Mujahedin Khalq Terror group

U.S. Intelligence Community: MEK trained females for suicide attacks

In newly declassified documents for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit, US department of State unveiled that based on the assessments of the U.S. Intelligence Community, the MEK trains female members of the organization for committing suicide operations in Karbala. The documents also say that the MEK solicits money under the U.S. Intelligence Community: MEK trained females for suicide attacks false pretext of humanitarian aid to the Iranian population.

Among the disclosures in the declassified material: “the MEK trained females at Camp Ashraf in Iraq to perform suicide attacks in Karbala”; “the MEK solicits money under the false pretext of humanitarian aid to the Iranian population”; “an August 2008 U.S. Intelligence Community Terrorist Threat Assessment, clearly states that the MEK retains a limited capability to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism”; “[t]he MEK publicly renounced violence in 2001, but limited intelligence reporting indicates that the group has not ended military operations, repudiated violence, or completely or voluntarily disarmed”; “[t]he [intelligence community] assesses that although there has not been a confirmed terrorist attack by the MEK since the organization surrendered to Coalition Forces in 2003, the MEK retains a limited capability and the intent to use violence to achieve its political goals”; and “UN inspectors say that much of the information provided to the UN by the MEK about Iran’s nuclear program has a political purpose and has been wrong.”

Habilian reporting from declassified Court documents, August 12, 2010

August 14, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Court Order Doesn’t Mean MKOs Removal from U.S. FTO List

The Mujahedin-eh Kalq Organization (MKO/MEK) since 1997 has been listed by the State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). The designation was reaffirmed in January 2009 by then-secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The MKO has had a long history of Court Order Doesn’t Mean MKOs Removal from U.S. FTO List terror and violence and has recently and eagerly tried to clean up its image—hoping the effort will help remove them from the FTO list. The MKO believes that if they are removed from the FTO list, they will have more credibility as an organization, and therefore gain more support from Western nations. The MKO currently argues that it had ceased its military campaign against the Iranian government in 2001, voluntarily handed over its arms to U.S. forces in 2003 and provided a flood of information to U.S. intelligence about Iran’s nuclear programs. [1] The MKO’s ultimate goal in this plan is to replace the Iranian government with their own, and they are seeking support from Western nations, never mind the fact that neither of the MKO leaders nor many members of this cult have stepped foot inside Iran for more than three decades. The MKO is out of touch with the pulse of the nation and the more they press for being removed from the FTO list, the more wary regular Iranians become—as it signifies that the MKO is becoming tighter with the very nations which impeded Iran’s natural political progress; Iranian citizens do not want a U.S. supported MKO—they simply see it as treacherous liaison, which if nurtured, will make an already tense relationship with Iran even worse.

The MKO believes they have made an advancement because now, by way of a heavy handed legal battle, they are celebrating a federal appeals court decision—argued January 12, 2010 and recently decided July 16, 2010—which orders the State Department to review its FTO designation of the MKO on the grounds that the MKO was not privy to classified information, and therefore could not establish an argument and rebuttal which they believe would generate a stronger case to get them removed from the list. The final order was not about lifting the MKO off the Foreign Terrorist Organization list, but about due process for the group. The court stated that the purpose of the remand was to afford the MKO “an opportunity to review and rebut the unclassified portions of the record.” [2] The court also stated in the order that the Secretary of State’s “denial of the People’s Mojahedin of Iran’s petition for revocation of its 2003 designation as a foreign terrorist organization is remanded to the Secretary for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” [3] What this means, is that the petition will end up back on the Secretary’s desk and the Secretary will look at it again. The judge who preceded over the case made a note in the order which states that “none of the AEDPA (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) cases decides whether an administrative decision relying critically on undisclosed classified material would comport with due process because in none was the classified record essential to uphold an FTO designation.[4] This is an unfavorable comment—although the Secretary is obligated to reconsider, she is unlikely to lift the MKO from the FTO list.

Standard procedure for the MKO in a situation like this is to celebrate as if it was a huge victory. The celebration is meant to bolster morale among members and augment interest from anyone from the media who will listen and report on the MKO’s plight. In essence they have used this ruling to exaggerate the issue and create a positive hype. In celebrating, they also hope to reinforce support from agenda-pushing neoconservative politicians who believe that Iran cannot handle its own domestic affairs. In France, in Auver Sur d-Oise where Maryam Rajavi, the self-imposed leader of the MKO, who feels entitled to speak on behalf of Iranian citizens despite, as previously mentioned, not having set foot in Iran for more than three decades, spoke to her sympathizers after the ruling; her response to the court order was that "sanctions against this regime are necessary and very important, but not enough. A regime change materializes in the resistance of a nation. International peace and security can only be guaranteed when ruling religious fascism is gone. So barriers to change must be removed. The chains tying the hands of the organized resistance of people must be removed." [5]. The chains she speaks of is the designation of the MKO as an FTO, and the bottom line here is that the MKO has not been de-listed from the Foreign Terrorist List—a statement she wishes to twirl into a bondage metaphor.

Rajavi claims that the FTO designation of her cult is a barrier to gain international peace and security. This is fine to claim, but the logic is fuzzy because the information gleaned from the court proceedings suggests nothing about moving Iran towards peace and security. According to Glen Kessler’s report from the Washington Post, “During the court proceedings, some of that information was declassified. State asserted that the group has not ended its military operations, still intends to use violence to achieve its political goals, has trained females to be suicide bombers and that much of the information it has provided on Iran’s nuclear program has been wrong. But the court cast doubt on some of these assertions and said the group now must be given the opportunity to rebut these charges.” [6] Kessler asserts that the State Department said it would study the opinion ‘carefully’ and noted it continues to view the group as a terrorist organization.” [7] It’s clear that promptly, the court cast doubt not because they thought the MKO was really a peaceful and non-violent group, but because the MKO was denied access to classified information and therefore could not rebut.

It is important for Iranians to know that the people in the West are aware of the use of violence by the MKO against Iranian authorities and civilians. In fact, MKO terrorist activities are always mentioned in the United States’ description of the group. The following excerpt regarding the MKO’s activities is from the State Department’s “Patterns of Global Terrorism 2003”:

The group’s worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorism. During the 1970s, the MEK killed U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians working on defense projects in Tehran and supported the takeover in 1979 of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. In 1981, the MEK detonated bombs in the head office of the Islamic Republic Party and the Premier’s office, killing some 70 high-ranking Iranian officials, including Chief Justice Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei, and Premier Mohammad-Javad Bahonar. Near the end of the 1980-1988 war with Iran, Baghdad armed the MEK with military equipment and sent it into action against Iranian forces. In 1991, the MEK reportedly assisted the Government of Iraq in suppressing the Shia uprisings in southern Iraq and the Kurdish uprisings in the north. In April 1992, the MEK conducted near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian embassies and installations in 13 countries, demonstrating the group’s ability to mount large-scale operations overseas. In April 1999, the MEK targeted key military officers and assassinated the deputy chief of the Iranian Armed Forces General Staff. In April 2000, the MEK attempted to assassinate the commander of the Nasr Headquarters, Tehran’s interagency board responsible for coordinating policies on Iraq. The normal pace of anti-Iranian operations increased during "Operation Great Bahman" in February 2000, when the group launched a dozen attacks against Iran. One of those attacks included a mortar attack against the leadership complex in Tehran that housed the offices of the Supreme Leader and the President. In 2000 and 2001, the MEK was involved regularly in mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids on Iranian military and law enforcement units and government buildings near the Iran-Iraq border, although MEK terrorism in Iran declined toward the end of 2001. The MEK leadership ordered its members not to resist Coalition forces at the outset of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and they surrendered their arms to Coalition forces in May 2003. [8]

In May 2005, Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball wrote an article about the hullabaloo of the MKO. They state that the MKO has long been controversial because of its history of violent attacks in Iran, its relationship with Saddam’s regime and its background as a quasi-religious, quasi-Marxist radical resistance group founded in the era of the late Iranian shah. They mention that in 1997, the Clinton administration put MKO on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist groups. They also put forward that the MKOs U.S. supporters, among whom at one point numbered dozens of members of Congress, charged that the Clinton administration only labeled MKO as a terrorist group as part of an ill-conceived attempt to improve relations with the ayatollahs who currently run Iran. They relate that the Bush administration added two alleged MKO front organizations to the State Department’s terrorist list in 2003. [9] Isikoff and Hosenball state that “despite the group’s notoriety, Bush himself cited purported intelligence gathered by [MKO] as evidence of the Iranian regime’s rapidly accelerating nuclear ambitions. At a March 16 press conference, Bush said Iran’s hidden nuclear program had been discovered not because of international inspections but ‘because a dissident group pointed it out to the world.’ White House aides acknowledged later that the dissident group cited by the president is the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), one of the [MKO] front groups added to the State Department list two years ago.”[10] Finally the Newsweek article reveals that “in an appearance before a House International Relations Subcommittee a year ago, John Bolton, the controversial State Department undersecretary who Bush has nominated to become U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was questioned by a Congressman sympathetic to [MKO] about whether it was appropriate for the U.S. government to pay attention to allegations about Iran supplied by the group. Bolton said he believed that [MKO] ‘qualifies as a terrorist organization according to our criteria.’ But he added that he did not think the official label had ‘prohibited us from getting information from them. And I certainly don’t have any inhibition about getting information about what’s going on in Iran from whatever source we can find that we deem reliable.’” [11]

Regardless of John Bolton’s—or any other official’s ambition for Iran, and regardless of the MKOs position or non-position on the FTO list, the MKO simply can not and should not be a trusted device. Following the 2005 report of Human Rights Watch on MKO atrocities against its own members titled "No Exit," various cases of human rights violations by the MKO was revealed through testimonies made by the group’s former members. Joe Stork, a Human Rights Watch expert on the Middle East, in a UN Refugee Agency report stated that “it would be a mistake to promote an opposition group that is responsible for serious human rights abuses". [12]

U.S. officials, especially those of the State Department should research and reflect deeply before making any decision about a group that owns all the criteria of a destructive terrorist cult. Western politicians should realize that their support for the MKO will never improve their standing among Iranians inside or outside the country and the reason why is articulated by Trita Parsi, an author who founded the National Iranian American Council (NIAC):

[The MKOs] involvement in terrorism is undisputed. It assassinated several Americans in Iran in the 1970s. It supported the taking of the U.S. Embassy in Iran and blasted Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini for releasing the American diplomats in 1981, arguing instead that the hostages should have been executed. It made a pact with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s and fought alongside his army against their Iranian countrymen. Later in the 1990s, they became Saddam’s most trusted henchmen, tasked with quelling Kurdish and Shiite uprisings against the Iraqi dictator.

