≡ Menu

State Department Officially Removes MEK from Terror List

Hillary Clinton has just completed one of the great shams of her tenure as secretary of state by delisting the MEK as a U.S.-designated terror group.  Here is part of the official statement of infamy:

The Secretary’s decision today took into account the MEK’s public renunciation of violence, the absence of confirmed acts of terrorism by the MEK for more than a decade, and their cooperation in the peaceful closure of Camp Ashraf, their historic paramilitary base.

This statement deliberately ignores credible evidence offered by many journalists and analysts including a high level confidential Israeli source here that the MEK has engaged in the assassination of Iranian scientists and other acts of violence and sabotage within Iran.  It ignores in particular Seymour Hersh’s expose of U.S. special forces training of MEK agents in communications and weapons use at a secret Nevada site that lasted until at least 2007.  This entire episode is a total shandeh.

In fact, writing in no less a “leftist” publication than Commentary, Michael Rubin had this to say about Israel’s cynical use of the MEK to do its dirty work in Iran:

“By utilizing the MEK—a group which Iranians view in the same way Americans see John Walker Lindh, the American convicted of aiding the Taliban—the Israelis risk winning some short-term gain at the tremendous expense of rallying Iranians around the regime’s flag. A far better strategy would be to facilitate regime change. Not only would the MEK be incapable of that mission, but involving them even cursorily would set the goal back years.”

CNN also carried this quote from an administration official which gave the lie to the State Department claims above:

“While they present themselves as a legitimate democratic group worthy of support, there is universal belief in the administration that they are a cult” one official said. “A de-listing is a sign of support or amnesia on our part as to what they have done and it does not mean we have suddenly changed our mind about their current behavior. We don’t forget who they were and we don’t think they are now who they claim to be, which is alternative to the current regime.”

However, this quote from the same official indicates he’s seriously deluded about the true nature of the group and it’s ability or interest in maintaining any commitments it makes:

If they think the notion of de-listing means they can run wild, that isn’t true. If they want to leave Iraq, they have to behave,” the official said.

In other words, their promises aren’t worth the paper they may or may not be written on.

In fact, since we’ve removed a real terror group from the list I submit we should add another to it to take its place: the Obama administration.  Its counter terror policies as documented by articles on secret kill lists and targeted killings of teenage U.S. citizens in the NY Times indicate we should nominate ourselves to take the MEK’s place.

Right Web has just published this masterful profile of the group.

Bufferfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail
youtubeyoutube

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • lifelong September 29, 2012, 5:05 AM

    The USGOV and the MEK do have two things in common: they will literally get into bed with anyone, and as a result both have zero credibility.

    The Iranians see and know this about the MEK, but the American population still has a ways to go to accept it about their government.

  • Tibor September 29, 2012, 5:35 AM

    Putting it back into proportions: there is obviously a limitless determination in the US to bring about a regime change in Iran, for an array of reasons – deemed strategically important to the US, and anything that helps in that regard becomes automatically Kosher. Be it cyber-war, eliminating nuclear scientists, strangling the economy, oil import ban, taking out Syria from the Iran axis, anything – the priorities have been lucidly set here. So it is not about the MEK or a new attitude to terror, as postulated here, but rather that this group was simply lucky enough to find itself on the right side of the equation (and thus has been Koshered too).

  • David September 29, 2012, 6:21 AM

    There is an Obama who talks about offering his hand in peace to Iran. Then there’s the one who is fighting a covert war with computer viruses and now-recategorized terrorists. Since actions speak louder than words, the *real* Obama is not that different from the posturing Republican candidate.

    • Tibor September 29, 2012, 8:47 AM

      With all fairness to Obama – there is a time factor involved here. Four years ago he was indeed elected on that promise – making a contrast between himself and Bush who saw no benefit in talking to the Iranian regime (having figured out what they really are and what they are really after). But that was then and after few years and several failed attempts Obama has drawn his conclusions and now acts accordingly.

      • Castellio September 29, 2012, 2:38 PM

        There were, in fact, no failed attempts. There was a successful attempt and Iran agreed to what the US requested in a deal brokered by Brazil and Turkey. Then Obama reneged. You could try to get the history right.

