ZOT!!! The Congressman Who Cried Wolf

Dunno, but I have a hard time with a couple of the listings. Any group going after the Iranian mullahs is not one I'd place on the same list as al-Qaeda. Nor would I put a group headed by a man who helped rip apart the infrastructure of Pablo Escobar's drug cartel on the crap list, particularly when it is operating AGAINST terrorist groups thta have killed American citizens (specifically, the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, also known as the AUC).

Someone wants to take a few potshots at the Iranian mullahs who sponsor terrorist groups, more power to `em. Maybe they'll get lucky and save us the time, money, effort, and hassle of regime change.

Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK or MKO)
a.k.a. The National Liberation Army of Iran (NLA, the militant wing of the MEK), the People's Mujahidin of Iran (PMOI), National Council of Resistance (NCR), Muslim Iranian Student's Society (front organization used to garner financial support)

Description
Formed in the 1960s by the college-educated children of Iranian merchants, the MEK sought to counter what it perceived as excessive Western influence in the Shah's regime. Following a philosophy that mixes Marxism and Islam, has developed into the largest and most active armed Iranian dissident group. Its history is studded with anti-Western activity, and, most recently, attacks on the interests of the clerical regime in Iran and abroad.

Activities
Worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorist violence. During the 1970s the MEK staged terrorist attacks inside Iran and killed several US military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran. Supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran. In April 1992 conducted attacks on Iranian embassies in 13 different countries, demonstrating the group's ability to mount large-scale operations overseas. The normal pace of anti-Iranian operations increased during the "Operation Great Bahman" in February 2000, when the group claimed it launched a dozen attacks against Iran. During the remainder of the year, the MEK regularly claimed that its members were involved in mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids on Iranian military, law enforcement units, and government buildings near the Iran-Iraq border. The MEK also claimed six mortar attacks on civilian government and military buildings in Tehran.

Strength
Several thousand fighters based in Iraq with an extensive overseas support structure. Most of the fighters are organized in the MEK's National Liberation Army (NLA).

Location/Area of Operation
In the 1980s the MEK's leaders were forced by Iranian security forces to flee to France. Most resettled in Iraq by 1987. In the mid-1980s the group did not mount terrorist operations in Iran at a level similar to its activities in the 1970s. In the 1990s, however, the MEK claimed credit for an increasing number of operations in Iran.

External Aid
Beyond support from Iraq, the MEK uses front organizations to solicit contributions from expatriate Iranian communities.

Ney is my Congressman, and I had never before heard of him trying to protect the Iranian theocratic regime.

IIRC, he supported an anti-Iranian insurgency group -- the MEK, I guess -- until he came to the conclusion that they were, well, a BAD insurgency group that the govt. lists as a terrorist org. If it's the same group that I'm thinking of, it has -- or had -- other supporters in Congress, including Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, but the pendulum has definitely swung from "debatably good insurgency" to "debatably? bad terrorist".

These guys are going after a state sponsor of terrorism? And we have them on the same list as Hezbollah and al-Qaeda?

State Department logic is a strange thing, is it not?

I shouldn't be surprised, given the crap treatment Carlos Castano got...

bump post 5.

These guys are going after a state sponsor of terrorism? And we have them on the same list as Hezbollah and al-Qaeda?

Looks like they're anti-Western terrorists attacking Iran. Perhaps they want Iran to be more radical?

Where was this published?

What does democracy in Iran have to do with the United States?

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake

Worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorist violence. During the 1970s the MEK staged terrorist attacks inside Iran and killed several US military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran. Supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran.

Yep. Those would be them.

Beyond support from Iraq, the MEK uses front organizations to solicit contributions from expatriate Iranian communities.

Now think real hard about the event you just attended and spoke so fondly about.

And for those who doubt if this is the same group, please see this website and this ad hosted on their website.

Now do a ping on that website to see what machine is hosting it. Notice it is 66.117.154.14.

