Skip to comments.US Openly Supports Iranian Terrorists MEK
Posted on 07/27/2005 1:40:09 PM PDT by F14 Pilot
The U.S. Government is now openly supporting the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, an Iranian resistance movement designated as terrorist organization by the US State Department. On June 20th of this year, the Mujahideen-e-Khalq held a conference at the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, which is where many foreign journalists stay and is under the full protection of the U.S. Army. I was in the area of the hotel that day, and saw at least 10 U.S. tanks heading in the direction of the hotel to provide additional security. I knew of the conference in advance, because of a report issued to all NGO's working in Iraq, which mentioned that the conference would take place. The report warned of an increased danger of attacks against the hotel, as anti- U.S. insurgents were likely to attempt to disrupt the conference .
The Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK) is a Marxist oriented Iranian resistance organization founded in the 1960's to topple the pro- western regime of Reza Shah. Since that time, MEK has carried out scores of attacks and assassinated a number of Iranian government officials. MEK killed several American military and civilian personnel in Iran during the 1970's, and assisted in the occupation of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979 where American civilians were held hostage. Though MEK participated in the 1979 revolution, which toppled the Shah, once the Ayatollah Khomeini consolidated power in Iran, MEK moved their headquarters to Paris and continued resistance activities against the Islamic Republic. In 1981, MEK bombed the offices of the Islamic Republic Party, killing 70 high-ranking Iranian officials. MEK established its military headquarters in Iraq in 1986, where Saddam Hussein became their main source of funding and protection. In return, the MEK fought alongside Iraqi forces during the war against Iran in the 1980's, and assisted Saddam's security forces in putting down the Kurdish and Shiite revolts after the first Gulf War in 1991. The majority of Saddam's recently discovered mass graves are filled with the Shiite and Kurdish dead from this uprising. MEK military operations against Iranian targets continued through the 1990's. The U.S. Department of State added the MEK to its official list of terrorist organizations in 1997, and shut down the organization's Washington, DC office in 2003 .
During the U.S. invasion of Iraq, MEK forces in Iraq surrendered to U.S. forces and turned over their military hard wear, including several thousand tanks, armored personnel carriers, anti-aircraft guns, and other vehicles. Despite denying suspected terrorists from Afghanistan and elsewhere prisoner of war status under the Geneva conventions, the US granted this status to detained members of MEK in Iraq .
Support for the MEK reveals one of the advantages the U.S. has acquired by occupying Iraq. The country can now be used as a staging post for carrying out attacks against regimes hostile to U.S. interests in the region, whether through proxy organizations such as MEK, or by attacking such countries directly by dispatching U.S. forces based on Iraqi soil. U.S. planners are currently somewhat constrained from using the latter option due to the difficulty they face in pacifying Iraq, so the first option, namely supporting terrorist organizations that are trying to destabilize the Iranian regime, will likely be their preferred course of action until U.S. control of Iraq is fully consolidated.
So when Paul Wolfowitz promised Iraqis in 2003 that the US would hunt down the "monsters" that assisted Saddam in digging the mass graves in 1991 , the Bush administration was in fact just beginning its support for some of the direct perpetrators of these crimes. Also revealing is U.S. criticism of the new Iranian president elect, due to his alleged involvement in holding U.S. embassy personnel hostage in 1979. Though the U.S. admits the MEK was involved in the same incident, White House support for this terrorist organization continues. This kind of hypocrisy reveals much about what the global "war on terror" is really about. It's not a war against terror as such, but rather a war of terror to subdue resistance to the US designs in the region.
 The organization which provides these security reports does not allow them to be cited publicly, and thus I cannot indicate the name of the source. The report for June 19th, 2005 stated the following: "A large conference involving the mujahadeen kalk and sponsored by the Iraqi Government is scheduled to take place in the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad 20th June, this may lead to insurgent attempts to disrupt the conference, HOM are advised to advise their staff to avoid this area."
 US State Department, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2002 (pdf). See specifically Appendix B: Background Information on designated foreign terrorist organizations, pg. 115 for information on the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq
See also this description of the group from Globalsecurity.org.
 Why the US granted 'protected' status to Iranian terrorists, The Christian Science Monitor, 07/29/2004.
 New York Times, July 20th, 2003.
The MEK were given an ultimatum.
Stop attacking and we won't kill you.
They are not being supported by the US. Unless, they think not killing them is support.
They have been neutralized.
Electronic Iraq -- found at electronicIraq.net -- is a supplementary news portal from the people who brought you the Electronic Intifada (founded 2001) and veteran antiwar campaigners Voices in the Wilderness (founded 1996).
Electronic Iraq was launched on 8 February 2003 to offer a humanitarian perspective during the then-looming conflict, as the U.S. government made clear its determination to go to war against Iraq.
It was the alternative news moonshot. Before, during, and after the US "Shock & Awe" bombing campaign, eIraq writers from Voices in the Wilderness' Iraq Peace Team reported on what they saw and heard via available Internet and a satellite modem connection. Visitors got a never before seen glimpse of war and its aftermath through the eyes of peace activists based at ground zero.
Post war, eIraq's work continues, documenting the US occupation and the rebuilding of Iraq, offering a range of reportage that includes News & Analysis; Opinion/Editorial; Iraq Diaries; International Law; Aid & Development; The Media; Art, Music & Culture; and Action & Activism.
Somehow I find it hard to believe that the MEK had "several thousand" tanks in Iraq and the other listed military hardware. I think this article is full of BS.
There is no good terrorists!
Moreover, this terror group is condemned by all Human Rights Watch Groups for abusing its own members.
And the groups is heavily hated among Iranian people.