      • lifelong September 30, 2012, 6:23 AM

        “having figured out what they really are and what they are really after”.

        Please share that with us, particularly ‘what they really are’.

        • Richard Silverstein September 30, 2012, 1:11 PM

          Reminds me of Freud’s “what do women want” misogynist comment.

  • Yonatan September 29, 2012, 7:16 AM

    Dozens of prominent US politicos involved, speaking fees of $20-25,000 for 20 minutes, private flights, hire of PR firms and so on – where does the money come from? Bush’s $400 million black budget to destabilize Iran? Elsewhere?

  • Bob Mann September 29, 2012, 11:53 AM

    And not a word about the Iranian Green Movement.

    Isn’t Mousavi still under house arrest?

    • PersianAdvocate September 29, 2012, 9:34 PM

      As a leader of the Iranian grassroots movement that Israel had an indisputable and thorough hand in hijacking, and on behalf of Iranians worldwide, I declare your conflation of an IRANIAN (domestic) struggle, which is none of your business, with Iran’s full and legal right to enrichment. All Iranians today have witnessed unabashed and unrestrained Iranophobia come from the same people who are now busy kissing our asses over our personal rights. And indeed, you can continue kissing our asses while you continue your Support for the possession of the most dangerous rogue nuclear program in the world In Israel and try to deny Iran an honest and legal right with Zionist noise.

      Besides, shouldn’t you be banqueting a Palestinian baby instead of weakly trolling this blog entry after entry trying to sabotage it with nonsense and redirection? If we wanted Liked talking points we’d consult Microsoft Clipart Gallery for an illustrative bomb design.

      • PersianAdvocate September 29, 2012, 9:37 PM

        Banqueting would be nice but autocorrect changed it from bayoneting…

      • Bob Mann September 30, 2012, 2:31 AM

        Huh?

        I’m just saying it’s odd that so many in the US (including prominent Democrats) are giving positive attention and supportive words to the MEK while ignoring Mousavi and the Iranian Green Movement.

      • Tibor September 30, 2012, 4:36 AM

        What`s wrong with you man? You see ghosts everywhere. Israel is trying to hijack the Green revolution? It is behind every plot against Iran? You seem to be totally consumed with hate and paranoia.

        • lifelong September 30, 2012, 6:35 AM

          How can you call it ‘hate and paranoia’ when every soundbyte coming out of Israel is about Iran?

          • Tibor September 30, 2012, 9:09 AM

            Why is Israel very much concerned about Iran? It is not for no reason. Here is a partial selection of statements, just from the recent weeks, emanating from Iran:
            Supreme leader Ayatalloh Khamenei: Israel is cancer in the region; President Ahmedinajad: Israel existence is an insult to all Humanity; Republican-guard chief Jafari: Israel will be destroyed; Parliament speaker Lariani: Tel-Aviv will burn

          • Richard Silverstein September 30, 2012, 11:45 PM

            You offer a few word summary without any links, quotations, etc. You’ll have to forgive us if we’re supremely skeptical. And for every nasty comment from an Iranian leader about Israel I’ll match and raise you one from an Israeli leader. Proving what precisely? That we should lock both sets of leaders in a room with 2 nukes & let ‘em destroy each other?

          • Tibor October 1, 2012, 6:28 AM

            I don`t remember Israeli leaders reaching such extremity in their statements (by the way the validity of all my quotations can be checked instantly in the Google-era). But there is though one key point that is undisputable – all this was STARTED by this Iranian regime. There was no outstanding issue between the two countries that could be seen as a justification for the extreme hostile stance they took vis-à-vis Israel and the main reason seemed to be (apart from inherent fanaticism) their aspiration at the time to reach regional hegemony (for the promotion of which they identified championing anti-Israelism as a useful instrument in gaining popularity in the proverbial “Arab street”). It was a gamble, which indeed worked for a while, but it now backfires (and threatens the future of the very framework of the “Islamic Republic” in Iran).

          • PersianAdvocate October 2, 2012, 8:27 AM

            Rhetoric is inferior to action. NEOZionist meddling is viewed as causing even the capitulation of Mossadegh by the Iranian street nowadays. Perception is superior to the reality (whatever that may be).

