"We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." President George W. Bush September 20, 2001 Address to Joint Session of Congress "… MEK hold fundraising events, where like-minded individuals are invited to contribute funds ultimately meant for terrorist activities." Assistant Secretary Juan C. Zarate, Terrorist Financing, Department of the Treasury February 1, 2005 Harper’s Bazaar/International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition Summit ——————————————————————————– Who are the Mojahedin and what are they up to? Following the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 13224. This order ostensibly blocked the assets of terrorist organizations and individuals associated with terrorism. The Mojahedin-e Khalq Organziation (aka MKO, MEK, National Council of Resistance of Iran, NCRI, People’s Mojahedin of Iran, PMOI, et al.) is one such listed terrorist organization. Several years before, however, Congress passed the 1996 Antiterrorism Act which directed the State Department to draw up a list of foreign terrorist organizations. Such a list was produced by then Secretary Albright in 1997 and has been updated each two years or as required (1999 info). Additional information on the terrorist list is found in The "FTO" List and Congress. It is a common assertion of the MKO that they were listed during the Clinton administration as a "gesture" to Iran. As evidence of this, an article in the 09 October 1997 issue of the L.A. Times is cited which paraphrases an un-named Clinton administration official as stating that the listing was intended as a goodwill gesture. Whether or not there were persons in the Clinton Administration who held this view, it was made clear to me in my conversations with the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the State Department that no such political considerations were made in drawing up the list. The fact is that the MKO were included in the very first list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations under the 1996 Antiterrorism Act and this determination was consistent with prior assessments by the State Department that the MKO was an organization involved in terrorism and this view was expressed even during the first Bush Administration. Indeed, in its decision on docket No. 01-1465 the United States Court of Appeals found: …. Petitioner argues that there is not adequate record support for the Secretary’s determination that it is a foreign terrorist organization under the statute. However, on this element, even the unclassified record taken alone is quite adequate to support the Secretary’s determination. Indeed, as to this element-that is, that the organization engages in terrorist activities-the People’s Mojahedin has effectively admitted not only the adequacy of the unclassified record, but the truth of the allegation. Perhaps surprisingly, however, the MKO has some supporters in Congress and this is evidently the result of a long lobbying effort. The effect of this lobbying effort is primarily seen in the repeated claims that some large number of members of Congress have signed on to some statement endorsing the MKO. The statements never have been published in the Congressional Record and the identities of the alleged co-signers are closely guarded by the handful of sponsors that are apparently well paid for their efforts (as you will see). The investment of the MKO has not always been well-placed, however. Two of their champions and targets of much money were Congressman (and then Senator) Robert Torricelli and Congressman James Traficant, both of whom were driven from office over corruption and influence peddling charges. Traficant was convicted and sent to prison. Gary Ackerman has also been the recipient of substantial contributions but these seem to have dried up since he told the Village Voice, in response to questions about his support of the MKO, "I don’t give a shit if they are undemocratic"… "OK, so the [MKO] is a terrorist organization". For some introductory information on the MKO and their friends in Congress, it is suggested that you read the following articles: "A Very, Very Bad Bunch" Don’t Confuse This Group with Freedom Fighters Iran "terrorist" group finds support on Hill Rep. Ros-Lehtinen defends Iranian group labeled terrorist front for Saddam Hussein U.S. bombs Mujahedin; backers hide Terrorists plan D.C. fundraiser Richard Perle Supports Terrorism. He spoke at a terrorist fundraiser In The Money: Congressman James Traficant And His Campaign Contributors Opponents Hit Torricelli On National Security ——————————————————————————– Data on political contributions In an effort to discover some of the MKO lobbying activity in the U.S. I have compiled some data from public sources and posted it here. The Federal Election Commission keeps records of donations made to political candidates and to political committees. There are a number of sites that provide search tools and resources to research this information on line. Two suggested sources are: FEC Campaign Finance Reports and Data Campaign Contribution Search at Newsmeat An Excel File of Political Contributions can be viewed (if you have Excel) by clicking on the highlighted link. This file contains data arranged in tabs according to year in which the contributions were made. Readers are cautioned that the list is almost certainly incomplete and inclusion of a contribution does not necessarily imply a link to the MKO. The file includes data that was collected according to one or more of the following criteria: 1) the contribution was made to a candidate who has promoted the MKO/NCRI or attended their conferences or other events. 2) the contribution appeared to be part of a concerted contribution to a candidate or committee, i.e. one of several contributions made on the same day or same time period, often of the same magnitude and to the same target. 3) the contribution was made by someone known to be associated with the MKO. Where there is an asterisk placed after the name of a contributor in the Excel file, this indicates a known association with the MKO/NCRI and specific information of such affiliations can be reviewed in the list of reference data. ——————————————————————————– OK, so what does this mean? Well, let’s look at one example and see how the facts tie together. On one day this year (May 11, 2004) the Ros-Lehtinen for Congress committee (Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is a Representive from the 18th Congressional District in Florida) reported contributions totalling $8,500 from 9 residents of California: Mr. Ali Kashani 1367 Camino Robles Way San Jose, California 95120 Shahid-Chamran University $500 Mr.[sic] Shahnaz Kiani 1077 Gray Fox Circle Pleasanton, California 94566 Valley Care Med. $1,000 Mr. Behnam Mirabdal * 1920 Francisco Street 301 Berkeley, California 94709 Copy Express $500 Mr. Ahmad Moeinimanesh * 3327 Parkgate Court Richmond, California 94806 Fujitsu $2,000 Ms Marzieh Nikouei 1012 Cornhill Way Folson, California 95630 Capitol Bowl $500 Mr. Farideh Sedighi * 721 San Luis Road Berkeley, California 94707 Cisco Systems $2,000 Mr. Ensieh Yazdanpanah * 4831 Meadowbrook Drive El Sobrante, California 94803 Albany School District $500 Ms Moigan Fahima * 1935 Marin Avenue Berkeley, California 94707 Self-Employed $1,000 Mr. Parvis Ghaffaripour 13765 Heritage Creek Court Saratoga, California 95070 Maxim Integrated $500 OK, well enough. It is possible that Ileana Ros-Lehtinen came to California to raise money for her campaign. It is possible that all these people just happened to want to donate to her campaign in a different state, all on the same day. There may be other explanations. It just seems odd. So let’s look at things more closely. According to the FEC records, Mr. Mirabdal is affiliated with Copy Express. There is a Copy Express at 1164 Solano Avenue in Albany, CA. This business not only sells copying services and greeting cards but also rents post boxes. In this store was found a stack of business cards printed: Copy Express Mojgan Fahima 1164 Solano Ave. Albany, CA 94706 T:510-524-0235 / F:510-524-2590 So now we have established a business relationship between two of the contributors in the list. What else? Well, with the help of some additional information we realize that two of the post boxes rented at that store are being used as registration addresses for web sites used by the MKO: WWW.IRANNTV.COM Registrant: Linear Communications Nasrin Saifi 1164 Solano Ave. #120 