Now check out the website of the political arm of Rajavi's group/MEK. And do a ping on it. Notice the IP is the same. And do the same for the Rajavi defense website, and it's ping. Same machine.

You can do a WHOIS lookup too, and will see they were all registered by the same person.

And again, for emphasis, what you posted:

Beyond support from Iraq, the MEK uses front organizations to solicit contributions from expatriate Iranian communities.

A GOOGLE search turned up the following:

Ambassador Cofer Black, Coordinator for Counterterrorism
Remarks at On-the-Record Briefing on the Release of the Annual Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002 report
Washington, DC
April 30, 2003...

.... QUESTION: What does the State Department think about the ceasefire that was signed between the MEK and the U.S., U.S. CENTCOM, in Iraq? Since this group is still on the terrorist list, as I understand it, Americans are not supposed to deal with them at all. And that's always been kind of a -- there is a problem in Washington, D.C., because they keep an office open here. So can you tell me how this squares with the MEK's terrorist status?

AMBASSADOR BLACK: Sure, I'll be happy to, happy to try. The Secretary has recommended that the President determine that the laws that apply to countries that support terrorism no longer apply to Iraq. The President's determination to provide greater flexibility in permitting certain types of trade with and assistance to Iraq; thus, we can treat Iraq like any other country not on the terrorist list.

I think it's important to underscore some facts here. MEK is designated by the U.S. Government as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. This organization mixes Islam and Marxism in their battle to establish what they claim would be a secular state in Iran.

Until the recent war in Iraq, they were allied with the government of Saddam Hussein and received most of their support from this regime. They have assisted the Hussein regime in suppressing opposition within Iraq, and performed internal security for the Iraqi regime. MEK, or as some recently referred to as the People's Mujahedin, has also attacked and killed Americans.

The MEK and its many aliases, including the political NCRI, are designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The United States Government does not negotiate with terrorists. MEK's opposition to the Iranian Government does not change the fact that they are a terrorist organization. We understand the agreement on the ground in the field is a prelude to the group's surrender. Commanders make tactical decisions to end conflict with enemy combatants successfully.

There's a lot of activity in various areas underway in Iraq -- of which this is one -- I would refer you to CENTCOM and their briefers to get better insight to the decision-making and the actions of our commanders, coalition commanders on the ground.

This is a pretty special group. They are a Foreign Terrorist Organization. They are not well liked in Iraq; they could not be put with the general prisoner population. They are following the orders of the coalition commanders, and their situation will be addressed in the coming days and weeks.

Bob Ney’s letter to The Hill

From Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio):
Recent statements by the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) through a paid full-page advertisement and a letter to the editor of The Hill contain outright lies, exaggerations and deceptions.

The MEK uses dozens of pseudonyms, such as the National Council of Resistance and the People’s Movement of Iran, to hide contributions and spread its propaganda. In fact, because of the MEK’s long association with and support for Saddam Hussein’s regime, the former Iraqi information minister may very well have been the one who taught the MEK his craft of making false statements in the face of incontrovertible facts.

That the MEK continues to peddle its lies should not be a surprise to those who are aware of the group. Both the Clinton and Bush administrations placed it on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations since the early 1990s. The MEK remains alongside groups such as al Qaeda and Hamas to this day.

Contrary to the MEK’s claims, and unfortunately ignored by the few members of Congress who still support them, the MEK’s headquarters, at least before the U.S. bombing of Iraq, was just 40 kilometers west of Baghdad.

In fact, the U.S. State Department notes Saddam Hussein himself paid for the headquarters. In addition, several news organizations have reported the MEK’s leader, Masud Rajavi, had been living in the home of Iraqi Gen. Ali-Hassan al-Majid, otherwise known as “Chemical Ali.” That residence recently met the same fate as two MEK bases in Iraq when coalition bombs destroyed them.

In the face of so much documented evidence, it is astonishing for the MEK and a few members of Congress to claim the support of 150 fellow representatives. There is only one reason that the MEK repeatedly refuses to disclose a current list of Congressional supporters: It does not exist.

At one point, it may have; in fact, when MEK representatives first visited my office several years ago, preaching democracy for Iran, I was glad to join them in what appeared to be their effort. However, I quickly discovered that the MEK are not the proponents of democracy they claim to be but are in fact documented terrorists with a history of killing American citizens and supporting Saddam Hussein. Today, no more than a handful of members supports the MEK, and even that number is dwindling.

Contrary to recent statements by the MEK, which to this day has never publicly repudiated Saddam Hussein, I say: I have never supported, and will never support, the current regime in Iran . I don’t support MEK either. There is no such thing as a good terrorist and there certainly is no such thing as our terrorist.

Source: http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/child%20pages/American%20Views.htm

Their attacks in the past killed Americans, but they seem to have shifted course. Hell, we're giving Qaddafi a second chance, and he did stuff that was far worse, IMO.

At one point, it may have; in fact, when MEK representatives first visited my office several years ago, preaching democracy for Iran, I was glad to join them in what appeared to be their effort. However, I quickly discovered that the MEK are not the proponents of democracy they claim to be

Damn I have a good memory!

These guys are going after a state sponsor of terrorism? And we have them on the same list as Hezbollah and al-Qaeda?

Gee, I can hardly understand why...

Worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorist violence. During the 1970s the MEK staged terrorist attacks inside Iran and killed several US military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran. Supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran.

Last I saw, we weren't having fundraisers for Qaddafi. And if the MEK has abandoned its leftist principles is certainly debateable, but without question they have every characteristic of a cult.

In the 1970s, they did. In the 1970s and 1980s, Muammar Qaddafi was providing terrorists safe haven, money, and support for attacks, inclduing the bombing of a Belrin disco intended to kill Americans.

They have apparently shifted course in the 1990s - and they could be useful if we wanted to launch some attacks on Iran with "plausible deniability" in the near future. If Qaddafi is redeemable, then this group arguably is as well.

Read my article on the Cult of Rajavi. If you still think, after reading it, that there is a chance that this group could somehow be redeemable, well, we're just going to have to disagree.

And if they still belong on the terror list or not, it doesn't change the fact that they are using humanitarian-sounding events as fundraisers for their cult. This should not be supported. It should be repudiated.

Can't always pick allies. Heck, some of the folks who were in Los Pepes, and who ripped apart the Medellin drug cartel's infrastructure weren't exactly angels, either.

The MEK could be useful. I'd at least hope someone in CIA or DIA is looking into options on that front.

It seems as if some discussions have occured based on that other thread.

This paragraph seems to say a lot, IMHO:
"After the negotiations with the Mujahedeen, it was reported that Odierno said he thought that the group's commitment to democracy in Iran meant its status as a terrorist organization should be reviewed. There are also Senate staff members, Pentagon officials and even some people in the State Department who have said that if all the Mujahedeen is doing is fighting the 'evil regime' in Iran, it quite likely that it will be removed from the State Department's terrorist list. 'There is a move afoot among Pentagon hard-liners,' one administration official said, 'to use them as an opposition in the future.' Recently Brownback submitted an Iran Democracy Act modeled on the Iraqi Liberation Act, which would set aside $50 million to help opposition groups overthrow the regime. The Mujahedeen, their U.S. supporters say, has provided the United States with key intelligence on Iran's nuclear program. One Congressional staff member working close to the issue said that there was a national security directive circulating 'that includes a proposal for limited surgical strikes against the Iranian regime's nuclear facilities. We would be remiss if we did not use the Mujahedeen to identify exactly what the Iranians have and in the longer term, to facilitate regime change.'"

If you want intelligence on what bad guys are up to, you often have to talk to other guys who might be not-so-bad as the bad guys. Mother Teresa's organization won't have info on who is a terrorist.