MEK terrorists fought Iranian people along with Saddam in 1980s and they are also accused of helping the seizure of the US Embassy in 1979 in Tehran.
MEK/NCRI is a marxist-islamist group founded in late 1960s to fight the Shah's government.
The group is also accused of killing several American Military Servicemen back in 1970s.
Now you can figure this out!
You might be right but it doesn't change the fact that this group is hated by majority of true Iranians and they are listed on terror list of EU, Canada, and US.
So why should we cooperate with them!?
We are NOT cooperating with them.
We are simply NOT killing them.
I'd say giving them protection while they hold a conference is a bit more than "not killing them", wouldn't you?
First you have to believe the people who wrote and SHAPED this article. If you look over their site and their history you might not be so quick to endorse this article.
I simply can't care!
The truth is that US is cooperating with bunch of hated Terrorists.
It doesn't change the fact that MEK is a terror group. Does it?
I'm not prone to believe the editorializations of the blog this story appears in.
There is a BS factor to this article. I doubt there were several thousand tanks, too. But what they had was given to them by Saddam.
They have up to 2000 armored vehicles and 3500 armed terrorists in Camp Ashraf which is under protection of US Army!
The truth is this article was written and SHAPED by a group of flaming left wing activists.
Terrorists are terrorists!
Okay everyone. Before you get too deep into this article go to the originating website and look at the credentials of the organization who tailored this hit piece. This group has a long history of distorting the truth to support their anger over the war on terror and America defending itself.
And Racheal Corry was a lying witch who hated America...she would fit in very well with the people who wrote this BS.
Are you defending MKO?
But like I said, it doesn't change the fact that MEK/NCRI/MKO is a terrorist group and we shouldnt work with them at all!
We are simply NOT killing them.
You're absolutely right: in 2003, we disarmed the MEK and interned their forces in their own camps. These weren't exactly "POW" camps, but neither were the MEK fighters allowed to leave. The compromise we reached with their leaders was that we would leave them alone if they stayed out of the fighting. So far, they've kept their word and we've kept ours.
Remember, just because anti-war activists say something is true, doesn't make it so. And what's this guy's beef, anyway? We neutralized a large militia without firing a shot. Would he rather we fight them in the streets of Mosul and Kirkuk?
Pentago using them as informants.
May be we are gonna have an Iranian version of Ahmad Chalabi?!
It doesn't change the fact that if people go and look at the anti-American BS on that web-site they will take this whole article with a huge grain of salt. The people who wrote this grossly distort the truth to further their agenda.
For instance, they are pushing the true feelings of our military people...high lighting the anti-war songs written by them. In truth one of the authors of a song your source claims is anti-war was on FR and said it was entirely the opposite...they were just writting silly BS music and they aren't anti-war.
Like I said, before anyone gets too wrapped up with this story they need to take a long hard look at the source site and see how they distort facts and the truth.
The website is left-wing.
But the question remains, was there a an MEK conference in Baghdad, and did U.S. soldiers provide support?
The fact remains that you cannot believe anything that site writes.
Even Hillary sprinkles the truth in with her lies.
Why should I not believe it?
Just because they are so-called liberal/left wing?
And most people have no problem recognizing that it's all built around a lie.
LOL! There's nothing "so-called" about it. By your value and judgment Michael Moore is a legitimate documentary maker and American historian. In my world he is a lying POS that cannot be trusted to tell the truth.
And what is your point here?
It does not matter who wrote the article or what the article says about US, Iran or MKO.
FACT: US cooperating with terrorists which are condemned by all countries, groups, people... etc
AND QUESTION is WHY?
Whatever the US Government supports, I support.
Such a petty post.
It's been recommended to turn MEK loose in Iran - one claim I read was that they could put 100,000 boots on the ground. We didn't. And we really need to take this sort of story with a tub full of salt.
Only if you do believe Michael Moore is a legitimate documentary maker.
"Even Hillary sprinkles the truth in with her lies."
"And most people have no problem recognizing that it's all built around a lie."
But the point is, no matter how it's used, or what the motive is, there is some truth.
Be aware that these people killed at least ten American senior officers in Iran in 1970s and they helped seized the embassy in Tehran!
It fits his agenda to endorse this article. MEK is the only active Iranian group fighting the mullahs. Bush has repeatedly called on the "freedom loving" iranians to stand up. Until they do MEK is the only game in town.
I try to stick to my instincts!
Yep, same with Michael Moore's BS 9/11 movie.
Once again, here we go again with you!
You'd better switch to instruments then because your plain has not right wing.
I wouldn't doubt that he/she/it has some connection with the originating source. Their styles are about the same.
I am an independent person!
I might dislike idiot Leftists but I do not support cooperation of the US government with bunch of Marxist-Islamist terrorists whom were involved in killing of Americans!
That is it!
But you are trying to make an issue over an article by an anti-American group that pushes all sorts of lies?
No, I did not! It was you who care about the source but not the contents.
I did not even care about the source.
I did/do care about the content of the article which is an established fact!
And I believe we are losing our crediblity among Pro-American Iranians by supporting their enemy!
And we also give excuses to such leftist groups to bash Bush and his admin
Do you want that?
So, the question is, was there a conference, and did our troops provide support? And if so, why?
Just because a left-wing site raises an issue, doesn't mean it should be immediately ignored or dismissed by the Right. And if it turns out it's untrue, then it's more evidence and ammunition against the Left.
LOL! Of course it doesn't occur to you that the source effects the truth of the article? As I said, by your standards Michael Moore is legitimate.
Did I support Michael Moore or Did I ever talk about it?
A left wing, anti-American site that has a lot of lies posted on their site at this very moment!
Strange how you and the left winged wonder there are defending that site so diligently.