          • Castellio October 2, 2012, 1:07 PM

            Tibor, who are you writing for? No one is that clueless…

        • Richard Silverstein September 30, 2012, 4:42 PM

          Of course Israel will try to hijack the Green movement or any other angle it can work including the MEK, Jundallah and other dissident groups.

          • Bob Mann September 30, 2012, 7:52 PM

            For what purpose? Why would Israel want to hijack those movements? Not sure I understand how that would serve their interests.

          • Richard Silverstein September 30, 2012, 11:43 PM

            It wants to use them to sow internal division in Iran & foment regime change. It indeed has used them by funding & training dissident groups & planning terror attacks with them.

        • PersianAdvocate October 2, 2012, 8:19 AM

          Read my post – I was IN IT. Were you? Nothing wrong with me – I simply have eyes, ears and a brain. Personal first hand experience. You?

  • lifelong September 30, 2012, 4:35 PM

    @Tibor: Partial selection of statements indeed. Don’t ever let their context get in the way of your point, you’re right.

    Perhaps though, you’d like to discuss how an Iranian feels to live under a constant threat of war by the US and Israel, which is illegal under international law, and against the UN charter itself. The Champion of Freedom alongside the Only Democracy in the Middle East slowly destroying the lives of 70’000’000 ordinary people.

    Makes for a much more intelligent conversation based on reality and facts, instead of the usual ‘they are crazy and want to kill us all, but only with a nuclear weapon because their chemical weapons stockpile is not bling enough’ fairy tales.

  • Joel September 30, 2012, 11:52 PM

    Maybe the cartoon was a bad idea, but people are still talking about the cartoon and the issue. Maybe not such a bad idea.

    • Richard Silverstein October 1, 2012, 1:14 AM

      No, they’re not “talking” about it, they’re laughing about it. There’s a difference. Not to mention that when they talk about what Bibi actually said they point out that he postponed for the Nth time the supposed date at which Iran will get a bomb. Meaning his formerly pitiful level of credibility fell even farther.

  • mary October 1, 2012, 4:11 PM

    Iran, for many reasons, enjoys only limited popularity on the “Arab Street.”

    Anti-Zionism is not at the top of every Arab’s priorities, although it should be, but Iran’s negativity against Israel is hardly an inspiration. I don’t think “inherent fanaticism” is a term you really want to use, either, unless you want to give people the wrong impression. Some of us think of Zionism as fanaticism, especially when it results in mass Palestinian casualties, so I guess fanaticism is all in the eye of the beholder.

    Antipathy between Israel and Iran actually goes back less than 20 years. This is interesting: http://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=124424
    “The Islamist government that took power in Iran in 1979 was deeply hostile to all things Western, Zionism not least among them. And yet, the requirements of Iranian national interest trumped ideology to force the Islamic government to cooperate with the hated Jewish state on a number of issues. Once the U.S.-supported Iraqi government invaded Iran, the Persian state turned to Israel for much-needed arms. Phantom fighter planes and weapons for the Iranian army were sent by Israel. One estimate puts Israel’s arms sales to Iran at $500 million annually.”

    • PersianAdvocate October 2, 2012, 8:24 AM

      Its funny you say that because whereas internally the Iranian government faces opposition, I have never met a Muslim outside of Iran who didn’t stop gushing about Iran’s last decade of being the vanguard against Imperialism (“the one who drew the line and took a stand). The old attitudes were that Arabs felt like Iranians were condescending towards them. Today, many Iranians complain of their DOMESTIC struggles only to hear their neighbors on the streets draw love stories about the Supreme Leader. Iran’s poise as to Palestinians is also viewed as a political strategy, but overall, it has placed Iran in a superior position in relation to the Arab League on the issue in the eyes of Arabs on the street.

      • mary October 2, 2012, 11:44 AM

        ‘ Iran’s poise as to Palestinians is also viewed as a political strategy, but overall, it has placed Iran in a superior position in relation to the Arab League on the issue in the eyes of Arabs on the street.’

        Just what has Iran done for the Palestinians?