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.
Yes, when you say that any anti-American activitist tells the truth...remember, you don't care about the source.
If you say so!
Pop on over to the source website and take a nice long look around. You might find the composite photo of the "Known American" soldier amusing. One of their talented artists took the time to morph the faces of all of our dead service people for their twisted agenda.
No, actually it was you who said: "I did not even care about the source."
It doesn't change the fact that MEK is now being used by Pentagon!
Can you deny that?
It doesn't change the fact that you are fanatically pushing a story by a site that provable prints lies and gross distortions and that you don't care about that for some strange reason. As I said, your plane is all left wing.
lol. I am not defending the site. I've never heard of them.
But I don't think it's right to immediately dismiss every detail, just because it's left wing.
And, there have been a number of other indications that some in our gov't, though thankfully not many, would like to take MEK off the terrorist list.
And MEK held a conference in the DAR Conference Center in Washington this past April (I believe).
So, there's some history behind this that makes it sound plausible.
LOL! All you're doing is defending the site and their "agenda".
No, f14 what you are is an iranian propagandist and your only concern about MEK is not their politics or their history but the fact that they are the only iranians actively fighting the mullahs and if they get in then the shahistas are sunk.
I am an Iranian and I can speak for most Iranians!
I am reading your comments!
I do not understand why you tend to ignore the established facts here.
But let me tell you one thing:
We'd rather live under the rule of Mullahs than these stupid communists that your government supports.
I hope you do not accuse me of being a left wing or a liberal but this is the fact.
You may want to talk to some true Iranians about MEK terrorist group.
You need to read the rest of what I said.
There are congressmen and women wanting to take MEK off the FTO list. The MEK has been allowed to hold rallies and conferences in the U.S.
Wondering whether one or 2 sentences in an article may be correct, is not defending an entire website.
And Al-Qaeda is actively fighting us.
Should Iranians (Our Enemy) support them?
The US is NOT supporting the MEK.
We neutralized them. They agreed not to conduct attacks on anyone and in return, we agreed to let them live in their conclave and not wipe them off the face of the earth.
You may be right!
But I don't see that the way you described.
It makes us angry to see any cooperation between terrorists and Bush's government.
It makes us wonder if there is a war on terror going on at all.
It helps fade our hope in the US as a true ally in our fight against the Mullahs.
It makes us wonder if the US is about to replace an Islamic dictatorship with a Marxist one.
I guess Jackson and wtc911 (who always makes every body laugh) are not able to understand our concerns.
The author offers no support for his assertion that we're "supporting" this terrorist group.
I have...all trying to push the political agenda of an anti-American website without regard to their history.
Don't you think that NOT killing them sends a signal to other Muslims that we're not out to wipe them out?
Check State Dept web site.
You will find them on Foreign Terrorist group list but at the meantime, Pentagon supports them, congressmen and women support them and it makes me angry to see terrorists being free in the US.
How would you feel if it turns out that Mullah Khatami has sheltered Bin Laden in Iran?
I wish you would have wiped them out.
It could send a strong signal to Iranians and some critics of the war on terror!
If you count all the ones in the huge junk yard behind the MEK compound they did.
This article isn't from the Department of State.
Yes. They are on the foreign terrorist list.
But right now, they are a danger to no one.
Should we just kill them all? Wouldn't that show the rest of the Muslim world that we are unreasonable?
They aren't doing anything right now.
Seems you are blindly in love with right and whatever they do is correct!
"...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."
"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."
It seems to me the Army was protecting everyone in the hotel, not just one particular group. There were many foreign journalists, the hotel is under the full protection of the Army, and there was an increased danger of attack.
They are danger to Iranians fighting for their own democracy!
LOL! No, that would be the folks pushing this article for their anti-war efforts.
Their conclave has a LOT of women and children. (In fact, I think their spiritual leader is a woman and a lot of their "militia" is made up of women)
We should have just slaughtered them all?
I guess you would like to support MEK
How? They can't leave Iraq.
That makes you wrong yet again.
Well, I see you as a person who thinks whatever Right does is sacred, absolutely right and ...
Well, if wondering about the facts in an article constitutes defending an entire website, then I'd say that's the type of rationale that closed-minded DU'ers use all the time.
Have a nice evening.
So tell me what difference it makes if the source of the article was Washington Times?
But they are active in DC, Denver, LA, Paris, London, Berlin
This aint war on terror!
War On Terror?
it's called a "struggle" now
I heard that!
Look. When I first heard that we had come to an agreement with the MEK I was upset.
When I looked into it further, I realized that we had not really come to an agreement with them. We gave them an ultimatum. They are not allowed to attack anyone. Iran, inside Iraq. Nowhere.
If they do. All bets are off.
USA, France and China don't want to see a democratic Iran.
Both USA and France will always do anything they can to stop Iran becoming a great democratic country.
They did it before (1979), they'll do it again.
Now China has joined the bandwagon.
France supports the Mujahideen-e-Khalq.
The MEK is based in France and is nearly openly supported by the French government.
My thoughts go to the young Iranians.
Nobody cares about them.I do.
So tell me what difference it makes if the source of the article was Michael Moore?
If they do. All bets are off.
I'll bet they got a check too.............
LOL! Hardly, ignoring the truth about a website to pursue an agenda is directly out of the DU playbook. You are good at it...a shame that anyone can actually go to the site and see the truth.
Good to hear from you!
More like a JDAM.
I asked you the question first!
Fact is still unchanged...
US is cooperating with the enemies of Iranian people!
It doesn't matter who talks about the issue.
The ISSUE is "cooperation between US and bunch of world wide known terrorists".
Is that legitimate?
I know that.
But if they're taken off the the FTO list, all bets may be on. And that's what upsets Iranians and those of us supporting their desire for a democratic gov't.
So you do think Michael Moore is a creditable source. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.