According to defectors, Mujahedin members in Camp Ashraf celebrated the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
In 2003, French authorities descended upon the Mujahedin headquarters in France, arresting the leader of the cult, Mrs. Maryam Rajavi. Immediately, zealous Mojahedin members staged hunger strikes and several set themselves ablaze. Hardly the behavior of a democratically oriented opposition group. [13]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose reputation would be tarnished should she allow a change of status for the MKO after the current court ordered remand, would be making an insouciant error. The removal of the MKO from the FTO list is a Pandora’s Box and both the U.S. and Iran would face a political nightmare over the next several years. In order to be fair, the U.S. should afford the MKO the right to a democratic process in which they can review the charges against them, but they should also be acutely conscious as to why they are on the Foreign Terrorist Organization list in the first place, and why they need to remain there.

References:
[1] United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Argued January 12, 2010. Decided July 16, 2010 No. 09-1059. PMOI v. Hillary Clinton. http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201007/09-1059-1255582.pdf
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] Ibid
[5] Policy prevents this author from citing this source, which is readily available on the web.
[6]Kessler, Glenn. "Court tells State Dept. to reconsider terrorist label for Iran opposition group." Washington Post 17 July 2010, Print.
[7] Ibid
[8] http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2005/65275.htm
[9] Isikoff Michael & Hosenball Mark. "Consider the Source: The State Department says MEK is a terror group. Human Rights Watch says it’s a cult. For the White House,
MEK is a source of intelligence on Iran.
”MSNBC.com 20 May 2005: Web. 10 Aug 2010. <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7902719/site/newsweek/>.
[10] Ibid
[11] Ibid
[12] Human Rights Watch, No Exit: Human Rights Abuses Inside the Mojahedin Khalq Camps, 18 May 2005. Web. 10 August 2010 http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/45d085002.html
[13] Parsi, Trita. "Deciding the Fate of the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation." Iran Press Service 10 October 2008: Web. 10 Aug 2010.
<http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2008/october-2008/
deciding-the-fate-of-the-mojahedin-khalq-organisat.shtml>.

By Mazda Parsi

August 14, 2010 0 comments

Iran

Spokesman Calls US Biggest Sponsor of Terrorism

Spokesman Calls US Biggest Sponsor of Terrorism in Decades
Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast condemned the US for sponsoring and conducting terrorist operations across the globe while accusing other countries of state-sponsored terrorism under false pretexts.
Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast
"Under such circumstances that instances of the US behavior show this country has been the biggest sponsor of terrorism during the last three decades, Washington projects the blame and levels void accusations against other countries in a bid to conceal its acts in this regard," Mehman-Parast said on Monday.

Addressing the international community, he stressed the necessity for preventing the outburst of such unfounded and biased claims and accusations, and warned that such a trend can negatively affect international trust as the main pillar of global stability and security.

He also deplored the US State Department’s annual report on terrorism which has accused Iran of sponsoring terrorism, and said the Islamic Republic of Iran has always made special efforts to cooperate with the international community in fighting terrorism.

Mehman-Parast blasted the double-standard policy adopted by certain western countries, specially the US, on terrorism, and said while these states accuse others of sponsoring terrorism, they provide support for the anti-Iran terrorist group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), and the terrorist Jundollah group.

The Jundollah terrorist group is responsible for several terrorist operations which have killed tens of citizens, officials and security forces in southeastern Iran. The group is directly sponsored and supported by Washington.

Abdolmalek Rigi, the ringleader of the terrorist group, confessed after his arrest in late February that his group was assisted and supported by the US and disclosed that he was on route to Bishkek to meet a high-ranking US official at a nearby military base when he was arrested by Iranian security forces.

Rigi also said that he and the US official were going to discuss new terrorist attacks on Iranian territory.

The MKO, whose main stronghold is in Iraq, is blacklisted by much of the international community, including the United States.

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.

August 10, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Israel’s Secret Relationship with MKO

In the 1960’s when the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) was founded by a handful of Iranian university students, its ideology encompassed a classless, monotheist society which denied all symbols of Western capitalism and Jewish Zionism. With this denial came a penchant for violence and systematic killing—killing which the State Department recognizes as terrorism. Michael Rubin, an independent scholar who in 2009, led a workshop at the AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee—America’s pro-Israeli lobby) conference in Washington DC, wrote an article in 2006 titled “Monsters of the Left” in which he declares that the “MKO launched a wave of bomb attacks which targeted the Iran-American Society, the US Information office, the Hotel International, Pepsi Cola, General Motors, and the Marine Oil Company […] In a wave of bombings that continued into 1975, the MKO group attacked clubs, stores, police facilities, minority-owned businesses, factories it accused of having ‘Israeli connections,’ and symbols of state and capitalism.” [1] While carrying out these attacks, the MKO not only denounced Israel, but it supported the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), and in fact, during the 1970’s, some of the MKO’s core members went to train in PLO military camps. [2] The MKO’s hostility towards Israel and Zionism was so strong that it led them to bomb the Jordanian Embassy in Tehran, “to revenge King Hussein’s September 1970 crackdown on their PLO patrons,”admits Rubin. [3] Israel may have been an enemy of the MKO at one time, but now they have warmed to them—because the ideology of the MKO has shifted, and Israel may be able to use them.

Now, the MKO could use a helping hand too because since the US-led invasion of Iraq, in the enclave of Camp Ashraf, a place the MKO has called home for over two decades, there is impending precariousness. The MKO fears for its future because they are no longer under the protection of Saddam Hussein, and there’s no telling what the shaky new Iraqi government will do. What’s more, the U.S. government no longer considers MKO members in Iraq to have the “protected-persons” status the U.S. gave them in 2003, and is privately supportive of Iraqi government efforts to encourage the residents to leave. [4] At present, the MKO’s biggest fear is Iranian reprisal. Even though they helped bring about the 1979 Islamic Revolution, killing Americans and ousting the Shah, in the years following, they simply proved to be too power hungry for the Iranian regime. In a move which was designed to distance them from the regime, and gain support, they changed their ideology, and in the 1980’s joined Saddam Hussein and moved to Camp Ashraf in Iraq (where many of them still remain). During the time in Iraq, they killed Kurds in exchange for arms, and then turned against the government they helped bring to power—killing Iranian officials and civilians. Support they needed from Iran shriveled, and the people of Iran now hold the MKO accountable for their deadly attacks on citizens and officials throughout the last four decades. For the MKO leaders, Maryam and Massoud Rajavi, a worst case scenario would be deportation back to Iran because they are viewed as fascist cultists, and worse, traitors. With this kind of track record, a relationship between the MKO and Israel is weirdly devious—and secret.

The MKO sees the West’s support as their only hope for continued existence. In order to formulate opportunity within the framework of hope, they no longer denounce imperialism and Zionism. And in a last ditch move to maintain their dying support among a small minority of Iranians, they have turned to President Ahmadinejad’s “Zionist” foes—credulous Western politicians and, yes, Israel. Despite the MKO’s past admonition of Zionism, Israel has been obliging, secretly working with the MKO in opposition to Iran. In order publicly unite with the West, the MKO came to the media in 2003 and announced that Iran had nuclear warheads—which according to the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), turned out to be wrong. Not only was the information incorrect, but it was fabricated by the Israeli government. In June 2009, Gareth Porter, an expert on U.S. national security policy, published an article on IPS, titled”Report Ties Dubious Iran Nuclear Docs to Israel Analysis.”Porter reveals that”Israeli intelligence was the source of the collection of intelligence documents which have been used to accuse Iran of hiding nuclear weapons research.” [5] Referring to various sources, Porter asserts that”the documents collection which the IAEA has called ‘alleged studies’ actually originated in Israel and in fact Israel intelligence assembled the documents.”[6] According to Porter, “German officials have said that the Mujahedin E Khalq or MEK, the Iranian resistance organization, brought the laptop documents collection to the attention of U.S. intelligence, as reported by IPS in February 2008.

Israeli ties with the political arm of the MEK, the National Committee of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), go back to the early 1990’s and include assistance to the organization in broadcasting into Iran from Paris.” [7] The Germans have long been wary of the MKO and Germany’s Office for the Protection of the Constitution has noted that the MKO’s propaganda campaigns often include attempts to contact members of parliament to inform them of the MKO’s alleged goals, encourage political support, and influence parliamentary debate about Iran.

MKO’s secret ties with Israel do not begin or end with Iranian nuclear documents. They also unabashedly attend AIPAC functions. In fact, the MKO has intensive and very direct cooperation with the Iran Policy Committee, a spinoff of AIPAC. Mahan Abedin, a journalist for the Asia Times, reports that there are regular media reports which allude to direct Israel-MKO ties. [9] In an article that Abedin wrote in which he interviewed a former MKO member, Massoud Bani Sadr, BaniSadr disclosed that”the [MKO] is exclusively motivated by the interests of the cult, and as such it will cooperate with any constituency. If there is any hesitation in collaboration it stems from Israeli reluctance, since the Mujahedin because of its close relationship with the PLO, is not fully trusted by Israelis. On the other hand from an Israeli perspective, the [MKO] is the only viable tool against Iran.”[10] In 2006, Connie Bruck, a writer for New Yorker, spoke with an Israeli diplomat who declined to elaborate on the MKO-Israel relationship, but did at least say to Bruck that “Israel had found the [MKO] useful.”[11]

Richard Silverstein points out that the Israeli lobby in Washington advocates tougher U.S. policy against the Islamic Republic. [12] And the MKO is all for it. In their efforts for starting a war with Iran, or impose crippling sanctions on it, the Israel lobby and the neocons have been aided by two groups of Iranian exiles: the monarchists, and members and supporters of the MKO. [13] Silverstein notes that “Israel is in the midst of a massive diplomatic, political and intelligence campaign, both public and covert, that could lead – if those officials behind it have their way – towards a military strike on Iran. It is a war for the hearts and minds of Americans. Or you might call it the war before the war. In intelligence circles, this Israeli project is known as perception management and defined by the department of defense as:

Actions to convey and/or deny information … to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders … ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to [US] objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception and psychological operations.” This is a parallel policy which is consistently held by the MKO, and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). In hope that Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the MKO, will become the puppet of the United States—a shoe in the door in Iran, the NCRI’s website maintains a canopy of praise for the U.S. for anything which is against Iran and the Iranian people. (Recently the NCRI’s website ran a headline that states, “Maryam Rajavi, President elect of the Iranian Resistance, welcomed the imposition of new sanctions against the mullahs’ regime by the US and the European Union”) [14]. The relationship with the US, the sanctions, and the underlying reasons and ramifications for pressing sanctions should be seen as more complex for the Rajavi’s, as they deem themselves Iranians—because Iranians are simply too savvy, and they know that sanctions are just a simplistic reprisal. The Rajavi’s attitude and blind devotion to U.S. policy, along with their support for the Israeli lobby shows that they are out of touch with Iranian sentiment. Iran doesn’t like Israel’s attitude and blind devotion to itself and its expansion. For Iranians, Israel demonstrates a haughtiness that doesn’t chronicle nicely with the rest of the Middle East, and Israel’s policy towards Iran is to pressure the U.S. to do what Israel wants. After 9/11 Iran held sympathy for the U.S. and offered to exchange al-Qaida terrorists for MKO terrorists [15]. But the Bush administration neoconservatives declined after Israelis met with Manuchehr Ghorbanifar (an unreliable intelligence source for the U.S. who was involved in the Iran Contra scandal). The Jerusalem Post reveals that at least one of the meetings was quite specific with regard to an attempt to torpedo better US/Iran relations:

“The purpose of the meeting with Ghorbanifar was to undermine a pending deal that the White House had been negotiating with the Iranian government. At the time, Iran had considered turning over five al-Qaeda operatives in exchange for Washington dropping its support for Mujahadeen Khalq, an Iraq-based rebel Iranian group listed as a terrorist organization by the State Department.”[16]

According to Juan Cole, an expert on the Middle East, “The neoconservatives have some sort of shadowy relationship with the Mujahadeen-e Khalq Organization, or MEK [MKO]. Presumably its leaders have secretly promised to recognize Israel if they ever succeed in overthrowing the ayatollahs in Iran. When the U.S. recently categorized the MEK as a terrorist organization, there were howls of outrage from ‘scholars’ associated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, such as ex-Trotskyite Patrick Clawson and Daniel Pipes.”[17]
MKO ties with US and Israel officials might offer short-term benefits to the group. But they will harm the fame of those who currently support them. Despite all effort made by the MKO propaganda campaign to win the support of AIPAC which “has a lot of weight” in U.S. congress according to Massoud Bani Sadr, the MKO”have not been able to pass a single substantial resolution in support of the organization in congress. Note also that the US government regards the Mujahedin as a terrorist organization and does not want to create another Al-Qaeda.”[18] For now these strange bedfellows must remain a secret.

References:
[1] Rubin, Michael.”Monsters of the Left.”Frontpagemagazine.com 13 January 2006: Web. 30 Jul 2010.
<http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=6036>.
[2] Abrahamian, Ervand. The Iranian Mojahedin. London, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. p 127.
[3] Rubin, Michael. Ibid
[4] McNaught, Anita.”Iranian Militant MeK Group Losing Fight to Stay in Iraq.”Fox News” 12 January 2009: Web. 30 Jul 2010.
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0, 2933, 479404, 00.html>.
[5] Porter, Gareth.”Report Ties Dubious Iran Nuclear Docs to Israel.”IPS 3 June 2009: Web. 31 Jul 2010.
<http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=47081>.
[6]Porter, Gareth. Ibid
[7]Porter, Gareth. Ibid
[8] According to Mahan Abedin, an Independent Iranian journalist for the Asia Times and an expert on Iran, Iraq, and Islamic movements and ideologies.
See Abedin, Mahan.”Dissent and Defection: An Iranian Confession.”Asia Times Online (18 may 2006): Web. 31 Jul 2010.
[9] Abedin, Mahan.”Dissent and Defection: An Iranian Confession.”Asia Times Online (18 may 2006): Web. 31 Jul 2010.
[10] Bruck, Connie.”A Reporter at Large: Exiles.”New Yorker 6 March 2006: 48.
[11] Silverstein, Richard.”AIPAC’s Hidden Persuaders.”Guardian 15 May 2009
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/13/aipac-iran-us-obama>.
[12] Sahimi, Muhammad.”The Israel Lobby, the Neocons, and the Iranian-American Community.”Antiwar.com 21 November 2009: Web. 2 Aug 2010.
[13] NCRI website
[14] Windrem, Robert.”Al-Qaida Finds Safe Haven in Iran.”MSNBC.com 24 June 2005: 2 Aug 2010.
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8330976/>.
[15] Cole, Juan.”AIPAC’s Overt and Covert Ops.”Antiwar.com 30 August 2004: 2 Aug 2010.
<http://www.antiwar.com/cole/?articleid=3467>.
The article Juan Cole cites, which is no longer available online, originally appeared in the Jerusalem Post.
[16] Cole, Juan. Ibid
[17] Sherwell, Philip.”Israel Launches Covert War Against Iran.”Telegraph 16 February 2009.
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4640052/
Israel-launches-covert-war-against-Iran.html>
[18] Bruck, Connie. Ibid

By: Mazda Parsi

August 8, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization

Why is the PMOI so isolated as a political opposition?

This is a vital and serious question whose answer will solve the ambiguities which still exist among some of the Iranians who are living in foreign countries and have been deceived by the lies which the PMOI’s leaders have told them about the organization, as well as the few foreign politicians who are acting as the PMOI’s backers.

I believe the best source which can answer this question is the separated members who have spent more than twenty years in that so-called organization and who can evaluate the organization (PMOI) easily as experts. These separated members are an excellent source of information about everything which goes on inside the PMOI and I had better say these separated people are like a blueprint so that everyone by referring to them can find their answers.
These separated people are the best assets available to disclose the hidden aspects of the PMOI which have deliberately been hidden from outsiders by the PMOI’s leaders. For that reason the PMOI’s operatives and leaders are very much afraid of these people because of their expert knowledge of the PMOI’s real entity and content, so they label them as Iran’s mercenaries and agents, etc.

Now with this prelude, I will share my point of view with you about this subject.

I believe the PMOI cannot describe itself as an opposition group. My reasoning is as follows:

1. The PMOI has a criminal record which began in the 70’s by killing American citizens and destroying foreign offices and properties in Iran: some of their terrorist missions are as follows:

#May 1972- U.S. air Force Brigadier General HAROLD PRICE, chief of the Air Force Section of U.S. Military Advisory Group in Iran.
#June 1973- U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Lewis Hawkins, U.S. military mission.
#May 1975- Colonel Paul Schaeffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, U.S. Air Force officers in the mission.
#August 1976- 3 civilian employees of Rockwell International, Donald J Smith, Robert R Grangrad, William C Catrel advising the Iranian military.
Bombing and Kidnapping
#In December of 1970 carried out an abortive attempt to kidnap U.S. Ambassador Douglas MacArthur.
#President Richard M. Nixon’s trip was marred by a series of bombings, including one explosion at the Tomb of the Shah’s father shortly before the President and his hosts were scheduled to arrive.
#The offices of El Al Airlines, Shell Petroleum, British Petroleum, British Overseas Airways, a Jewish Emigration office in Tehran, and numerous other U.S. facilities and properties were bombed and victimized.
#In July 1975, two bombs were exploded in two places, first one in USA and Iran Committee building and the second one in the English Consul in the city of Mashad .
#On 4th July 1975, PMOI’s terrorists stopped the motorcade of the American Ambassador in Tehran and opened fired at his car.
#In 1979, they supported the American Embassy occupation in Tehran and their operatives who were student leaders participated in occupying the Embassy.

2. Their full cooperation with Iraq’s notorious dictator Saddam Hussein and his army and intelligence service for two decades. They participated in the suppression and oppression of Kurds and Shiites in 1990 -1991 to show their loyalty to Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein.

3. Illegitimacy among Iranian people because of their military and intelligence cooperation and collaboration with Saddam Hussein’s army and intelligence service. It is helpful to know that the PMOI were utilized as informants by Saddam Hussein’s government for providing top secret military and civilian target information to Saddam Hussein’s army to use for bombardment or missile attacks during the eight years war between Iran and Iraq and in return they were receiving money and military equipment, garrisons, armoured vehicles, free passes with permission to carry guns throughout Iraq, etc. The PMOI was utterly dependent on and attached to Saddam Hussein’s government, financially and militarily. (The video tapes revealing exchanges of money and top secret information between the Iraqi side and the PMOI’s agents are available as documents.)

4. Utilizing violence and armed struggle to forward its strategy which is rejected and cursed among the Iranian people as a method. They killed and assassinated many Iranian officials as well as innocent people and bombed many places and exploded many oil pipes between 1981 and 2003.

How can a criminal organization like the PMOI, with a bloody record and hands smeared with blood, claim to be a legitimate opposition group? They are criminals and they should be tried in courts of law for their bloody past. They do not have any popularity among Iranian people at all and Iranian people in their recent protests throughout Iran, especially after Iran’s presidential election, showed that not only do they not support the PMOI as an opposition group, but rather they blame the PMOI for provoking the Iranian government to use violence against their peaceful protests and demonstrations. How can Iranian people accept a violent religious cult (PMOI) which did not have mercy even upon its own members and their families, as an opposition group? The Iranian people deserve to have freedom and real democracy and they are struggling to gain them in the best way possible, so how can the Iranian people, who are intelligent, politically savvy, smart and experienced, relinquish and renounce freedom and democracy which they are struggling to achieve, and cave in to a violent and treacherous cult which through its cultic ideology and destructive politics would bring more captivity, misery and catastrophe for them?

The PMOI is a dangerous criminal cult and the only thing that they are thinking of is gaining power by all and any means and nothing else.

The Iranian people have chosen their way – peaceful protest – of retrieving their freedom and democracy.

In conclusion, the PMOI does not have the slightest chance in Iran’s future politics, so the PMOI leaders and operatives should wake up and stop dreaming and see the reality on the ground. Still, the question which comes to every right thinking person’s mind is “how can a bunch of criminals whose hands are smeared with the blood of Iraqi and Iranian people have such a claim?

Clearly we need to look beyond the Iranian people to answer this particular question.
Respectfully,

Hassan Piransar, Paris, a critic of Rajavi’s Cult

August 7, 2010 0 comments

USA

Open Letter to United States Secretary of State considering MKO

Mrs. Hillary Clinton
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Honorable Secretary of State

My name is Mohammad Karami. I began my political activities with the People’s Mojahedin organization of Iran (aka MKO, NCR,PMOI) during 1976 and 1977. I was imprisoned in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s prison on political charges. I was sentenced to death in 1981 in the prison, but I and six other political prisoners managed to escape from the prison. I was also imprisoned by the PMOI in 1985 as a result of my disagreement with their sectarian approach and platform in their internal relations, and was also put on trial in the PMOI many times just because of my disapproval of and disagreement with their cultic politics.

I was threatened four times by Massoud Rajavi himself that if I wanted to leave the organization I would have been sent to the PMOI’s jail for two years and after that I would spend eight years of my life in Iraq’s notorious prison, Abu Ghraib as a prisoner where I was going to be put on trial by an Iraqi court for illegal entry into Iraq. It is interesting to note that during Saddam’s reign illegal entry into Iraq was considered as a deadly crime and the punishment for that was a death sentence. As a result of that threat I was forced to stay in the PMOI, despite my unwillingness, until the downfall of Saddam Hussein and his government.

I escaped from the PMOI after the downfall of Saddam Hussein and I took refuge in the American Camp Grizzly (Ashraf Camp) which was located next to the PMOI garrison. I lived in Camp Grizzly, which was run by coalition forces led by the US Army for four years and I was under their protection until my exodus from that camp. After leaving the American Camp, I found my way to Europe. But even in Europe I have not had tranquility in my life because of the presence of PMOI agents here, which is another story to tell.

The People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran was founded in 1965. Its ideology is a combination of Marxism and Islam which in many areas of their work they the Marxist resources, some of which are as follows:

What should be done by Lenin, four philosophic articles by Stalin, where does the science go? by Max Plong, the source of evolution and life by Aparin, From human being to the galaxy by John Fefer, How to be a good communist by Shaochi, Against liberalism by Mao, Imperialism and all the dogmatic in history are paper tigers by Mao, Rectification of party duties by Mao, Vietnam under fire, Mao Red booklet ,Nahjol Balagheh, God in Society, Qoran, etc,. Their ideology is based on fighting against capitalism and they believe that the United States of America is the symbol of global capitalism and they call the USA ‘the World-Eater Imperialism’. Their ideological principle and objective is based on fighting against the United States and its interests, and in this regard they have written and published many books such as, The Carter Presidency (World Eater Imperialism), Response to Current Capitalism, Thirty Questions, The Discernment of the World; the majority of these books’ resources are from Marxism Ideology. In this regard the PMOI has many songs and anthems which come directly from their anti American ideology. Some of the most important of them are as follows:

1. The song, War with America which is an epic song.

2. The anthem, The Mojahed full of hatred and vengeance is sitting in ambush.

With such an ideology and approach which exists in the Mojahedin, they began their terrorist operations against American citizens and American offices located in Iran in 1971 which are as follows:

– June 22, 1972- U.S. Air Force Brigadier General HAROLD PRICE, chief of the Air Force Section of U.S. Military Advisory Group in Iran.

– January 1973 – bombing the office of Shell Oil Company.

– A few days later bombing the office of Pan American airlines

– 3 June 1973 – assassination of U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Lewis Hawkins, U.S. military mission.

– 25 May 1974 bombing of Jewish American establishments like General and British establishments like Yorkshire Bank and Tichno Co. HQs

– January 27 1975, in response to the visit of Henry Kissinger to Iran the explosion of the office of TT International and Joan Doer Company.

– 11 May 1975 – assassination of Colonel Paul Schaeffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, U.S. Air Force officers in the mission.

– 4th July 1975, PMOI’s terrorists stopped the motorcade of the American Ambassador in Tehran and opened fired on his car, but because of the darkness inside of the car, an Iranian official who was working for American Embassy in Tehran and was the PMOI’s infiltration agent was killed by mistake.

– In July 1975, two bombs were exploded in two places, first in the USA and Iran Committee building and the second one in the English Consul in the city of Mashad.

– 28 August 1976 – 3 civilian employees of Rockwell International, Donald J Smith, Robert R Grangrad and William C. Catrel, advisor to the Iranian military were subject to bombing and kidnapping.

1. In December of 1970 carried out an abortive attempt to kidnap U.S. Ambassador Douglas MacArthur.

2. President Richard M. Nixon’s trip was marred by a series of bombings, including one explosion at the tomb of the Shah’s father shortly before the President and his hosts were scheduled to arrive.

3. The offices of El Al Airlines, Shell Petroleum, British Petroleum, British Overseas Airways, a Jewish Emigration office in Tehran, and numerous other U.S. facilities and properties were bombed and victimized.

4. In 1979, they supported the American Embassy occupation in Tehran and participated in the occupation of the Embassy by their agents who were student leaders.

As a result of the terrorist operation which happened in 9/11 in the USA, every country became astonished and confused at such brutal and barbaric acts, which targeted thousands innocent people in the twin towers, and all these countries and their governments condemned such brutality and savagery. But, surprisingly the PMOI’s operatives and leaders threw a very big party in Bagherzadeh Garrison in Iraq and celebrated that incident and showed their admiration for that terrorist act by dancing, shouting and congratulating one another in front of their leaders, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi.

Massoud Rajavi was on the stage and while he had his hands on his waist he began a war cry against the USA, and in his admiration for Osama Ben Laden and his organization, Al Qaeda, he said, ”This was fanatical Islam which trembled and shacked the basis of US Imperialism and they destroyed the twin towers which were the symbol of their power, and successfully reduced it to rubble through their successful mission”. Then he (Massoud Rajavi) with a smile on his face continued his war cry and said, ”What will happen to the USA if revolutionary Islam with our Ideology and Maryam’s leadership comes to power, then this paper tiger (the USA) will be destroyed as a whole.”

After the downfall of Saddam Hussein, all the PMOI members underwent various interviews for recognition of their identification by the US State Department’s agents, the CIA, FBI, and specifically US Military Information section MI. They gained a huge amount of very valuable information from the PMOI members – all of which documents and information substantiate and prove that the ideology and the strategy of the PMOI are all anti-western, and particularly anti USA.

After the downfall of Saddam Hussein, the PMOI rapidly mobilized all its organization for three weeks to destroy all books, CD’s, tapes, newspapers, archives, and even the members’ personal memorandums which were produced in various of Rajavi’s sessions and gatherings. Whatever could be interpreted as anti-USA were pulled out of their library, archives, offices, storage rooms and etc, and were all burned to ashes under the direct supervision of the PMOI’s commanders. Right now if you go to the PMOI’s main garrison Camp Ashraf, you won’t find even a single piece of paper which is anti-USA. They performed the same exercise with their computers as well.

The US State Department has justly listed the PMOI and its political wing the National Council of Resistance (NCRI) as a terrorist organization in its terrorist list. While the State Department listed them as a terrorist organization, it did not have the valuable information which it now has now. In a report that was published in 2005 by the US State Department regarding the terrorist organization list, it mentioned justly that the PMOI is a potential threat and is a very dangerous terrorist organization. In that report it was mentioned that the PMOI has the potential to become a dangerous organization in any period of time because of their special terrorist training and cohesive organizational structure. For instance, on 17th of June 2003 when Maryam Rajavi was arrested by French Police, PMOI leaders ordered their members to set themselves on fire in public streets. If there was no complaint and protest from the international bodies and humanitarian organizations against this kind of brutality and savagery, it was still going to become one of the biggest of human catastrophes.

Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the US State Department has justly listed the PMOI as a terrorist organization in the terrorist list and has justly mentioned in the US State Department report that the PMOI has signs of being a cult. I must stress that even though the State Department reports of 2005 and 2006 are not complete, that the report shows that this organization is a religious cult.

In this regard, should you look into Mr. Alireza Jafarzadeh’s request (PMOI’s spokesman in USA), you can find more about the authenticity of their cultish culture and thoughts. According to the information that the US State Department and US Army (Military Intelligence) have about the PMOI, they should not be allowed to tell their lies as vital news to US politicians and Senators. I urge you to list the PMOI as a terrorist organization again and do not let them deceive and delude international society and the US administration.

As adjunct to this letter, I have attached some documents which prove and substantiate their cultic identity.

Lets create another Vietnam for America(pdf).
(Mojahedin English language paper April 1980)

Letter to Imam (Khomeini) (pdf).
(Mojahedin English Language paper April 1980)

Some questions unanswered regarding the US military invasion of Iran (pdf).
(Mojahedin English Language paper June 1980)

Respectfully,

Mohammad Karami, Paris, a victim of the Rajavi Cult -oyanyoldash@yahoo.com

August 7, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Anniversary of crushing defeat of Mojahedin Khalq

Mersad was God’s ambush for MKO

Masood Rajavi left France on a private plane for Iraq on June 7th, 1986. An Iraqi delegation headed by "Taha Yasin Ramadan" the vice prime minister welcomed Rajavi at the airport on behalf of the Iraqi president. Mujahedin-e Khalq believed in this move as follow: in a situation where different imperialism conspiracies are taking place against the armed resistance of the people of Iran, and fears of the shaken and dying regime of Iran is reaching at its climax of Masood Rajavi and his new revolution, moving from France to the borders of Iran which is the last step for Rajavi to take before entering the country, is congratulated to all his followers. A day before his flight, Rajavi stated on a video tape:

If I don’t go tomorrow, the day after tomorrow might be too late. Not only for myself but for the people resistance, people in chain and incarcerated in the country.

After settling where he was supposed to be staying, he started meeting Iraqi officials. 8 days later on June 15, 1986 he met Saddam Hossei. At this time terrorist activities of MKO continued in border cities of Iran.

The Liberation Army
On July 8th, 1987, Rajavi met the Iraqi dictator again; at this meeting Saddam congratulated Rajavi the foundation of the national liberation army. Reciprocally Rajavi congratulated Sadaam the national day of Iraq and celebrations of the July 30th day.
At this time once a while we heard a meeting taking place between Rajavi and Saddam.
The liberation army was founded on June 20th, 1987 after receiving huge support either in form of cash or military assistants from the Iraqi government. In a short time the alleged army started attacking Iranian border cities in large scale.

On Monday July 18th, 1988 at 2 p.m. the radio of the Islamic Republic of Iran broadcasted news as follows:

The Islamic Republic of Iran has officially accepted the resolution # 598 in a message delivered to the general secretary of the United Nations in order to establish peace and security in the region.

Two days after this news, Imam Khomeini (peace be upon him) in a detailed statement on the anniversary day of the massacre of the Iranian pilgrims in Mecca appreciated all those who fought to defend this country. He continued his remarks by saying that at this time, I see accepting the resolution in the interest of the revolution and the country.

Accepting the resolution, had wide spread reactions, domestically and internationally. Some countries, like Iraq regarded this event as a new tactic. When the cease fire was accepted by Iran, a very serious situation was created for MKO. They had a very good understanding of Saddam, they knew that Saddam might make a deal on them any moment and turn them in to the government of Iran; in other hand, MKO had planned all their politic and their existence upon the continuation of the war, and they never anticipated a cease fire.

Therefore they did not see any other way except to intensify the war or at least keep the war going on. After our Islamic country was attacked by the Iraqis and temporary withdrawal of our fighters, MKOs thought that accepting the U.N resolution was due to the separation of the government and people. They were trying to take advantage of the situation to achieve their ugly goals.

By gathering some people from the counter revolutionary groups in different parts of Europe, and by all military equipments that they received as gift from Saddam, the MKO put a force of 15000 people together. They started their attacks from strait of Patagh in the west of the country against the Islamic Republic if Iran.

Members of this group, who up to now had a comfortable life in the west, were drawn into the war because of the MKO propaganda and excessive financial aids from the U.S. and Iraqi government and in the hope of conquering Tehran in 3 days. Saddam ordered the Iraqi army to provide the most modern military equipments which were recently purchased, at their disposal. Therefore, they attacked Iran by using new and the most modern equipments.

The Iraqi air force, by providing preliminary supports encouraged them to enter deep into Iran and ultimately conquer Tehran. By this doom alliance, a wide section of our Islamic country was attacked.

MKO were able to conquer the city of krend in early stages of their advancement. So happy of this victory, they tried to reach city of Islam Abad, they faced little resistance and finally conquered Islam Abad as well. 4 days after accepting the United Resolution # 598 by Iran, on Friday July 23rd, 1988, Iraqis started wide spread attacks against Iranian positions in the south and advanced to a point, 30 km away from Khoramshahr. Their intention was to capture more territory and prisoners from Iran so they could use them as a bargaining tool with Iran in future.
Khoramshahr was about to fall again, because in light of accepting the U.N resolution, all forces were evacuated and the city was in fact defenseless. At this time Imam Khomeini (PBU) sent a message to all military commanders, asking them to prevent the enemy from taking over the city at any price.

Following the broadcast of the message, a huge number of volunteer militias, who were dismayed by accepting the Resolution, made themselves available at Khoramshahr and forced the enemy to withdraw back to the border lines.

On July 25th, 1988 at 2:30 pm, few members of the MKO who had fled to Iraq and with the supports that they received from Saddam and heavy & light equipments that they received from the United States started invading Kermanshah in the west. This happened when the army was busy in the south and neglected the west. In a short time they passed strait of Patagh and entered into Iranian territory.

They conquered the cities of "Sare Pole Zahab" and west Karand.
They stayed in Islam Shahr for the first night and killed a lot of inhabitants of that city. They even killed people who were injured in hospitals, it is interesting to know that they killed even their own relatives, Masood Rajavi, while riding in a Bulett Proof car, accompanied the group which consisted of 15000 men, women and children.

MKO commanders believed that Iran’s military is disintegrated and is very vulnerable, and only one shock will topple the Islamic Republic. MKO prepared their military plan in 24 hours, unveiled their plan in a meeting on July 22nd, 1988 and called their operation "Forough – E – Javidan" which means an immortal light. Masood Rajavi concluded in that meeting that the internal situation of the country was very fragile and will have his next meeting in the Azadi square in Tehran.

MKO were very happy of their preliminary victories and in a hurried decision they decided to move toward Kermanshah In form of a column from Islamshahr. They thought that people would join them on the way towards Tehran. They thought that they could form new regiments of people and each of their members could lead the regiment. They thought that they could prepare the foundation for the regime to topple. Radio MKO started sending messages to the people of Kermanshah, asking them to join them and prepare the city for their arrival.

In the morning of July 27th, 1988, the Iranian army started the operation of Mersad with the code name of "Ya Ali – Ebne – Abitaleb" (AS).

MKO, who were happy of not facing any resistance on their way, suddenly faced themselves in an Inferno of bombs which were falling on them from air and land. It did not take a long time to see the Kermanshah – Islamabad road piled up by burned equipments which were given to the MKO by the west as gift. Few people who succeeded to save their lives, escaped to the villages nearby, some other decided to take their lives by taking cyanide tablets. When the operation ended, both sides of the road were piled up with bodies of thousands of men and women whom their hands were stained with the blood of their own countrymen.

The Islamic fighters suddenly closed the road 34 km away from Islam Abad. A heavy fighting took place on that artery.

The anti tank division of the military in an outrageous action, destroyed many tanks of the MKO. The Islam Abad, Kermanshah artery was filled with many burned equipments at early stages.

The actions of the Islamic fighters shattered all dreams of MKOs. MKOs had no choice but to withdraw and pull back to Islamshahr. The city was surrounded by following the enemy.

MKO had no choice but to escape the city in order to save their lives. The Islamic fighters, by using air force and helicopter, blocked the roads on MKOs on Karand and strait of Pathgh and cut their communications. On July 28th, 1988 the Islamic fighters advanced towards predetermined targets. The air force sharp flyers and heavy bombardment left no opportunity for the Iraqi air force to get engaged… As the result, in the same afternoon, the city of Islam Abad was cleared of the MKO.

One of the particular characteristic of this operation was that, not only the Iranian people didn’t welcome MKO, but also resisted against their invasion as well. In addition, all political parties, groups, figures who are in opposition to the government of Iran and are based outside Iran, condemned the action of Masood Rajavi and other leaders of MKO in sending thousands of people to be killed in Forough Javidan Operation.

London Kayhan, an opposition News paper in London in an article from a reader wrote;
I watched the BBC news, I am so angry, my message is this that we should not keep quiet in dealing with traitors like MKOs, and MKO in collaboration with Iraqis invaded our country. We are sitting and watching.

Summary of the Operation
What was destroyed from the enemy?

Over 120 tanks
400 transporters
90 cannons 80 mm
150 cannons 60 mm
30 cannons 106 mm

Regiments of the Enemy

Over 20 units of joint cooperation of Iraqis and MKO

Spoils of War

1000 RPG
700 Kalashnikov
Tens of Tanks and Transporter
Tens of Automobile
Advanced communication equipments
Electronic Equipments and Internal documents

MKO listed 1274 people killed in the Forough Javidan Operation. Among them were 5 members of executive group who each led one military regiment, and 11 members of the executive group of the organization.
According to these findings, 1100, of MKO got injured in the operation as well.

The damage sustained by the MKO based on their own assertion was as follow:

72 tanks
612 different types of vehicles
21 cannons 122 mm
51 rifles 106 mm

52 U.S. senators, few days before this operation, wrote a letter to the U.S. secretary of state, at the time, George Schultz, telling him that the United States must support MKO who are based in Iraq and use them at maximum to overthrow the government in Tehran.
Senator Mervin Daimly who strongly insisted on overthrowing the Islamic Republic government took part in MKO meetings and took a very heated position in favor of them on June 27th, 1988, senator Daimly took part in the MKO demonstration in Washington D.C. as well.

He told the audience that “We should not give up, we will be marching from Mehran to Tehran very soon if we try a little harder”
In this operation, Rajavi ordered to kill Ali Zarkash one of the persons in charge in the organization who recently had disobeyed his orders.
He was killed from behind by one of the officers of Rajavi. It was portrayed as he was killed by government army. They even arranged special seven day traditional mourning services for him.

MKO lost quite a few of those good members in that operation. Among people who got killed in the MKO side, were few foreign nationals – mostly because they married Iranians and accompanied their spouse in the operation.
After Imam Khomeini (PBU), passed away, Rajavi performed few combat maneuvers in Iraq. He tried to keep his members busy. He wanted to get permission from Saddam to attack Tehran.

Few Iraqi generals, who were always present during those military maneuvers, said that those maneuvers did not have enough military values to topple the government of Iran. Some fake scenes of those shows made them to laugh.

July 31, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Brushing the Dust off a Court Ruling

As already predicted, triumphalism was the order of MKO media and propaganda machine for nearly two weeks since the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the State Department review designation of Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO, MEK, PMOI, NCR, NLA) the State Department’s response in all the last threes has been nothing but to re-designate it, as it will be probably with this last one. as a foreign terrorist organization. This was not MKO displaying itself as the winner of a petition but a terrorist organization shaking its fist at the world. However, now the cloud of the triumph subsided and anything returning to normal, it is time to have a review of the ruling to dig out the facts MKO were trying to bury under the heavy cloud of disturbing the usual pattern of events. Although improbable to be removed from the terror list, as the ruling has nothing to do with the issue, there are points in the ruling indicating that the State Department insists on the accuracy of its decision makings.

It has to be pointed out that the case in the question is not the first but the fourth through which MKO is challenging its designation as a FTO and bringing it before the court. And the State Department’s response in all the last threes has been nothing but to re-designate it, as it will be probably with this last one. Let’s see what remarkable points the organization has noticed specified in the ruling that may signify a triumph for it.

1. Stated in per curiam, it affirms that “This case is the fifth in a series of related actions challenging the United States Secretary of State’s designation of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) and its aliases as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). The MEK, also called the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), has challenged its FTO status before this court three times”. Accordingly, the organizations attempts so far has proved unproductive against the State Department’s reasonable evidences.

2. MKO’s provided evidences to defend itself against the charges have been piles of letters of recommendations from its lobby in the Congress and other European parliamentarians. Asserted in the ruling, the State Department’s decision to keep MKO on the list as a FTO relies on sound classified and unclassified information. “The PMOI also thrice supplemented its petition with additional information and letters in support from members of the U.S. Congress, members of the UK and European parliaments and retired members of the U.S. military, among others. After reviewing an administrative record consisting of both classified and unclassified information, the Secretary denied the PMOI’s petition and published its denial in the Federal Register on January 12, 2009. She also provided the PMOI with a heavily redacted 20-page administrative summary of State’s review of the record, which summary referred to 33 exhibits, many of which were also heavily or entirely redacted.”

3. The court upholds that the Secretary resolved to designate MKO based on sound records and evidences. “We are to uphold the Secretary’s determination unless it “lack[s] substantial support in the administrative record taken as a whole or in classified information submitted to the court.”
4. The court asserts that in all his/her previous responses, the Secretary has shown no satisfaction that the organization has permanently renounced terrorism and that, it might resume such activities in future. “In my view, (Karen LeCraft Henderson, Circuit Judge) the classified portion of the administrative record provides “substantial support” for her determination that the PMOI either continues to engage in terrorism or terrorist activity or retains the capability and intent to do so and, consequently, for her denial of the PMOI’s revocation petition.”

5. The State Department in its explanations for keeping MKO on the list argues that there is no evidence to confirm that the organization has permanently renounced terrorism since its present circumstances are the same as the previous. The State Department relies on sound facts rather than claims. “To seek revocation, an FTO “must provide evidence in that petition that the relevant circumstances . . . are sufficiently different from the circumstances that were the basis for the designation such that a revocation with respect to the organization is warranted.”

It adds that “While the Secretary may revoke a designation at any time, the statute directs that she shall revoke a designation if she finds that either “the circumstances that were the basis for the designation have changed in such a manner as to warrant revocation,” or “the national security of the United States warrants a revocation,” She wrote that “in considering the evidence as a whole, the MEK has not shown that the relevant circumstances are sufficiently different from the circumstances that were the basis for the 2003re-designation,” and that “[a]s a consequence, the MEK continues to be a foreign organization that engages in terrorist activity . . . or terrorism . . . or retains the capability and intent to” do so.

Accordingly, America has concluded that in spite of the cease of open military operations and the voluntary surrender of arsenal and weapons to the occupying forces in Iraq, MKO does not seem to have adopted a total non-aggressive attitude. The militarism potentiality submits that the continued proscription of MKO has not been unjustified.

6. The ruling admits that “although the Secretary must give the PMOI an opportunity to rebut the unclassified material on which she relies, AEDPA does not allow access to the classified record as it makes clear that classified material “shall not be subject to disclosure for such time as it remains classified, except that such information may be disclosed to a court ex parte and in camera for purposes of judicial review.”

It indicates that the US has a comprehensive understanding of MKO compared to other designated organizations. Naturally, classified information include sensitive compartmented information and special access data and are to be used by government departments and agencies if deemed necessary. Disclosure of these information in the presence of an ineligible terrorist organization increases the risk of an unauthorized disclosure of classified information that puts terrorists in full alert.

However, the court requires that MKO be notified of only unclassified information: “In short, we have held due process requires that the PMOI be notified of the unclassified material on which the Secretary proposes to rely and an opportunity to respond to that material before its redesignation; nothing in the amended statute suggests that this protection is any less necessary in the revocation context.”

MKO is well aware that the only probable, granted chance before it is to refute unclassified information or to ask for further opportunity to provide justifications to prolong the process. “And even though the PMOI was given the opportunity to include in the record its own evidence supporting delisting, it had no opportunity to rebut the unclassified portion of the record the Secretary was compiling—an omission, the PMOI argues, that deprived it of the due process protections detailed in our previous decisions.”

The ruling concludes that because of the foreign policy and national security concerns it leaves the designation in place: “As we noted in NCRI I, “[w]e recognize that a strict and immediate application of the principles of law which we have set forth herein could be taken to require a revocation of the designation[] before us[, but] . . . we also recognize the realities of the foreign policy and national security concerns asserted by the Secretary in support of th[e] designation.” 251 F.3d at 209. We thus leave the designation in place but remand with instructions to the Secretary to provide the PMOI the opportunity to review and rebut the unclassified portions of the record on which she relied.”

Consequently, what MKO is trumpeting as a ruling of being removed from the terrorist list is nothing but an urge by the court requiring the State Department to grant MKO an opportunity to defend itself against unclassified information, an opportunity already granted. The court has judicial responsibilities to fulfill, as it will be also held accountable for the consequences of unleashing a terrorist organization. It is complying with all regulations that struggle to diminish the nightmare of terrorist threats that has jeopardized the national security since 9/11.

July 31, 2010 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Iraq and the American Pullout: Separate We Must

The withdrawal of United States combat troops on August 31 falls during Ramadan, the Muslim month of fasting and prayer; a timetable better suited to the American political cycle than to MEK also participated in the 1979 take-over of the US Embassy in Tehran and so its members, as designated terrorists, are not eligible for resettlement in the US conditions in Iraq. Ramadan usually sees a spike in violence as religious fervour combines with heat and hunger. But delaying the withdrawal another year would mean the Iraq war surpassing the Vietnam war in length. The timing could have been better for Iraq, but withdrawal is overdue for the US. Having never been justified in the first place – legally, strategically, or defensively – it is time to endmilitary engagement in Iraq.

The United States has dug its military into the landscape, requiring enormous sums of taxpayer dollars to maintain its presence. It justifies its Iraq addiction by claiming only its soldiers can prevent Iraqis from killing each other and the Iraqi government from falling apart. For their part, many Iraqi politicians rely extensively on the US military, even as they call for the end of the occupation to score political points against rivals. It is an unhealthy, co-dependent relationship and the withdrawal will be a withdrawal in all senses of the word, possibly incurring further damage in the process if not undertaken responsibly.

IN CHAOS
Iraq’s political landscape is in bad shape and likely to get worse, but there is nothing the US military can or should do to prevent this. Some argue that the combat presence should be extended, raising visions of renewed sectarian bloodshed, Arab-Kurd violence, and the lack of Iraqi security force competence as justification for renegotiating Washington’s security agreement with Baghdad.

There are very real risks of violence and destabilisation, but committing US troops ad infinitum would have almost no impact on the underlying causes, and escalating violence should not justify another Iraq fix. On the contrary, a continued US military presence would deter Iraqis from taking-on the issues themselves, the only long-term solution to Iraq’s problems, particularly in regards to security which is a domestic rather than international issue.

Once American combat troops leave, Shi’a followers ofMoqtada al-Sadr will be deprived of their favourite devil and will lose relevance unless they can turn their energies to solving the country’s electricity crisis and improving relations with its Arab neighbours.

With fewer US bases, Al Qaeda in Iraq will have a reduced number of targets and its presence there is likely to diminish. After all, it has very few natural allies even among the Sunni Arab population.

Iyad Allawi’s Iraqiyya party won a tiny advantage in the March 7 vote, but Allawi has squandered whatever mandate he had by failing to form a coalition with any of the other major political parties. His frequent travels to Sunni Gulf countries further alienate him from the Shi’a population.
The National Alliance, intended to unite the rule of Law party with the Iraqi National Alliance in an undefeatable bloc, has likewise frittered away its mandate by botching the basic issue of who will lead the coalition.

Nuri al-Maliki, supposedly a strong leader, clutches onto the premiership even as the country crumbles around him because of a lack of leadership. Death threats against party leaders abound, and at least three elected officials have already been assassinated.

If a new government has formed by August 31, it may exclude at least one of the main demographic groups: Kurds, Sunni, or Shi’a. As in 2005, there is no appetite for a national unity government that would put all parties into the same tent and force them to compromise on de-Baathification and Kirkuk, issues that Iraqis are willing to kill and die for, rather than make concessions on.

If a national unity government is rammed into existence, the reluctant players will spend their four years in office squabbling rather than tackling the tough issues. The alternative of leaving-out one or more parties, may result in increased violence, but it may also lead to the development of a healthy opposition, able to credibly challenge the government when it acts illegitimately.

WITHDRAW SLOWLY…
The US will not be going cold turkey in its withdrawal. With its remaining fifty thousand support troops and 1,300 civilians and diplomats, it would do well to focus on getting the country electrified and supporting constitutional reform, things Iraqis themselves see as major stumbling blocks for economic and political development.
Nothing would stabilise Iraq more than reliable electricity, which would allow business growth and employment of those who might otherwise join militias to support their families. Electricity would attract investment and make it possible for the oil and gas sectors to expand, increase refrigeration of vaccines and fresh food, benefit schools, and even have allowed more people to watch World Cup games; it is no coincidence that major protests prompting the Electricity Minister to resign occurred in June during the football tournament.

The delay in government formation both in 2005 and this year underscores the vital need to reform the constitution as well as the rest of the legal structure. The constitution’s ambiguous, vague wording, written in haste and barely ratified in 2005, resulted in both Iraqiyya and the National Coalition claiming in March to have won the right to form the next government. Without the laws, courts, and constitution for political and legal solutions, Iraqis will rationally choose violence as the most effective means to solve problems.

…AND WITHDRAW RESPONSIBLY
The US should, however, withdraw responsibly. Our departure will have consequences for many Iraqis. To ignore our responsibilities would, in the words of US Congressman Brad Sherman, ‘Allow a human rights catastrophe to occur in Iraq just because we are in the process of leaving.’ Representative Sherman was referring to the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq (MEK), about three thousand radical Iranians held in Camp Ashraf in Iraq who oppose the Iranian government. Baghdad has no sympathy for the MEK because it assisted Saddam Hussein in suppressing Iraqi Shi’a and Kurds. The US withdrawal could result in a piranha-like feeding frenzy as both Iraq and Iran exact revenge.

MEK also participated in the 1979 take-over of the US Embassy in Tehran and so its members, as designated terrorists, are not eligible for resettlement in the US. Camp Ashraf, however, postpones the inevitable and risks becoming another Guantanamo Bay. MEK members who took part in acts of terror should face justice, possibly through an ad hoc United Nations tribunal that would ensure a fair trial. Those exonerated should then qualify for resettlement.

Even more desperate than the MEK are the estimated one hundred thousand Sahwa members, Sunni insurgents who initially fought against Americans in 2003-4 but then cooperated with them against Al Qaeda from 2005-8. Al Qaeda targets Sahwa members for betraying them, Shi’a militias despise them for working with the Americans, and the Shi’a government is reluctant to include the former insurgents in either the police or security forces.

Like MEK, Sahwa insurgents do not qualify for resettlement in the US. However, without Sahwa’s assistance, US forces would almost certainly have been defeated. Having signed a deal with Sawha we should uphold our end of the bargain by protecting remaining members from being picked off by Al Qaeda or Shi’a militias. We should help Sahwa families join the US refugee programme; restrictions on resettlement should not apply to innocent spouses and children. The credibility of America as a strategic partner in the Gulf depends in large part on how we treat our Arab allies, including Sahwa members.

As the military withdraws, thousands of Iraqis will lose their jobs as translators and assistants. Along with income loss they will face death threats for having worked with Americans and will no longer have the protection of nearby forces. Those who want to be resettled in the US should have quick and efficient access to the Refugee Assistance Program. For those who do not wish to leave Iraq, generous severance packages should benegotiated, taking into account their increased need for security as US troops depart.

On August 31, there may not yet be a new government to escort the US out, let alone take responsibility for the country’s security. People will undoubtedly still suffer from severe electricity shortages, with no air conditioning or refrigeration for most at the hottest time of the year. Clean water will be scarce and crops will be dying. There will be long, angry lines at fuel stations, rubbish mounting in the streets, and occasional explosions with accompanying screams and sirens. Basically, most people’s idea of hell. But separate we must.

Rachel Schneller, Foreign Service Officer, US State Department, currently International Affairs Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations. The views in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the US Government or State Department.

Rachel Schneller, Chatham House,The World Today, Volume 66, Number 8/9

July 29, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Tom Tancredo’s Marriage to the Mojahedin Khalq

Tom Tancredo’s Marriage to the Mojahedin Khalq (MEK, MKO, NCRI, Rajavi cult): Posterboy for Israel’s Infiltration of the American Right

The Washington Post and the international media inform us this week that it’s official: Former Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) is going to seek that state’s gubernatorial nomination as the candidate of the Constitution Party. For the record, I was the Constitution Party’s nominee in the U. S. Senate race in Delaware in 2000, opposing now-Senator Thomas Carper and the late William Roth.

Mark Dankof: The MEK/MKO/PMOI terror organization.

Does it have the fingerprints of the CIA, Mossad, and MI6?

TPM informs us that the Constitution Party is a paleo-conservative party in the mold of Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, rejecting “neoconservatism and American internationalism as threats to the country’s independence and sovereignty.”

But, as usual, the media (and many of the naive faithful in the Constitution Party) misses the real story: Tom Tancredo is a tool of the Israeli Lobby, a neo-conservative, and a warmonger for the Zionist State on the subject of launching a preemptive war against Iran.

This is not the first time that the national Constitution Party has promoted an Israeli asset at the national level in recent years . In 2008, Constitution Party founder Howard Phillips, chairman of Washington’s Conservative Caucus, was promoting Dr. Jerome Corsi of Harvard University as a prospective Presidential candidate for the fledgling conservative 3rd-Party-in-the-Electoral-Wilderness.

It takes less than 5 minutes on the Net to establish Corsi’s credentials as a neo-conservative, Zionist asset of influence on the American Right. An inspection of Corsi’s written archives for World Net Daily, the brainchild of Netanyahu’s buddy-in-residence, Joseph Farah, tells all that is needed to know about the good Harvard doctor. His book, Atomic Iran, might as well been authored by the agitation-propaganda assets for the Israeli intelligence establishment that Philip Giraldi informs us are using Rupert Murdoch’s media chain to deliberately disseminate false stories about what is transpiring with Iran’s nuclear program. As an excellent summation of Atomic Iran, Payvand’s Iran News carries a review of Corsi’s tome that reveals the extent of its connections to America’s Mossad-linked Neo-Conservatives.

But Corsi made one mistake in 2008. He appeared on my broadcast, “Mark Dankof’s America,” for the Republic Broadcasting Network. At that time, he shared with my listeners his ongoing travels to Israel, for consultations with his “advisors in the Israeli Knesset.” It was shortly after that revelation that he withdrew his name from the Constitution Party Presidential sweepstakes. It would be the end of his brief foray into electoral politics, but not the end of the bigger story.

The new posterboy for Israeli infiltration of American paleo-conservative parties and media outlets would appear to be Tom Tancredo. An examination of Tancredo’s published views in an interview with Right Wing News reveals what the London Financial Times depicted by photograph yesterday, in covering the ex-Congressman’s run for the Colorado governor’s mansion. He is working with the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MKO)/National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), the Communist-cultic terror organization, in assisting American neo-conservatives and Israel in facilitating “regime change” in Iran.

Hey, Mr. Tancredo: Is that the Hammer-and-Sickle in the MEK Logo?

My recent work on the MKO, and my coverage of the Raymond/Constance Tanter divorce case, should tell every American paleo-conservative in either the Constitution or Republican Party about that organization—and who it is that Tom Tancredo is working for. It isn’t America. It’s Israel and the Jewish Lobby.

Right Web joins Right Wing News in chronicling the Tancredo world view as it pertains to both the MEK, the Neo-Conservative “clash of civilizations” ideology, and support for America’s alleged War on Terror. Here is a sample:

“A cultural warrior on the international front, Tancredo is an enthusiastic supporter of the Bush administration’s war on terror, including the war in Iraq. Tancredo, who is a consistent supporter of the Pentagon and U.S. defense industries, has become a leading spokesperson in the House for an Iran regime change strategy in which the People’s Freedom Fighters (MEK) would be the vanguard organization supported by the United States.

“Describing himself as a ‘devotee’ of Samuel Huntington and the thesis of his Clash of Civilizations treatise, Tancredo, like many on the right-from social conservatives to neoconservatives-bases his restrictionism less on economic reasons than on cultural and racial ones. ‘The threat to the United States comes from two things: the act of immigration combined with the cult of multiculturalism,’ argues Tancredo. ‘We will never be able to win in the clash of civilizations if we don’t know who we are. If Western civilization succumbs to the siren song of multiculturalism, I believe we are finished.’

“Concerning the war on terrorism, Tancredo stated: ‘I believe that what we are fighting here is not just a small group of people who have hijacked a religion, but it is a civilization bent on destroying ours. Radical Islam has been the foe of Christiandom for centuries. The most serious foe of Christiandom. The battle ebbs and flows, peaks and becomes less intense, but it has been going on for centuries. We have never really been bothered by it, because the world was a place in which you could not really attack the United States physically. There were oceans separating us and if you did come, what were you going to come with? A gun, a rock, an arrow? But today it has all changed; it has taken on a different dimension.’

“‘This combination, massive immigration and radical multiculturalism,’ warned Tancredo, ‘is a prescription for our own demise.’

“Violent Regime Change in Iran by Freedom Fighters Tancredo advocates U.S. support for the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), a cult-like group that is cultivating a broad base of support among Iranian expatriates around the world. Mujahedin e-Khalq means ‘people’s freedom fighters.’ MEK affiliates are the Iraq-based National Liberation Army of Iran and the National Council of Resistance in Iran. MEK calls itself the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). The public face of the MEK is Maryam Rajavi, who has been designated by the MEK as the president-elect of Iran’s government in exile.

“Although identified as a terrorist organization by the State Department and accused of a pattern of human rights abuses, Tancredo says ‘We should be aiding them, instead of restricting their activities. We can use the MEK, they are in fact warriors. Where we need to use that kind of force, we can use them.’

“Together with Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Tancredo in 2005 formed the Iran Human Rights and Democracy Caucus.

“On April 6, 2005 the caucus convened a briefing on Capitol Hill organized by the Iran Policy Committee, the most prominent policy institute dedicated to advancing a U.S. government-supported regime change strategy that relies on the MEK as the main instrument of a violent revolution. At that briefing, Tancredo called for the Bush administration to remove MEK from the list of terrorist organizations. According to Tancredo, MEK was designated not because it was involved in terrorist activities, but because the Clinton administration sought to curry favor with the Iranian regime.

“Tancredo describes Maryam Rejavi as ‘very charismatic, she believes in women’s rights, she believes in democracy in Iran . I do support their efforts. I understand that the United States characterizes them as a terrorist organization, but what you have to understand is that they were identified as such only after the Clinton administration agreed to mollify the regime in Iran. They wanted to reach some kind of detente with Iran. Iran had only one demand, and that was that we put the Mujahedin-e Khalq on the terrorist list and so it was done for political reasons, not because they posed any threat to the United States.’

“On May 10, 2005 Tancredo organized another Capitol Hill briefing through the Iran Human Rights and Democracy Caucus that featured a variety of witnesses who spoke favorably of the MEK, including at least two U.S. military officials who had worked with the MEK in Iraq. On May 18, 2005 Tancredo took his support of MEK to the House floor when he asked that excerpts of the briefing be included in the congressional record. In his statement, Tancredo said that 65 political groups in Iraq had organized a petition signed by 2.8 million Iraqis that criticized Iran-sponsored ‘Islamic fundamentalism’s stealthy domination’ of Iraq and strongly supported the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran. Tancredo called the organization the ‘main Iranian opposition group.’ Describing the petition, Tancredo said its supporters demanded that ‘the PMOI should be recognized in Iraq as a “legitimate political movement”’-which is also one of the demands of the Iran Policy Committee.

“Tancredo and Filner, the co-chairs of the Iran caucus, offered their support to a pro-MEK rally in Washington on January 19, 2006. In a letter to the rally organizers, the Council for Democratic Change in Iran, the co-chairs of the House caucus, said, ‘We believe a possible alternative to the current government can be achieved through supporting the people of Iran and the Iranian resistance . We extend our solidarity to you and to the Iranian people and their defiance against tyranny.’

“The pro-MEK rally was endorsed by two U.S. Senators: Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), and by four individual congressional representatives: Christopher Shays (R-CT), Ed Towns (D-NY), Bob Filner (D-CA), and Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX).

“By publicly supporting the MEK and the Iran Policy Committee, Tancredo has positioned himself with the most radical wing in the intensifying debate about how the U.S. government should pursue an Iran ‘regime change’ strategy. All sides that favor such a strategy agree that the U.S. government should be working more closely with Iranian dissidents both inside and outside Iran.

“Tancredo continues to be an enthusiastic supporter of the U.S. war in Iraq. In a section on his official website on Iraq, Tancredo says: ‘The United States did not invade Iraq to conquer it, but rather to set it free. The United States does not stand to gain territory, oil, or any other spoils of war. We all should be proud of that sacrifice.’

“Concerning the war on terrorism, Tancredo states: ‘Ultimately, I believe that the leadership of President Bush and the determination of the American people will result in the needed investments in technology, people, and weapons systems to combat, deter, and respond to future acts of brutality and terror by our enemies.’”

Alfred E. Newman and Tom Tancredo: Which one is "Mad" Magazine’s Poster Boy

So much for a political party that rejects “neoconservatism and American interventionism” and nominates Tom Tancredo. You can consign the Constitution Party to the ashheap of history, along with an Israeli-infiltrated Tea Party movement. As I pointed out in my past essay, “Controlled Opposition: The Tea Party Turds and the House of Rothschild’s Coming War with Iran,” the ongoing demonization of Iran and ad hominem attacks on Islam, are always accompanied by a complete ignorance of the history of the relationship between the Jewish Lobby and Israel on the one hand, and their malignant influence on America on the other. When the Tea Party’s well-publicized Nashville conference featured Neo-Conservative after Neo-Conservative, leading up to the grand finale of Sarah Palin’s gracing of the stage, I suggested the following:

“Try this one on for size. What would have transpired in Nashville if someone with access to podium as a scheduled speaker had said something on the order of the following?

“‘Ladies and gentlemen, why is the domestic and foreign policy of the modern American conservative movement and the Republican party being defined by a view of Biblical prophecy unheard of until the 19th century, and largely promoted worldwide by the House of Rothschild’s distribution of the Scofield Reference Bible through its Oxford University Press? Why are we in an alliance with a nation that has repeatedly committed crimes against the United States, including the Lavon Affair, Mossad involvement in the Kennedy assassination, the premeditated attack on the USS Liberty in June of 1967, the Pollard spy case, participation with Communist China in the theft of American nuclear secrets at Los Alamos through the PROMIS affair, and the more recent Ben Ami Kadish and AIPAC/Rosen/Weissman spy cases?

“‘Why are we in an alliance as American conservatives with a domestic Jewish lobby which has militantly supported and financed the radical feminist, abortion, and homosexual lobbies most of us are sworn to oppose?

” ‘Why are we, as a pro-life movement, committed to policies of genocide against the Palestinians and the advocacy of the mass murder of Iranians, at the behest of an “ally’’which is the chief nuclear, biological, and chemical military power in the Middle East, and a non-signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) signed, however, by Iran?

“‘And why, pray tell, are people here today in Nashville, talking about recovering American domestic liberty, in the context of ongoing obeisance to the chief players in a central banking cabal which has handed to us the direct federal income tax, the Federal Reserve Board, $13 trillion in national debt, and every globalist trade treaty that has destroyed American sovereignty and the manufacturing sector of our economy? Is Bernard Madoff going to show up next year as a Tea Party keynote speaker?

“‘And are Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, William Kristol, Mary Parker Lewis, Alan Keyes, Lou and Phillip Sheldon, Connie Hair, Judson Phillips, Mark Skoda, and Andrew Breitbart concerned that Israeli intelligence is promoting agitation-propaganda through the Rupert Murdoch News Corp chain designed to begin a Third World War?

“‘Frankly, ladies and gentlemen, there is only one word to describe these activities on the part of those who claim to speak for America, its Constitution, and its people, but who have been bought off by what I have just described. That word is treason.’

” Nashville clearly would have exploded. It should have. And the longer America First patriots delay the exposure of the Trojan Horse within the gates that should have transpired in Tennessee, the greater likelihood of the destruction of the Republic at the hands of the House of Rothschild, and the envelopment of the planet in the flames of a Third World War, courtesy of the Neo-Conservative dream of a ‘Clash of Civilizations.’“

To the list of agents of the House of Rothschild, you may add the name of Tom Tancredo.

And for the real history of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq and its affiliates, real American conservatives and patriots are invited to listen to my past broadcast with Dr. Paul Sheldon Foote on the subject. Dr. Foote is a Ron Paul Republican, ex-U. S. Army veteran in Vietnam , and past denizen of the American Embassy in Tehran decades ago. He is presently a professor at Cal State Fullerton. When accessing the interview on the Habilian Association web site in Iran, peruse the rest of the site, along with the web page of the Nejat Society.

You’ll learn what Tom Tancredo isn’t telling you. And who he’s working for. And who continues to deceive you.

And why they hate us. It isn’t because of our “freedoms.”

Mark Glenn is returning from sabbatical leave to resume his radio shows with me on The Ugly Truth. We will be talking about the Israeli-sponsored infiltration of the American Right, and the MEK, in future shows. Stay tuned real soon.

July 29, 2010 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts