelligence Agency. Get the picture?

Habilian Association: What is your estimation of the recent American accusation of Iran’s attempt to kill the Saudi Arabian ambassador to US?

Mark Dankof: I believe the accusation is absurd on its very face. As I told Press TV the other night, the nature of this alleged plot presupposes that the Supreme Leader of Iran, the Guardians Council, President Ahmadinejad, and the leadership of the Islamic Republican Guard Corps are all idiots. They clearly are not. There is no way that anyone acquainted with the intelligence and shrewdness of these Iranian leaders would buy for one minute the notion that they would commission a plot as reckless as this one, with two Iranian individuals representing the unstable profiles of the accused, and in conjunction with an unproven asset in a Mexican drug cartel (who proved to be an American DEA informant). This is straight out of the Keystone Cops.

And when we ask who might have benefited by a false-flag operation of this type pinned on Iran, the clear answer is Israel and its Neo-Conservative agents of influence in the American government angling for a wider war in the Middle East. Israel does not want any regional power in the Middle East threatening its absolute hegemony in the region, especially Iran. Simultaneously, they need an international PR diversion from their illegal activities in Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and elsewhere, where the Zionist State is clearly losing catastrophically in international opinion in every known venue outside that of the United States. Even in the case of the latter, there are evidences of cracks in the canvas where the Netanyahu government is concerned. And between the ominous downturn in the American national economy, and the upcoming Presidential election in 2012 where Obama and his GOP opponents are tripping over each other to demonstrate which has the most absolute fealty to American Jewry and the Israeli Lobby’s entrenched position on the Hill, the aggregate picture suggests the identity of the leading candidates for using this so-called Saudi Envoy Assassination Plot for their own non-publicly-advertised purposes and agendas.

And now that there is a published allegation that Interpol in France has established an MEK-link and affiliation for the second terror suspect now in custody, the odor becomes even more pungent. Yesterday’s New York Times made reference to this allegation, but only in a small strip column on page A8. Where is Elizabeth Rubin on this one? Or is the Israeli scent to the trail one her bosses have told her not to follow? We shall see. Mrs. Rubin’s July 13th, 2003 essay, “The Cult of Rajavi,” taken in tandem with her story of August 13th this year on the MEK, fills in many blanks. Will she fill in the rest of them, and connect the rest of the dots for the composite portrait on the canvas? If she should do so, some sordid people will run pell mell for the exits. If she doesn’t, American Corporate/Zionist media will have failed the acid test one more time.

Habilian Association: After all these many years, you should visit in Iran again.

Mark Dankof: Time and political developments will determine whether or not God will grant me that special privilege. If I do get the chance to come, it is my intention to also visit Yerevan and some of the Christian monsteries in Armenia, maybe in conjunction with another pilgrimage to the Armenian Christian Festival of St. Thaddeus at the Church of St. Stephanos in Azerbaijan Iran. My own feelings about your country are best expressed by your 10th century poet, Ferdowsi. I understand that chiseled on his stone tomb at Tus is an inscription of his immortal words which state, “Let not this body live if there is no Iran.”

Mark Dankof’s America

October 22, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Who is Really Behind It? The Implausibility of an Iranian Plot

On October 11, Attorney General Eric Holder, flanked by the FBI Director and the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, accused the government of Iran, specifically the elite Quds battalion of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), of plotting to assassinate the ambassador of Saudi Arabia to the U.S, Adel Al-Jubeir.

So what do we know about this alleged conspiracy? And what are the facts pertinent to this explosive charge? Who is Really Behind It? The Implausibility of an Iranian Plot

1) The alleged conspirator, Mansour Arbabsiar, is a 56 year old naturalized American of Iranian descent. He has been living in several Texas communities since the late 1970s when he arrived to the U.S. as a student. By all accounts, Arbabsiar led a disorderly life marked by constant failure, whether as a student, husband, father, or businessman.

For over two decades the alleged “mastermind” left behind a trail of successive failed businesses, including a used car lot, a restaurant, a convenience store, and a finance company. One of his friends told the Washington Post that he is “a goofy guy who always had a smile on his face.”