Albanay, CA 94706 US Phone: 510-528-0605 Fax..: 510-528-0605 Email: nasrins@earthlink.net www.iran-solidarity.org Registrant: Azimi, Hamid 1164 Solano Ave, No. 117 Albany, CA 94706 US Administrative Contact: Azimi, Hamid hamid@azimi.net 1164 Solano Ave, No. 117 Albany, CA 94706 US 510-528-0605 fax: 510-751-5332 WWW.IRANNTV.COM is the web site of MKO television, Sima-yeh Azadi, and the registrant of that site, Nasrin Saifi, is found to have been a contributor in coordinated donations in past years to pro-MKO candidates Robert Torricelli and Gary Ackerman. WWW.IRAN-SOLIDARITY.ORG is the web site that was used by the MKO to announce their fundraiser in Washington DC earlier this year (see introductory articles). Hamid Azimi was registrant for other MKO web sites including www.iran-e-azad.org and used his contact information in one of the registrations of the site www.mojahedin.org. Now we have established a business relationship between four persons, two in the above list, two with clear MKO links and one a prior contributor. But there is more. The names of two more persons in the above contributor list, Farideh Sedighi and Ensieh Yazdanpanah, appeared on a MKO letter to Jacques Chirac in response to the arrest of the MKO leader, Maryam Rajavi, in France. And one must truly wonder what a person listing their affiliation as "Shahid-Chamran University" (Ali Kashani) is doing making political contributions in the U.S. Recent Events On October 14 2004 a web site was registered with the domain CFDIRAN.COM. A check of the registration shows an address which matches that reported on the receipt for Mr. Ensieh Yazdanpanah’s donation to Ileana Ros-Lehtinen as noted above: Registrant: cfdiran.com 4831 meadowbrook Richmond CA 94803 US The purpose of this web site seems to have been to announce the protest event which took place in Washington DC on 19 November 2004. The Washington Post reports that the event was organized by "the Council for Freedom and Democracy in Iran and the Global Coalition Against Fundamentalism". This "group", the Council for Freedom and Democracy in Iran, had hitherto been unknown and seems to have been created solely for the purpose of obfuscation and to give the appearance of broad support for the MKO. Its creation just prior to an important MKO event is similar to the sudden appearance of the site WWW.IRAN-SOLIDARITY.ORG weeks before the MKO fundraiser in January of this year. Looking into the other reported organizer, Global Coalition Against Fundamentalism, shows that it has a web site, too: WWW.GCAF-USA.ORG Registrant: Shirin Nariman 1409 Beulah Rd Vienna, VA 22182 Phone:+1.7038562565 FAX:+1.7038562565 shirin-nariman@yahoo.com The registrant, Shirin Nariman, is reported to have been an organizer also of the fundraiser. But she denies any link to the MKO , said that there were no MKO members at the event but admitted that there might have been "supporters" there. Interestingly, in other circumstances, defending the MKO, she proudly proclaimed that she had been an MKO supporter for over 24 years. Some of those who witnessed the 19 November event had interesting comments not reported in the media and it was observed that the protest was unusually orchestrated and appeared to have participants flown in from overseas. This may well be, the Washington Times reported 30 November 2004 that a delegation of Iraqis came to Washington for the event and to press for the removal of the MKO from the terrorist list. But we should not forget that in making its case for going to war in Iraq the White House put the MKO at the head of its list of terrorist groups receiving support from Saddam Hussein in violation of UNSCR 687, viz.: Iraq shelters terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians. [NOTE (20 Jan 2005): According to a Homeland Security report obtained by Cryptome the Secret Service reported an Iranian from Germany suspiciously videotaping near the White House on 18 November 2004. The man claimed to be in Washington DC for the demonstration. Also, it was reported that on 19 November 2004, 25 Mujahedin e-Khalq linked persons were denied entry at the Alexandria Bay Port of Entry from Canada. The 25 were planning to attend the rally.] The group isn’t quite so benign in its operations in the U.S. since the 1970s, though. While the focus of the organization is no longer generally against American targets since their falling out with Khomeini, the fanaticism of the MKO remains and this from time to time comes through in extreme acts such as the self-immolations in Europe in 2003 (example reference articles 1 and 2 ). The last major act of violence committed by the MKO in the U.S. known to this author was the seizure and hostage taking at the Iranian mission to the United Nations in New York in April 1992 (reported in the New York Times, 06 April 1992). This was part of a concerted terrorist operation on a global scale. In its report on the threat of terrorism to Canada, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service writes: On 5 April, 1992, the Iranian Air Force conducted a bombing raid on an MEK base in Iraq. Hours later, forty MEK supporters wielding sticks, crowbars and mallets attacked the Iranian embassy in Ottawa, wounding several people. Near-simultaneous attacks were carried out on Iranian Embassies in thirteen other countries around the world More Coincidences The web site of the Council for Freedom and Democracy in Iran, which one reporter stated was "Virginia based", lists a mailing address at: Council for Freedom and Democracy in Iran (CFDI) 5765-F Burk Center Pkwy #360 Burk, VA 22015 which is evidently a typo, as there is, rather, a Burke, VA and a 5765-F Burke Center Pkwy. The address is that of a mailbox facility and not a business office. Several names in the FEC database immediately come to attention in reviewing those from the 22015 Zip code. One is Shirin Nariman, the organizer of the January 2004 fundraiser. Another is that of Hossein Panah. In 1996 Hossein Panah made a contribution to Ed Towns, listing his address as "6338 Draco St., Burke, VA 22015". Interestingly, Shirin Nariman also used this address once in an on-line posting. And last but not least, it appears that Bob Filner, who spoke at the 19 November event, was the recipient of an infusion of donations just weeks before, from an interesting group of Californians all residing outside his district: 10/25/2004 Alavi, Parvinalsadat 12468 Whispering Tree Ln Poway, CA 92064 American Int. University/Accountant $400 FILNER, BOB (D) 10/25/2004 Kohani, Kambiz D.D.S. 7920 Grado Al Tupelo Carlsbad, CA 92009 Costa Verde Dentistry & Ortho $300 FILNER, BOB (D) 10/25/2004 Mokhtari, Parvaneh 15 Malibu Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Home Couture Design Group/Interior $600 FILNER, BOB (D) 10/25/2004 Parsay, Farhad * P.O. Box 92603 Long Beach, CA 90809 Solar Turbines/Engineer $300 FILNER, BOB (D) 10/25/2004 Taheri, Massood 13488 Turlock Court San Diego, CA 92129 Banyan Associates/Business Owner $1,000 FILNER, BOB (D) 10/25/2004 Tasooji, Matthew 851 Cocos Drive San Marcos, CA 92078 Nokia Inc./Senior System Engineer $500 FILNER, BOB (D) Several of these names (Farhad Parsay, Massood Taheri and Matthew Tasooji) repeat throughout the FEC records. Farhad Parsay’s name was on the 2003 MKO letter to Jacques Chirac. Bob Filner received another infusion of cash (at least $4,750 according to FEC records) from additional persons outside his district a month prior to his appearance at a 14 April 2005 rally of the MEK in Washington DC. The first in the following list of contributors, Somayeh Yazdanpanah, used an address identical to that of the CFDIRAN.COM registrant: 3/4/2005 Somayeh Yazdanpanah * 4831 Meadowbrook Drive El Sobrante, California 94803-2051 Albany Unified School Distri $1,000 FILNER, BOB (D) 3/4/2005 Yousef J. Shenasi 3328 E Clay Avenue Fresno, California 93702-1017 Department of Transportation $1,000 FILNER, BOB (D) 3/4/2005 Shahin Toutounchi 1077 Gray Fox Circle Pleasanton, California 94566-6969 Xilinx $1,000 FILNER, BOB (D) 3/4/2005 Nader Moavenian 3949 Acapulco Drive Campbell, California 95008-3821 E2 Open $750 FILNER, BOB (D) 3/4/2005 Fatohllah Dastmalchi 1098 Bevinger Drive El Dorado Hills, California 95762-7669 Department of Transportation $1,000 FILNER, BOB (D) Please note that the address of Shahin Toutounchi is the same used by Shahnaz Kiani in her May 2004 contribution to Ros-Lehtinen documented above. Likewise, James Talent was the recipient of $8,500 before his billing as a celeb at the MEK convention: 12/1/04 SADEGHPOUR, MAJID 500 Kendall Street CAMBRIDGE, MA 02142 GENZYME $1,000 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 SAJADI, SAEID * P.O. Box 3668 KANSAS CITY, KS 66103 PHYSICIAN $2,000 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 TALEBIZADEH, ZOHREH 2401 Gilham Road KANSAS CITY, MO 64108 CHILDRENS MERCY $1,000 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 SHAHRIARY, AZAM 1535 Hummingbird Hill ELLISVILLE, MO 63011 BIOTECH BIOLOGICAL $1,000 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 ARDAVANI, RAHIM 700 NW 5th St BLUE SPRINGS, MO 64014 RAIL AUTOMATION $1,000 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 ATTARAN, ALIREZA 1535 Hummingbird Hill Lane ELLISVILLE, MO 63011 UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI $500 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 KHATAMI, SHAHAB 705 Falls Landing Ct ALPHARETTA, GA 30022 STRUCTURAL DESIGN INC$500 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 NEJAT, KASRA * 903 Cleta Drive MANCHESTER, MO 63021 ST JOHNS MERCY $1,000 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO 12/5/04 NEJAT, KASRA * 903 Cleta Drive MANCHESTER, MO 63021 ST JOHNS MERCY $500 TALENT, JAMES MATTHES (R) Senate – MO According to the Washington Post, "about 300" staged the MEK convention at DAR Constitution Hall on 14 April 2005, while one of the MEK’s news outlets, Iran Focus, inflated the attendance to "thousands". Although coming on the heels of a rally last November, the press release announcing this event described it as a "first-ever convention". Not to lose out on a winning slogan, the MEK held another "first-ever convention" in Brussels less than 2 weeks later according to the MEK’s Iran Focus. ——————————————————————————– The Foreign Agents The U.S. Department of Justice list four persons under the Foreign Agents Registration Act as registered foreign agents of the National Council of Resistance of Iran: Filabi, Mahin Jafarzadeh, Alireza Mostowfi, Hedayatollah Samsami, Soona Of this group, Mahin Filabi and Hedayatollah (aka "Hedayat") Mostowfi have recorded political contributions with the FEC. Recently, Mr. Mostowfi is shown to have made donations to the FED Political Action Committee on 8/20/2004 and on the same day (7/20/2004) with Mr. Mehdi Ghaemi, donations were made to the Republican Party of Virginia. He lists his address and affiliation as: 2721 South Adams St. #203 Arlington, Virginia 22206 CSRI/Executive Director The CSRI is the "Committee in Support of Referendum in Iran" ( www.referendum-iran.org ) whose board lists Hedayat Mostowfi as Executive Director. All the other names on the list will be recognizable from the FEC files cited above (Mr. Sharifi’s name appears under a number of permutations, most often as "Nassersharifi"): Board of Directors: Masoud Dolati, PE CSRI President and Director of Media Relations dolati@referendum-iran.org Mansour Panah, MD CSRI Vice President panah@referendum-iran.org Ali Parsa, Ph.D CSRI Secretary and Director of Research and Policy Analysis parsa@referendum-iran.org Homayoun Sharifi CSRI Treasurer and Director of Public Relations sharifi@referendum-iran.org Hedayat Mostowfi Executive Director mostowfi@referendum-iran.org The domain registry for the website of this group shows that it was created 26-Nov-2003. At about this same time several other persons who have served as officials or spokespersons of the MKO/NCRI set up web sites and/or corporations with an assortment of names. For example, the "National Coalition of Pro-Democracy Advocates" (http://ncpda.com/) was domain registered 06-oct-2003 by Haydar Akbari. Nasser Rashidi is identified as the group’s Executive Director. Nasser Rashidi has registered an additional web site on Aug 18 2003, http://www.prusa.us/, for a corporation offering lobbying services and giving an address in Virginia. However, no such corporation appears in searching the Virginia State Corporation Commission records: PR-USA Inc. 850 N. Randolph St. Suite 103-A150 Arlington, VA 22203 Tel: 202 487-6989 Fax: 202 318-8331 The web site domain registry, however, lists a different address and it is exactly the same address as used by Hedayat Mostowfi in the FEC records of his donations this year: 2721 S. Adams St Apt 203 Arlington, VA 22206 1.2024876989 nasser_rashidi2003@yahoo.com And then there is the case of Ali Safavi, who was known to have been outside the country in the middle of last year. He is cited as the NCRI London spokesman in a CNN interview aired June 17, 2003. Prior to that he had served in various other locations including Paris, Dubai and Baghdad according to news reports in which he is quoted. Although U.S. law bars entry of non-citizen members of terrorist organizations, barring the possibility of a failure by Homeland Security, Mr. Safavi must have entered the U.S. some time toward the end of 2003 with a U.S. passport. We know this because the Virginia State Corporation Commission records that he established on 11/05/03 a corporation: Near East Policy Research Inc. (NEPR Inc.) 4625 SOUTHLAND AVE APT 302 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22312 [Note: one report states that Ali Safavi has political assylum in the United States. He also travelled to London again in Dec. 2004 to speak on behalf of the Mojahedin.] Similarly, Alireza Jafarzadeh, who we will remember from the list of NCRI foreign agents above, set up a corporation with web site (http://www.spconsulting.us/) giving an address: Strategic Policy Consulting, Inc. 1101 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20004 Tel: 202-756-2288 Fax: 202-318-8382 The Virginia state records list the corporation as being effective 10/07/2003 and with the following address information: 2101 CRYSTAL OLAZA ARCADE #164 ARLINGTON, VA 22202 4600 This is probably a typo, however, as there IS a 2101 CRYSTAL PLAZA ARCADE in Arlington, VA. Actually, it is the address of a mailbox rental firm; Plaza Mailboxes ( phone: 703-415-0400 ). Searching the address "2101 Crystal Plaza Arcade, Arlington, VA" turns up dozens of different organizations. Similarly for "1101 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Suite 600". Presumably that also is a mailbox rental facility. Mr. Mohamad Alafchi is a prominent contributor in the FEC records. On 6/28/2004 it is recorded that he made a $1000 contribution to the Committee to Re-elect Ed Towns. Mr. Alafchi is cited on the ncpda.com web site as the President of American Iranian Association- New York. This organization, along with others which you will recognize, cosponsored a Conference at UN Plaza, December 17, 2003. The list of sponsors included: sponsors: Honorable Congressman Ed Towns (D-New York) Association of Iranian-American in New York (AIA-NY) The National Coalition of Pro-Democracy Advocates (NCPDA) The Public Relations USA, Inc. (PRUSA) Near East Policy Research, Inc, (NEPR) If one did not know better, it might appear that this had been a broadly organized event! Soona Samsami, who has long served as a spokeswoman of the Mojahedin’s NCRI and was appointed in 1998 as their U.S. Representative, is now identified as "President" of the Women’s Freedom Forum (http://www.womenfreedomforum.org/) and makes appearances as their "Spokeswoman". Another spokeswoman of the Women’s Freedom Forum, Zolal Habibi, participated in the 19 November 2004 rally (link is to CFDI site that includes Washington Times coverage) in Washington DC. The National Coalition of Pro-Democracy Advocates, Women’s Freedom Forum and Women’s Forum Against Fundamentalism in Iran all share common U.S. hosts and Australian Registrars for their web sites: National Coalition of Pro-Democracy Advocates Domain Name: NCPDA.COM Creation Date: 06-oct-2003 IP Address: 66.218.79.170 (Yahoo!) IP Location: US(UNITED STATES)-CALIFORNIA-SUNNYVALE Current Registrar: MELBOURNE IT, LTD. D/B/A INTERNET NAMES WORLDWIDE Women’s Freedom Forum Domain Name: WOMENFREEDOMFORUM.ORG Created On:23-Mar-2004 IP Address: 66.218.79.157 (Yahoo!) IP Location: US(UNITED STATES)-CALIFORNIA-SUNNYVALE Sponsoring Registrar: Melbourne IT, Ltd. dba Internet Names Worldwide Women’s Forum Against Fundamentalism in Iran (Radio Voice of Women) Domain Name:WFAFI.ORG Created On:26-May-2004 IP Address: 66.218.79.164 (Yahoo!) IP Location: US(UNITED STATES)-CALIFORNIA-SUNNYVALE Sponsoring Registrar:Melbourne IT, Ltd. dba Internet Names Worldwide There are certainly more manifestations that I have failed to list.
After months of political struggle on Iran’s nuclear issue, the US took advantage of the Israeli war on Lebanon to pass a resolution against Iran in the UN Security Council; The Council that, under the pressure of the US, has so far failed to even condemn the crimes of the Israelis.
The US’s history, of course, is full of such unrighteous approaches. It is always looking for the approval of Capitulation in different countries, refuses to all Iraqi government to try US soldiers, and ….it also uses all diplomatic means to support Israel’s crimes.
Apart from the weaknesses and legal defections in the resolution, one can say that the approval of this resolution was aimed at diverting attentions from Israel crimes; even US ambassador to UN, John Bolton said in the UN that Iran’s nuclear issue was more important than the crisis in Lebanon!
However, the interesting point is that Maryam Rajavi, representing Massoud Rajavi’s treacherous gang, rushed to welcome this anti-Iran resolution to prove her faithfulness to Americans (whom she hopes will support her after Saddam Hussein).
The main purpose of Maryam Rajavi, of course, is to boost the morale of restricted MKO members who have been waiting for this resolution for years.
While those who passed this resolution admit that sanctions will have no political impact on Iran, MKO leaders try to introduce it as an important issue that will save the group. But the gang of Rajavi will face more severe problems from now on, since the hopes they gave their members were tied to the referral of Iran’s case to UN Security Council and a resolution against Iran.
However, now that a resolution has been passed against Iran, MKO leaders have to use more energy to keep the members and make them hopeful about the next stage. In fact, the members who have been locked in Iraq for more than 18 years have lost most of their capabilities so that the major problems for the group are: efforts of the forces to leave the group and efforts of the group to keep and control them.
Predicting future’s events depends on several factors, but it’s hard to say that diplomatic solutions will be excluded from Iran’s agenda.
On the other hand, even if we expect a process for Iran like those of North Korea or Iraq, Rajavi’s gang should still think about keeping its low morale members in Ashraf for the next 10 years, the time that will never be given to this group by the Iraqi government.
Irandidban – 2006/08/03
Bijan Nyabati, a left member of NCRI, MKO’s political branch, in a recent jeremiad in Persian lamented the Qana village tragedy of thirty seven innocent Lebanese women and children killed under the Israeli heavy shelling. In fact, deliberately or unknowingly, he swam against MKO’s policy taken towards Israel. Long trying to win the support of the Israeli lobbyist in the US Congress, MKO have shown enough prudence not to disappoint the US and Israeli advocates.
Compelled to react against the Israeli bloodshed in Lebanon, more because peoples like Nyabati had poked their nose into something they shouldn’t have, Mojahedin took a moderate position in condemning the Israeli bloodshed never mentioning the Israel itself. Have a look at its statement for instance:
The Iranian Resistance condemns the killing of innocent people in Lebanon and expresses its condolences to the people of Lebanon and in particular to the families of those who have lost their loved ones.
Enraged by Nyabati’s act of overstepping the organization’s red line, Hooshang Behdad, penning in Mojahedin-run andesheh.com, denounced Nyabati’s condemning Israel for what it has not been responsible. Indirectly, Mojahedin warn Nyabati not to get too emotional when he has to remain unconcerned. Putting the blame of the human tragedy in Lebanon on all but the Israel itself, in a part of his criticism addressed to Nyabati, Behdad stated:
Demonstrating a leftist stance, taking an anti-imperialism position, condemning Israel, and thoroughly forgetting the warmongering, terrorist sponsor regime [Iran] is absolutely inexcusable… What other outcomes could one have expected when such an army [Israel] is provoked and Israel is threatened to be wiped out, its military and non-military zones are rocketed, and its soldiers are abducted?
Mojahedin have learned their dictated lessons well. The Bush Administration had earlier announced that Israel had the right to defend itself. The Israeli Ambassador to the UN had also castigated the Hizbollah forces and the sponsoring countries for the killings and rejected to accept any responsibility.
mojahedin.ws – 03/08/2006
In the third celebration of June 17, day of arresting Maryam Azdanloo the third wife of Rajavi and the leader of Mujahedeen terrorist sect, who absconded three years ago, some of the statesmen such as DOOMINIK LOOFER, JAN PIER BEKEH, JIL PAROUEL, PIER BERSI, ROONEH DOFOUR and…. have been gathered in a conference to protect the sect of Mujahedeen, which has been in the black list of terrorist more than 10 years. Furthermore, the unreal protections of 300000 people of France citizens have been added.
The question is that why the government paid no attention to common views of France citizens? Is the meaning of freedom to advocate from terrorism?
Perhaps the advocators of Mujahedeen sect are not aware about the history of the sect. It’s enough to know that the sect ordered to its members to burn themselves for the arresting of Maryam Rajavi by the government.
Or they can look at the views of Maryam and Massoud Rajavi about the American and European statesmen. These statesmen are considered as gull and stupid persons who can be utilized as instruments.
Here, are some of the site addresses which can be helpful to get important information about the black records of Mujahedeen. Please take a glance:
1- http://www.nejatngo.com
2- http://www.irane-ayandeh.com/
3-http://www.iran-interlink.org
4-http://www.irandidban.com/
5-http://www.theblackfile.com/
6-http://www.roshana.net
7-http://www.mojahedin.ws/?cl=pe
8-http://www.negahe-no.net
9-http://www.pars-iran.com/
The blackfile – 24June,2006
The issue of MKO’s presence in Iraq could be viewed from three different levels: 1. In an official level, disarming the MKO, detaining its members, and signing agreement with each and every one of Camp Ashraf residents (under the name of Geneva Convention) are of measures taken by the US to counter the pressures of Iraqi government to expel the group from Iraq; by such efforts, the US tries to convince the Iraqi government to agree with the temporary stay of the group in the country so that the final fate of the group could be determined. Although the Americans tried to prove their good will by paving the way for defecting members to get back to Iran by the Red Cross and also allowed the UNHCR to interview the members in the camp, Iraqi authorities are still opposing the presence of this group in Iraq. However, Iraqi officials prefer to solve their problems with Americans (including problems related to the MKO) through legal channels; they have repeatedly stressed that the presence of occupiers in Iraq has influenced diplomatic and legal issues of Iraq and that this is not what they want. 2. What is obvious (and is backed by the evidences presented during past 3 years) is that extremist warmongers and Zionist lobby in the US prevent the MKO’s dissolution and want it to be used. This request has failed due to the opposition of large part of US administration, the State Department in particular. So the "protected status", which means nothing except confusion and limbo for the MKO and suspension of warmongers’ plans, is related to the differences inside the US government. 3. But the main hand behind the issue is "CIA". By detaining Massoud Rajavi and declaring conditions for his freedom, CIA is trying to control the MKO and advance its own goals, which are mostly different from those of Pentagon and the State Department. For instance, it instructs the MKO to establish ties to Sunni tribes in Iraq in order to stay in that country. It appears that the MKO is told that by such move is influential in its efforts for staying in Iraq, but the truth lies beneath: by keeping them in Iraq, CIA advances its own intelligence purposes and at the same time increases the price of the group for possible deals with Iran. Also, to control the political atmosphere inside the US, CIA directs the propagandistic activities of the MKO in order to convince those politicians opposing the group that the MKO has been useful in Iraq. This can be proved with a brief look at MKO’s expensive ad in New York Times. On the other hand, this agency doesn’t allow the removal of the group’s name from terror list and prevents the warmongers and Zionist lobby from using this group because it’s fully aware of the failure of such plan due to the unpopularity of MKO inside Iran, group’s military weaknesses, and its bad record in military cooperation with Saddam Hussein. It’s amazing that when discussing the issue of supporting pro-democracy groups in Iran, CIA always introduces the MKO as an undemocratic group with cult-like structure. Creating such a balance allows the agency to advance its own goals and plans by the obedient members of the MKO.
Irandidban – 2006/06/26
– According to reports, AIPAC " American Israeli Public Affairs Committee’’, the
strongest lobbying group in Congress, has a great weight among neo conservatives who are seeking the option of regime change in Iran. Also, the neocon senators and representatives including Ilenea Ros-Lehtinen, Bob Filner … support the regime change in Iran sponsoring Mujahedin-Khalq as a viable alternative for clerical regime of Iran. In an interview with Masud BaniSadr, a former member of MEK, on May 19th 2006, ‘’Dissident and defection: An Iranian confession" Mahan Abedin the Middle East analyst at Asia Times asked about the likely relation between AIPAC and MEK: Dissent and defection: An Iranian confession By Mahan Abedin, 19 May 2006 (source: Asia Times) …Mahan Abedin: Explain the dynamics in the MEK-Israel lobby relationship. Masud Banisadr: If there is an anti-Iran petition on the table in the Congress, the two lobbies would work hand-in-hand to promote it, without necessarily communicating directly. MA: Are the two lobbies organizationally linked? MB: To give you an example, we knew which members of Congress were influenced by AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee], so when we needed signatures we’d go to these congressmen first. AIPAC has a lot of weight in Congress, and without having to communicate with them directly, we benefited enormously from their deep influence. We also copied their lobbying techniques. Consequently the Mujahideen’s lobby in the US is organizationally strong but it lacks the two core elements I outlined earlier, namely numbers and money. They have a tiny constituency among Iranian-Americans, and even with the addition of imaginary names and addresses they cannot deliver votes or similar political advantages to congressmen. It also lacks an independent financial base. Much of its funding came from the former Iraqi regime. MA: Your claim that there were no direct contacts between the MEK and the pro-Israel lobby is undermined by the organization’s intensive and very direct cooperation with the "Iran Policy Committee", which seems to be a spin off of AIPAC. There are also regular media reports alluding to direct MEK-Israel ties. MB: I would not be surprised if these links existed. As I said earlier, the MEK 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 Mujahideen, because of its close relationship with the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization], is not fully trusted by the Israelis. On the other hand, from an Israeli perspective, the MEK is the only viable tool against Iran. Monarchists are deeply divided and lack organization. However, Western and Israeli intelligence are well aware of the MEK’s limitations. They are perfectly aware of the cult nature of the organization and know that it has – at most – around 5,000 members and active sympathizers (most of whom are stranded in the Ashraf camp in Iraq) and are in no position to seriously threaten the Iranian government. This factor – coupled with the organization’s cult-like and totalitarian ideology – dissuades the US State Department from working with them. To put it simply, the Americans do not trust Mujahideen-e-Khalq, for they know they have no principles, save the interests of the cult. This is why, despite all the efforts of the organization in the past quarter-century, they 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 Mujahideen as a terrorist organization and does not want to create another al-Qaeda… – As Professor Juan Cole at Antiwar Website explains in his article titled " AIPAC’s Overt and Covert Ops", he brings into question the key role of Israel to lead US policy toward Iran fomenting a second war against Iran: AIPAC’s Overt and Covert Ops
August 30, 2004
by Juan Cole Antiwar.com
..The neoconservatives have some sort of shadowy relationship with the Mujahadeen-e Khalq Organization, or MEK. 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. MEK is a terrorist organization by any definition of the term, having blown up innocent people in the course of its struggle against the Khomeini government. (MEK is a cult-like mixture of Marx and Islam). The MEK had allied with Saddam, who gave them bases in Iraq from which to hit Iran. When the U.S. overthrew Saddam, it raised the question of what to do with the MEK. The pro-Likud faction in the Pentagon wanted to go on developing their relationship with the MEK and using it against Tehran. So it transpires that the Iranians were willing to give up 5 key al-Qaeda operatives, whom they had captured, in return for MEK members. Franklin, Rhode and Ledeen conspired with Ghorbanifar and SISMI to stop that trade. It would have led to better U.S.-Iran relations, which they wanted to forestall, and it would have damaged their protégés, the MEK. Since high al-Qaeda operatives like Saif al-Adil and possibly even Saad bin Laden might know about future operations, or the whereabouts of bin Laden, for Franklin and Rhode to stop the trade grossly endangered the United States. The FBI has evidence that Franklin passed a draft presidential directive on Iran to AIPAC, which then passed it to the Israelis. The FBI is construing these actions as espionage or something close to it. But that is like getting Al Capone on tax evasion. Franklin was not giving the directive to AIPAC in order to provide them with information. He was almost certainly seeking feedback from them on elements of it. He was asking, "Do you like this? Should it be changed in any way?" And, he might also have been prepping AIPAC for the lobbying campaign scheduled for early in 2005, when Congress will have to be convinced to authorize military action, or at least covert special operations, against Iran. AIPAC probably passed the directive over to Israel for the same reason – not to inform, but to seek input. That is, AIPAC and Israel were helping write U.S. policy toward Iran, just as they had played a key role in fomenting the Iraq war… – The spying role of Americans for Israel, was sought in an article published at UPI written by Richard Sale. His documented research presents the focus of FBI on a meeting in Paris, attended by Rhode (a member of Near East/ Sauth asia Office)Larry Franklin ( US air force reserve colone ),Gerechet ( a former CIA Operative) with the MEK: DOD spy’s arrest imminent By Richard Sale UPI Intelligence Correspondent …Stephen Green, author of two books on U.S.-Israeli relations and former CIA counter-terrorism chief, alleges that in March 1983 Feith was fired from the National Security Council by Judge William Clark after Feith was discovered to be the object of an FBI probe alleging that he had passed classified information to Israel. Former CIA counter-terrorism chief Vince Cannistraro confirmed to UPI the firing of Feith in the 1980s. Feith did not return repeated phone calls. According to a federal law enforcement official, other Pentagon officials of initial interest included Bill Luti, a former Navy captain who ran the day-to-day office operations of OSP, and Harold Rhode, a prominent member of the Near East/South Asia office, a sister office of OSP. According to sources who have been briefed on the case, the focus of the FBI probe finally settled on a meeting in Rome in December 2001, attended by Rhode and Franklin who met with an Iranian, Mansur Ghorbanifar, the notorious Iranian middleman in Oliver North’s 1980s scheme to craft an arms-for-hostages deal, later named Iran Contra. The head of Italy’s military intelligence also attended, according to these sources. At that meeting, Ghorbanifar offered to put the Bush administration in touch with "elements in Tehran who could mount a coup with U.S. help," one source close to the case said. The meeting was brokered by Michael Ledeen, a major figure in the Iran-Contra scandal of the mid-1980s, according to a source with close knowledge of the case. The meeting allegedly took place with the knowledge of the White House, but White House officials denied that they had known Ghorbanifar was to be there, according to a recent Los Angeles Times account. Other sources briefed on the case, however, said another meeting occurred in Paris in June 2002 when Rhode "accidentally" bumped into Ghorbanifar, a meeting attended by Franklin, Rhode and Ruel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA operative, now a scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, and an assistant to Richard Perle, a former senior Defense Department official during the Reagan administration. Sources close to the case also said that the meeting "was prearranged" and involved representatives of the Mujahedin al-Kahlq, an Iranian group of exiles, to discuss assistance to the MEK for the purpose of destabilizing the current government of Iran. "According to a congressional investigative memo, these meetings were arranged by Gerecht and Ledeen. Ledeen denies this. "The only meeting I knew about was the December meeting," he said. "I don’t know about the others, if they in fact existed."
Ledeen denounced the Franklin case as "total bullshit and lies."
Gerecht did not return phone calls. One source with close knowledge of the case said that the Franklin-Rhode- Gerecht meetings with the MEK, which is on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations was "served to undermine (Secretary of State) Colin Powell’s effort to sustain dialogue with moderate elements within the Iranian government." The MEK is still listed on the State Department’s list of terrorist groups because they have killed American officials, according to a State Department official. When questioned by congressional investigators, Luti "and other senior Defense officials denied that there was any serious consideration of using the MEK terrorists to destabilize the Iran regime," according to a source briefed on the case… – While Raymond Tanter, one of the cheer leaders of supporting MEK who has founded IPC (Iran Policy Committee ) works closely with AIPAC, seeking the removal of MEK’s terrorist label, Kenneth Timmerman,the executive director of the foundation for Democracy in Iran, asks How MEK a terrorist designated organization can operate in the US so freely: Iran Freedom and Regime Change Politics
ALARAB ONLINE
By Tom Barry*
…The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is the most prominent lobbying group pressing for congressional approval of the Iran Freedom Support Act. After the House’s approval of the bill, AIPAC told its members and supporters: “Please thank your Representative for voting for the bill and urge your Senators to co-sponsor S.333.” On its website, AIPAC lists the 58 senators who have already agreed to support the companion bill when it comes to the Senate. The Senate bill counts on such Democrats as Barbara Boxer, Maria Cantwell, Dianne Feinstein, and Barbara Mikulski as well as such conservative Democrats as Joe Lieberman and Mary Landrieu. While AIPAC is the most powerful group advocating a tougher U.S. policy toward Iran, numerous other pressure groups calling for regime change in Iran have emerged over the past several years. One of the earliest, the Coalition for Democracy in Iran (CDI), formed in late 2002, ceased functioning in mid-2005. Operating out of the office of Morris Amitay, the former director of AIPAC, CDI worked closely with AIPAC to encourage Congress to pass resolutions condemning Iran. The CDI principals continue their efforts to promote regime change in Iran through other organizations, including the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Committee on the Present Danger, and the American Enterprise Institute. Raymond Tanter, one of the original members of the Coalition for Democracy in Iran, founded the Iran Policy Committee (IPC) in January 2005. Tanter, who was a senior staff member of the National Security Council during the Reagan administration, is also associated with several other right-wing policy organizations, including the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Middle East Institute, and the Committee on the Present Danger. Since its founding the Iran Policy Committee has sponsored conferences and policy briefings on the Hill, and has also published four policy papers—a common theme being that the U.S. government should declassify the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) as an international terrorist organization and recognize it as being the “indisputably largest and most organized Iranian opposition group.” According to Kenneth Timmerman, executive director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq) is shifting its militant rhetoric and is now claiming to be a nonviolent, pro-democracy group. The MEK, which is characterized as a terrorist group, operates a political front organization called the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which is sponsoring conferences in Paris and Washington during the last week of May on regime change in Iran. The Paris conference, according to Timmerman, is being organized by the London-based Gulf Intelligence Monitor. Timmerman reports that the “five American participants—Ray Tanter, Maj. Gen. (ret.) Paul Vallely, Lt. Gen. (ret.) Thomas McInerney, Navy Capt. (ret) Chuck Nash, and Lt. Col. (ret). Bill Cowan—are all members of the Iran Policy Committe e, an organization set up by Tanter and by former CIA officer Clare Lopez in early 2005.” According to Timmerman, “The group has published a number of ‘white papers’—all of which have one thing in common: they urge the Bush administration to take the MEK and its various front organizations off the State Department list of international terrorist organizations.” Timmerman asks where the MEK is getting the money to finance the conferences and why the FBI is allowing an international terrorist organization to operate openly in the United States. Clare Lopez, the executive director of the Iran Policy Committee, is, like Tanter, a resident scholar at the Middle East Institute. Another leading member of IPC is Bruce McColm, who is the president of the Institute for Democratic Strategies and the former president of the International Republican Institute. Most of the other principals of IPC are retired military officers. The U.S. government has committed at least $75 million for projects that directly or indirectly support a regime change strategy in Iran. Over the last couple of years, several million dollars in U.S. democracy assistance aid for Iran has been distributed to an array of organizations, including Freedom House, a neocon led organization in Washington. New funding would also be channeled to Iranian dissidents, mostly expatriates, although groups like IPC would like to see the MEK, which has bases in Iraq, benefit from U.S. “democracy building” funding…
Download MKO and AIPAC Relations
Download MKO and AIPAC Relations
Mojahedin Khalq Organization
Michael Massing, in his detailed study of the Israel Lobby network in the US published in NYREV, refers to Mearsheimer and Walt arguing the case. The network is constituted of many affiliated parts whose fellows back whoever opposes Iranian ruling power. He argues that Washington Institute for Near East Policy, AIPAC, has a stranglehold on the US Congress and helps to decide who Israel’s friends are according to AIPAC’s criteria and liable to receive its support. MKO has proved to be worthy of receiving supports as we regularly meet AIPAC associates that talk and pen in support of it. In a the last parts of the study we read:
One key part of the network is the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. AIPAC helped to create this think tank in 1985, with Martin Indyk, AIPAC’s research director, becoming its first director. Today, the Washington Institute is fully independent of AIPAC, and there is some diversity among its fellows (Dennis Ross is one). Overall, though, its policies mirror AIPAC’s. Its executive director, Robert Satloff, is a neoconservative with very hawkish views on the Middle East. Its deputy director of research, Patrick Clawson, has been a leading proponent of regime change in Iran and of a US confrontation with Tehran over its nuclear program. (AIPAC features him as an expert on its Web site.) Raymond Tanter, an adjunct scholar at the institute, has been championing the MEK, or People’s Mujaheddin, a shadowy group of Iranian guerrillas who want to overthrow the government in Tehran (and whom the State Department regards as terrorists). Members of the Washington Institute’s board of advisers include Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, James Woolsey, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Mort Zuckerman, and Max Kampelman; its single most important source of funding is Larry Weinberg, one of AIPAC’s Gang of Four, and his wife Barbi.
nybooks
The Iranian ‘Left’ in Exile: Collaborators with US Imperialism A glance at websites and newspapers of many Iranian "left" groups residing outside the country, gives one little impression that Iran’s neighboring country, Iraq, is in a state of war and occupation by the US Empire.
There seems to be little concern among Iran’s traditional left about the United States’ intentions to take over and control Middle East’s oil resources.
The neoconservative "Project for the New American Century (PNAC)" signifies little (if anything) to many of Iran’s left groups.
Some, even, under the pretext of fighting fundamentalist Islamists, indirectly cheer the American incursion into Afghanistan and Iraq. In reality, however, Iraq is a mirror reflecting the many flaws and shortcomings of the left in the Middle East.
Some in the Iranian left might be evasive on the issue of their silence about the US imperialism’s crimes in the region, but the Iraqi left’s direct collaboration with the Bush administration is undeniable.
As part of the Iraqi Governing Council, the Iraqi Communist Party (with the exception of the breakaway faction) and the Kurdish forces headed by Jalal Talebani and Masoud Barezani, collaborated with the US occupation forces.
Not just in the arrest, torture, and murder of thousands of Iraqi insurgents, but also in the process of building a neo-liberal state that will sell out the future of Iraqis (Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites alike) to the capitalist institutions, such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and such transnational corporations as Halliburton, Bechtel, etc.
In their impotent (if not incompetent) quest against Saddam’s regime, they have ended up collaborating with a colonial power to topple a secular government, only to replace it with a fundamentalist, theocratic regime in a landscape leaning towards civil war. Do they really think they will have any following among the people of Iraq when the present puppet government is gone?
The same unfortunate parallels can be drawn with respect to the Iranian left.
Instead of questioning their tactics and strategy as a result of which the Mullahs, not the left were able to take power after the fall of the Shah’s dictatorship, at a moment of ultimate debility, the Western-cultured leftists seem to be waiting for the overthrow of Iran’s Islamic Republic regime in the hands of the US imperialism without the slightest concern over (or understanding of) what will pursue in the aftermath.
Before disputing any of the above assertions, these intellectuals would have to explain their disregard, silence, or cheerleading for a number of issues, some of which are listed below:
1) The US imperialism has frozen (in essence stolen) and is holding millions of dollars of funds belonging to the Iranian people. Why has the left remained silent all these years on this issue?
2) At a time when global sources of fuel and energy are becoming more and more scarce and critical, why are these groups remaining silent or collaborating with colonial powers (propaganda-wise) in their attempts to deny the Iranian people their right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes?
3) Why all the silence with respect to the crimes of the US imperialism in Iraq?
4) Why are they being silent about the fact that their "Mecca for democracy" is about to impose yet another "Islamic Republic" government in the Middle East region (not counting Saudi Arabia and all the other puppet dictatorships) while they are cheering the downfall of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein?
5) How can they claim to be in opposition with the regime of the Islamic Republic when they remain silent to the crimes of another religious state, Israel, that has enslaved the Palestinian population and denies non-Jews (and not just the Muslims) the right to own land in many parts of that country, to marry Jews and to enjoy status equal to Jewish citizens?
Instead of working towards grass roots organizing, most left groups have preferred to take on the role of the "truth-telling Messiah,"
They fill their newspapers and websites with general talk, obvious, trivial, and often impertinent facts, and trite slogans, thus further isolating themselves from the masses of the Iranian people and their circumstances.
Likewise, in place of dealing with the issue of social justice as a whole, which today, unequivocally includes the struggle against neo-liberalism at its heart, many groups focus on and attempt to build around the slogan of "democracy" or "secular republic" in its most nebulous form.
Which yet again exposes their lack of understanding of today’s globalized economy and the role of the United States and international finance capital.
With such tactics, not only will the Iranian left make no headway in its efforts (as has been the case so far), but in the end, its feeble activities will only end up benefiting the US imperialism.
On this issue of collaboration with the United States, we should especially mention and condemn organizations funded and supported by the US Intelligence:
The Organization of People’s Mojahedin Khalq that has mutated into a mercenary force at the service of anti-Iranian propaganda, the various Monarchist factions who, from their websites and twenty-or-so CIA-financed TV Satellite channels (out of Los Angeles, California) spew poison and lies against the Iranian people, and the reactionary leadership of Hezbe Komoniste Kargari (Workers Communist Party) and its offshoot, the Hekmatists.
Iranian American Community (IACUS) – January8,2006
WASHINGTON -– Dozens of self-avowed supporters of an Iranian group on the State Department’s list of international terrorist organizations met Thursday in a public building in Washington, D.C., to call on the Bush administration to legalize the activities of their group.
The Mujahedin-e Khalq, also known as the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran, was first blacklisted by the State Department in June 1994. Various front organizations, including the National Council of the Iranian Resistance, were added to the U.S. blacklist in 1997.
While the blacklisting has prohibited the group from openly lobbying Congress, a variety of like-minded organizations have championed its cause, claiming to have no operational ties to the banned terrorist group.
“We sympathize with them,”one of the organizers of Thursday’s event told NewsMax, when asked why people attending the rally had been given banners with photographs of MEK leaders Massoud and Maryam Rajavi.
He said the event had been organized and paid for by”Iranian-American organizations,”but would not name any specific group.
The MEK and its front groups have distributed letters in Congress in support of its cause that have garnered as many as 226 signatures from members of the House of Representatives. Many congressmen who signed later said they had no idea they were supporting a terrorist group. Story Continues Below
The MEK calls itself the Iranian”resistance,”but other organized Iranian opposition groups in the United States and inside Iran consider them traitors, because the MEK allied with Saddam Hussein during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.
Called”Islamic-Marxists”by the former shah, today even the Marxist Organization of the People’s Fedaii Guerillas of Iran (OPFGI) has rejected the group.
But some U.S. military officers who processed MEK members after their training camp in Iraq was seized during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 believe the United States could use the MEK to lead an armed uprising against the Tehran regime.
Thursday’s pro-MEK rally was sparsely attended compared to similar events in the past. Elaborately staged to ressemble a U.S. presidential nominating convention in an elegant hall at 1301 Constitution Ave., barely 100 people attended the event.
Participants were given noisemakers and other props to make the event appear like a mass rally. Professional video crews were posted around the large ballroom and sent live footage to a satellite truck outside, which beamed it to Florida and then to Europe, technicians said.
Organizers said the only member of Congress who addressed the rally was Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas. An officer from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Protective Services said he had been assigned to assist the private security detail hired by the organizers.
When asked why the U.S. government was allowing sympathizers of a group on the State Department’s terrorist list to gather in a government-owned building — the Andrew Mellon auditorium -– he said the decision had been made by his superiors.”I’m here to ensure that people can express their First Amendment rights without threat or restriction,”he said.
Also addressing the group was proferssor Raymond Tanter, who chairs the Iran Policy Committee, a private group in Washington that is lobbying Congress and the Bush administration to remove the MEK and its front groups from the terrorist list.
Tanter had just returned from Paris, where he and other members of the Iran Policy Committee had been invited to address a similar event sponsored by pro-MEK groups. IPC does not disclose its source of funding, but invites donations over the Internet.
While the MEK today opposes the clerical regime in Tehran, it took part in the 1979 revolution against the Shah. In a 1994 report to Congress, the State Department explained that it had designated the group as a terrorist organization because it had taken part in the 1979 taking of the U.S. embassy in Tehran and had murdered Americans working in Iran under the shah.
newsmax
‘Alternative World Cup’ playing with Mojahedin as the football
Group tied to terror seeks U.S. inroads — Anti-Tehran exiles have some support despite hostile past
Washington — AS TENSIONS between the U.S. and Iran continue to mount, an Iranian exile group viewed here as a terrorist organization is lobbying to play a greater role in the struggle against Tehran. And it is winning some support in Congress.
The Mojahedin-e Khalq, or People’s Mojahedin of Iran, was formally listed as a terrorist group by the State Department because of its attacks on American military personnel and Iranian officials. It fiercely opposed the Shah and his supporters during the 1970s and allied with former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in his 1980-88 war against Iran.
But today, the MEK and its supporters say the organization should be supported by the Bush administration as part of a broader effort to promote regime change in Tehran. They say the group has developed among the most-sophisticated intelligence operations covering Iran’s leadership and nuclear operations, and it has networks inside Iran that can spread propaganda on democracy and on the need to remove the Islamic regime. The MEK also has 4,000 fighters that can target Iran from Iraq, though they have been demobilized by U.S. military commanders and held in a kind of house arrest.
As the White House deploys $85 million this year to promote pro-democracy groups in Iran, the MEK says it can support this campaign without receiving a penny. "We seek neither money nor weapons from the U.S. We just want our legitimate right to resist tyranny in our country," says Mohammad Mohaddessin, a Paris-based member of the MEK who serves as foreign-affairs chairman of its affiliated organization, the National Council of Resistance of Iran. "Let the Iranian people deal with the mullahs."
[Note: Mohaddessin is currently awaiting trial in France on terrorism charges.]
Mr. Mohaddessin and other MEK leaders say they want the U.S. to remove their organization from the terrorism list so that they can more easily raise money and support globally. They also want their fighters released in Iraq.
For more than a decade, the MEK has been employed as a political football in the diplomatic games played between Washington and Tehran, say current and former U.S. officials. The Clinton administration placed the MEK on the State Department’s terrorism list in 1997, as Washington sought to appeal to moderate leaders inside the theocratic government in Tehran. A blacklisting of the MEK was among the actions the Iranians sought in exchange for better relations, these officials say.
The State Department’s 2006 terrorism report says the MEK has been launching attacks on Western and Iranian targets since the 1970s. In the last years of the Shah’s rule, elements of the MEK assassinated U.S. security advisers and military contractors, and assisted in the takeover of the American Embassy in Tehran. It subsequently turned on Iran’s new theocratic government due to ideological differences and launched bombing campaigns against senior Iranian officials.
Under pressure inside Iran, MEK fighters shifted their base to Iraq, conducting operations from there against Iran’s Islamic government throughout the 1980s and ’90s. Most of their activities were concentrated on Iranian military installations and commanders. But the U.S. also accuses the MEK of conducting terrorist strikes outside of the Middle East, including simultaneous attacks in 1992 on Iranian embassies and installations in 13 countries.
Some U.S. diplomats say that to delist the MEK now would make Washington appear inconsistent on terrorism and could further incite Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. They also believe Iran’s leadership could use U.S. support of the MEK to further strengthen Mr. Ahmadinejad’s position, due to what is perceived as widespread antipathy toward the MEK inside Iran. "It could be incredibly provocative in Iran’s eyes," a U.S. official said.
In 2003, the Bush administration also placed the National Council of Resistance of Iran on the terrorist list, as U.S. military planners sought assistance from Iran in stabilizing post-Saddam Iraq. Among the issues the Iranians and Americans discussed that year, said officials involved in the talks, was a plan to swap MEK members it was detaining in Iraq for al Qaeda leaders hiding inside Iran. But the talks ultimately bogged down, as American commanders grew increasingly convinced that Tehran was working to destabilize Iraq.
"Iran wanted the MEK first" before they would hand over al Qaeda leaders, says Michael Rubin, an Iran specialist who served in the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans during the first Bush term. "We made it clear to Iran, that if al Qaeda planned an attack, they’d be held responsible."
The MEK, however, has used the Iraq invasion to try to build bridges to the Bush administration. U.S. officials say the MEK has largely cooperated with U.S. military commanders in agreeing to disarm their troops based in Camp Ashraf, which sits about 100 kilometers north of Baghdad. The fighters are being held as protected combatants under a United Nations charter, though some groups in Iraq have sought to try the MEK for atrocities it allegedly committed in league with Mr. Hussein.
Leaders of the MEK and National Council of Resistance, meanwhile, have aggressively moved to highlight the threats posed by Iran’s nuclear programs. In a string of news conferences tracing back more than a decade, first the MEK and then the resistance council have accused Tehran of flouting its international treaty obligations by clandestinely seeking to produce nuclear-weapons fuel.
In an August 2002 news conference, council leaders in Washington specifically charged Iran with running a stable of centrifuges to enrich uranium in the central Iranian city of Natanz. International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors would confirm the accusations a few months later. U.S. officials, including President George W. Bush, have cited the role played by Iranian exile groups in exposing Iran’s nuclear programs.
Still, the MEK remains a deeply divisive issue inside Washington. In 2002, 150 members of Congress signed a letter seeking the MEK’s removal from the terrorism list. Lawmakers also have quizzed the State Department on the MEK’s status in recent weeks, after it was again named to the U.S. list of global terrorist organizations.
"It’s the only group on the terrorist list that’s been more helpful to the U.S. and more harmful to our enemies," said Rep. Brad Sherman (D., California), who is among those representatives questioning the MEK’s designation. "It played a very important role in telling us what happened in Natanz. We should be clear on what we expect of them to get off the list."
Despite this support in Congress, however, many current and former U.S. officials say the Bush administration should stay clear of any dealings with the MEK. They describe the group as operating like a cult under the control of its founder, Massoud Rajavi, and his France-based wife, Maryam. They say the two have very little support in Iran and face deep hostility from the populations of Iran and Iraq, due to the MEK’s alleged complicity in Mr. Hussein’s atrocities.
"An enemy of my enemy is not my friend" in this case, said Mr. Rubin, the former Pentagon official. "From a policy standpoint, the problem with the war on terrorism is the propensity for moral relativism. But we shouldn’t accept certain terrorists and not others."
By Jay Solomon – The Wall Street Journal Europe – 22 May 2006