Arbabsiar was neither an ideologue nor religious. His nickname among his close friends was “Jack” because of his affinity for Jack Daniel’s whiskey. Last year, he was arrested for felony possession of a narcotic. According to public documents, his former wife accused him of spousal abuse and filed a protective order against him in 1991.

2) The complaint (so far it is not even an indictment by a grand jury) charges that Arbabsiar allegedly conspired with a high official of the Quds battalion of the IRGC. According to the complaint he was recruited by this official – who is also supposedly his cousin – when he visited Iran earlier this year.

[..]The Quds force has been publicly supporting the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance organizations in their struggle with Israel. These activities have earned it the label of “supporter of terrorism” by most Western nations, including the U.S.

But according to Robert Baer, a 21-year veteran CIA operative and analyst, the Quds Force is one of the most professional and disciplined (though deadly) organizations in the Middle East. As reported by CNN, the Quds Force “has never been publicly linked to an assassination plot or an attack on U.S. soil.”

Baer confirmed this fact when he said that “in its 30-year history of attacking the West, the Quds Force went out of its way never to be caught with a smoking gun in hand. It always used well-vetted proxies, invariably Muslim believers devoted to Ayatollah Khomeini’s revolution.”

He then questioned whether the plot was genuine by asking, “Why didn’t the Iranians use tried and tested Hizbullah networks and keep Iranian nationals, much less unknown Mexican narcos, out of it?”

3) We know from the complaint that the U.S government was actually directing the plot (target, location, method of attack, setting the price of the assassination, bank account information, etc.) Pete Williams, NBC’s DOJ correspondent, said that the plot was in fact “a sting operation” directed by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and the FBI. A recent report published by New York University Law School showed that in the past decade federal agencies have relied heavily on sting operations, not only in drug busts, but also most significantly in dozens of national security cases “that were planned, financed and executed by the FBI.”

4) According to the official story, we are to believe that, although the price set for the Saudi Ambassador’s assassination by a member of a Mexican drug cartel (who was actually a DEA informant) was $1.5 million, the Iranian handlers expected the assassin to carry it out by advancing him only $100,000 (less than 7 percent of the total amount.)

Moreover, as Baer argued in Time magazine, in three decades of external operations in many countries, the IRGC fingerprints or money transfers were never traced back to Iran, but that Iran has always “enjoyed plausible deniability.” Baer further told CNN that, “it would be completely uncharacteristic for Iran to be caught red-handed.”

Therefore, such sloppy behavior through traceable money transfers and phone intercepts is simply not credible. It appears to be a deliberate attempt to leave behind as many clues as possible to pin this alleged egregious act on Iran.

5) Another hole in this puzzle concerns the possible motive Iran could have by sponsoring such a provocative act. Strategically, Iran has never been stronger in the region. It has been the greatest beneficiary of the U.S. debacle in Iraq and its difficulty in Afghanistan. Furthermore, despite the successive international sanctions imposed on Iran, its nuclear and other military programs have been progressing at an increasingly steady pace, while asserting a growing and dominant role in the region.

Hillary Mann Leverett, an adviser on Iran in former President George W. Bush’s administration, told CNN that this act made no sense, and contradicted Iran’s national security strategy. She stated, “There’s no benefit; there’s no payoff in them pursuing this kind of hit against Adel Al-Jubeir. And it runs contrary to their entire national security strategy.”

If Iran wanted to punish Saudi Arabia it had a plenty of targets in the region, including in Saudi Arabia itself, Iraq, Afghanistan, or the Persian Gulf region in general. If it wanted to target a diplomat, the worst choice would be on U.S. soil where such an act would be easily uncovered and would not go unpunished. It is not clear why Iran would even target a small functionary of the Saudi diplomatic core. Al-Jubeir is neither royalty nor a significant player in Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy.

Since at least 2003, the Iranian national security strategy has been to de-escalate regional tensions and avoid any confrontation with the U.S. or its regional allies, especially Saudi Arabia. It has been in the middle of unprecedented build-up of its military power, especially its navy, nuclear power, and long-range missile programs. Experts believe that it needs at least five more quiet years to finish this phase of its build-up.

6) Ironically, in 2004 the U.S. uncovered an alleged assassination plot by another U.S. national against King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia himself, not his ambassador. In that plot, the U.S. asserted that it confiscated more than $340,000 payoff from former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddhafi for the killing of the Saudi monarch.

The Bush and Blair administrations, which were in bed with Gaddhafi at the time, negotiating the surrender of his nuclear programs, did not threaten or impose any sanctions on the former Libyan regime because of the plot. Although the U.S. sentenced the alleged U.S. conspirator to 23 years in prison, the Saudi king pardoned the alleged assassin who was arrested in Saudi Arabia.

However, this time the reaction by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia was not only swift and harsh, but threatening and escalating.

7) Since the inception of the Arab Spring, Saudi Arabia has been very nervous. It has sent its army to Bahrain to crack down on the popular protests, while bribing its citizens and inviting the monarchs of Jordan and Morocco to join the GCC alliance in order to halt any movements in these countries towards a constitutional monarchy.

Meanwhile, throughout this year the Saudi media has been relentless in its attacks against Iran, presenting it as a “Shi’a” nation and a “Persian” power set on taking over the Arab Sunni countries in the region. It is an old tactic used by authoritarian regimes to focus the public’s attention on an external enemy to deflect from the popular demands for democracy and civil rights and against repression and corruption as demonstrated by the Arab uprisings throughout the region. This alleged plot plays into the hands of those who want to escalate the confrontation with Iran inside Saudi Arabia.

8) But the clear winners of any escalation with Iran are those who want to attack Iran militarily in the region, namely Israel and Saudi Arabia. In one of the Wikileaks documents released recently, the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia cabled back to the State Department that King Abdullah wanted a U.S-led military confrontation with Iran. He said that the Saudi monarch wanted to “cut the head of the snake” in the region.

Moreover, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who resigned a year ago, described the current Israeli government as “dangerous and irresponsible.” Last spring he told the Israeli Haaretz newspaper that Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu would attack Iran and that doing so would be “the stupidest thing.” When asked about what would happen in the aftermath of an Israeli attack, Dagan, said that: “It will be followed by a war with Iran. It is the kind of thing where we know how it starts, but not how it will end.”

According to The Forward, twelve of the eighteen living ex-chiefs of Israel’s two security agencies (Mossad and Shin Bet), have been opposing an open war with Iran and are “either actively opposing Netanyahu’s stances or have spoken out against them.”

So the trick for the right wing Israeli government has been how to drag the U.S. into this war and make it an American-Iranian confrontation rather than an Israeli-Iranian conflict.

To sum up, this alleged plot actually raises more questions than it answers. It’s supposedly led by a “goofy”, unsuccessful U.S-Iranian dual citizen, who is neither religious nor ideological; manipulated by an informant of a U.S. law enforcement agency fronting as an assassin for a Mexican drug cartel; recruited without vetting by one of the most elite and disciplined organizations in the world, while paying only 7 percent of the contract to assassinate the ambassador to a country (Saudi Arabia) with which Iran is trying to have a good relationship, in a country (the U.S) with which it is trying to avoid any confrontation, while leaving money transfers, telephone intercepts, and clues behind.

If this sounds illogical, then who is behind this amateurish plot?

It is unlikely that there are so-called rouge elements within the IRGC that want to drag the U.S. into a confrontation with Iran. That would amount to virtual suicide within the Iranian establishment. There is no history of such behavior even when the country was militarily much weaker and politically unstable.

Thus, to best answer the question is to identify those who would benefit the most from a confrontation between the U.S. and Iran. Clearly those who have the most to gain from such a clash are Israel and the Iranian opposition, particularly the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO).

While the former seeks to cripple Iran’s nuclear program, the later has been in a deadly confrontation with the Islamicly-oriented government for decades, and wants to weaken the regime so it could be toppled. Both entities have tried over the years to sponsor terrorist operations and covert actions within Iran and outside to damage the regime or implicate it in external terrorist acts.

It is not beyond the realm of possibilities that the Israeli Mossad or the MKO were able to recruit an idiot or his cousin or both in a plot that involved assassinating the Saudi Ambassador, while leaving a trove of evidence behind to be found in order to implicate the Iranian government.

But assuming the U.S. was not privy to it, despite the plot being a sting operation, the more important question is then why the U.S. government took the bait and escalated the incident to a dangerous course with uncalculated consequences?

The U.S, Israel, and Saudi Arabia can certainly start a war with a more assertive Iran. But they certainly cannot end it. One only has to look at the recent U.S. adventures on either side of Iran’s borders to learn that lesson.

Esam Al-Amin, Global Research, Canada

October 20, 2011 0 comments

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

MKO crimes shocks the cult’s European supporters

“Many of the MKO European supporters will be taken aback by knowing about the cult’s long MKO crimes shocks the cult's European supporters history of criminal records” Said Adnan Siraj; President of the Center for Media Development, in a meeting with Secretary General of Habilian Association (Families of Iranian Terror Victims).

Referring to the MKO European supporters’ lack of knowledge over the cult’s long history of violence and terror, Adnan Siraj said in a meeting with Secretary General of Habilian Association: “when I talked to a group of Swedish politicians about the crimes MKO committed, they expressed great surprise and admitted that they knew nothing of the MKO bloody history of crimes.”

Member of the State of Law coalition went on and said: “Iraqi people are well aware of the Mujahedin-e khalq and the crimes they have so far committed.” Siraj also added: “Until now we have managed to hold about 30 congresses against the MKO parasitic presence in Iraq and the Iraqi people have set up 3 legal gatherings in front of Ashraf garrison in protest to their occupation of Iraqi lands and also the crimes they have so far committed against Iraqi people.”
Then Siraj pointed out the proposal for moving the MKO to Naghratul Salman region and said: “although the plan was rejected but the MKO is undoubtedly the enemy of Iraqi people and must be expelled from the country soon.”

October 20, 2011 0 comments

Iran

Iran Judiciary to open file against USG for using MKO and other Terrorists

Judiciary Chief Sadeq Larijani on Wednesday ordered to open a file on crimes perpetrated by the US Administration against Iranian and Muslim nations.

Speaking in a session with senior officials of Judiciary, Ayatollah Larijani commissioned Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei, the prosecutor general and Mohammad Javad Larijani, the head of the Judiciary’s Human Rights Commssion to pursue the case.

“The American administration crimes against Occupy Wall Street movement activists, its support for crimes committed by US puppet regimes in the Muslim countries including Egypt and in the meantime advocating the crimes against Iranian nation committed by terrorist Mujahedeen Khalq Organization as well as Washington’s crimes against Iranian revolutionaries before 1979 Islamic Revolution should be pursued and indicted,” Ayatollah Larijani said.

Iran has been the victim of terrorism and US has always supported terrorist operations by MKO and other terrorist groups against the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Judiciary chief added.

“US scenario about Iran’s plot to assassinate Saudi ambassador to Washington is an illogical story that has been rejected and derided even by most American analysts. Muslim nations have trust in Iran Islamic ideals and assassination has no place in Islamic teachings; accusing other nations of terrorism and human right violations will not hide US criminal actions in Iraq and Afghanistan which account for crimes against humanity, causing divide the Shia and Sunni Muslims, undermining their united front against arrogant powers and their regional puppet regimes,” Larijani said.

US officials claimed last Tuesday that Iran has tried a plot including an assassination attempt against the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Adel Al-Jubeir, with a bomb and subsequent bomb attacks on Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington. Bombings of the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires, Argentina, were also discussed, according to US officials.

Iranian officials have strongly dismissed the US allegations as a fabricated scenario which is totally unfounded and described it as worn-out approaches which are based on the old hostile American-Zionist attempt to sow discord among Muslims.

Referring to increasing US pressure against Islamic Republic of Iran, he noted that Iranian politicians and officials from different factions have a united front against any foreign pressure.

“Recent report by UN Special rapporteur is an illegal and incredible report which is full of lies and reflects hostile views of Iranian opposition in exile and nothing more,” the Judiciary chief stated.

He underscored that the politicized goal of ‘UN Human Rights’ Council for designation of a rapporteur on Iran to accuse Islamic Republic of human rights violation was quite clear from the beginning and this was the reason Tehran refused visa to Ahmed Shaheed.

He made it clear that Iranian judiciary system works based on Islamic values and not western values.

October 20, 2011 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts