Removing MEK from the terrorist list would raise chance of war

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 8 Comments

Robert Wright at The Atlantic has a good piece on the campaign to remove the name of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) from the U.S. terrorist list.  As Wright states, legitimizing this terrorist group whose main goal is to overthrow the current Iranian regime is not a big confidence builder for the upcoming second round of nuclear negotiations with Tehran.  This is especially true since MEK has been responsible for recent Israeli-sponsored acts of sabotage including assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. 

But Wright is strangely upbeat, concluding that the final decision on MEK’s fate may rest with Hillary Clinton, who is less subject to the political pressures to embrace MEK  than President Obama, who will be involved in placating special interests and bagging contributions in a bid for a second term.  It is odd to think Hillary would choose doing the correct thing over a pro-Israel, pro-war option.

When talking about the huge amounts of money that are behind the MEK campaign, Wright skittishly does not mention the pro-Israel lobby, although their fingerprints are all over this.  But the post adopts the Iranian point of view to describe the involvement of Israel, so the reader gets the picture.

Here is part of the narrative the [Iranian] hardliners are pushing:

Iran needs nuclear weapons to defend itself. It is beset by enemies. The Sunni states would love to overthrow our government. Just recall that Iraq, when it was a Sunni-run state, attacked us, starting a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Iranians. And note that Sunni states are currently trying to abet the overthrow of our ally in Syria–just one domino away from the fall of our own government. And don’t forget about the American-Zionist axis: prominent Americans and Israelis openly call for regime change in Tehran, and we suspect that this is the secret goal of the Obama administration.

OK, so that’s the narrative that we don’t want to strengthen–particularly the America-Zionist-axis-is-bent-on-regime-change part. Here, then, is an example of something we probably shouldn’t go out of our way to do: Take an Iranian-exile group that is devoted to overthrowing the Iranian government, and that has long been on America’s list of terrorist organizations, and give it our seal of approval by taking it off that list.

That would be stupid, right? Yet that’s what, according to today’s report in the Journal, the State Department is leaning toward.

The group in question is the Mujahedin-e Khalq, or MEK, which got onto our list of terrorist organizations decades ago by, among other things, killing Americans.

 

About Ira Glunts

Ira Glunts is a retired college librarian who lives in Madison, NY.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

8 Responses

  1. CloakAndDagger
    May 17, 2012, 11:16 am

    Ha! Hillary will approve taking MeK off the terrorist list in a heartbeat. She has already been reported as looking favorably on that outcome.

    What makes her any less prone to zio pressure than any other politician in the US? She has her sights on a presidency in 2016, and even a rumored vice presidency in 2012 were Biden to step down.

    All these moves are designed to make next week’s talks fail.

  2. pabelmont
    May 17, 2012, 11:16 am

    Until BIG-MONEY is taken out of USA’s politics, money will distort the computation of EVERY part of the USA’s “national interest” or “policy” (that is, what our government plans and what it does). Just think of our refusal to deal with global warming or with banking shenanigans or to really reduce military spending. And then confirm by thinking about our kowtowing to the Israeli “fifth column” (AIPAC and friends).

    • AllenBee
      May 17, 2012, 11:58 am

      The not-so-invisible-hand of George Bush —

      The George W. Bush Presidential Center “Celebration of Human Freedom”

      Welcome and presentation by
      James K. Glassman, [1] Founding Executive Director, George W. Bush Institute

      Introduction of President George W. Bush by
      Ammar Abdulhamid, Founder, The Tharwa Foundation [2]

      Remarks by President George W. Bush

      Introduction of Mrs. Laura W. Bush by
      Xiqiu Bob Fu, Founder, China Aid Association

      Remarks and introduction of Aung San Suu Kyi by [3]
      Mrs. Laura W. Bush

      Remarks and conversation with
      Aung San Suu Kyi , Nobel Peace Prize Laureate via video teleconference
      Moderated by Michael Gerson, Columnist, The Washington Post

      Contributions to the Freedom Collection facilitated by
      Amanda Schnetzer, Director, Human Freedom, George W. Bush Institute

      With a special message by
      Normando Hernandez, Reagan-Fascell Fellow, National Endowment for Democracy
      www dot bushcenter dot com”

      ————————–

      1. Glassman has been a mainstay in VOA and other propaganda activities, targeting Iran. According to Ephraim Sneh, the “problem” with Iran is NOT its nukes but its regime, which must made to worry about the “starvation of its 70 million people” until Iran becomes “secular and democratic.”

      2. Interesting outfit, The Tharwa Foundation Diversity, Development, Democracy.

      That’s scary; shades of Jerry Berman arriving in Iraq: “we are the govt and we are here to help you.”
      provides some insight into the money behind the debacle in Syria. Looks like Hillary Clinton might be running an operation for George Bush and his friends

      “The Tharwa Foundation is a nonprofit, nonpartisan grassroots organization that encourages diversity, development and democracy in Syria and the broader Middle East/North Africa. . . .
      The Tharwa Foundation was established to provide a supportive environment for democratic principles and practices in the broader Middle East and North Africa region. Through programs that encourage inter-communal dialogue and leadership development, Tharwa uses a range of educational, networking and outreach strategies to enable people of different religious, economic and ethnic backgrounds to come together to discuss peaceful solutions to the region’s longstanding socio-political and development challenges.

      Since its inception, Tharwa has been guided by a vision for the region’s future, based upon:

      The emergence of an open and self-empowering commonwealth of nations in the broader Middle East and North Africa region, where traditional communal identifications – ethnic, religious, and linguistic – are sources of the region’s wealth and prosperity, rather than its division and decline

      Increased political awareness and issue-based, grassroots mobilization among disenfranchised groups in the region

      A growing role for local, national, and supranational non-state actors and institutions, forming the basis of vibrant civil societies where diversity is respected and celebrated . . .”

      3. Call me cynical, but if Geo Bush is behind it, U.S. involvement with Burma cannot be in Burma’s interest, in the long run.

      = = =

      The Tharwa Foundation’s Manifesto names the problems it proposes to solve, including the problems of:

      “Rising religious radicalism, a phenomenon often associated with Islam, albeit it is not exclusive to it by any means, and which, in itself, is both a product and a cause of instability in the region and around the world, and lies at the heart of international terrorism.

      Continuing external dabbling in the region that often fails to take the interest and intellectual input of its peoples into consideration, or that assumes a messianic character that serves to further alienate and radicalize the peoples of the region. . . .”

      = = =

      Born again Christian George Bush is on a quest to proselytize the Middle East for mammon, militarism, and Methodism.

  3. BillM
    May 17, 2012, 11:16 am

    True. More to the point, though, by making moves toward delsiting the MEK right before the next round of talks, the US is signalling very clearly that it has no intention of actually allowing the talks to succeed.

    • Citizen
      May 17, 2012, 4:39 pm

      Yep. It’s another way of pressuring Iran to give up even the capacity to make nukes. It’s all about maintaining Israel’s hegemony in the ME, an area with only Israel with the bomb.

      • BillM
        May 17, 2012, 5:14 pm

        Well, the whole “nuke” issue has very little to do with actual nukes. It’s about weakening Iran as a player in Middle Eastern events. The sanctions are not the a tool in the service of a goal of halting nuclear development; the sanctions are the goal in themselves (or war if the sanctions fail to weaken Iran) and the nuke issue is the tool for employing them.

        But with the MEK particularly, remember they are the most hated “terrorists” in Iran. It’d be like Iran arming and organizing Timothy McVeigh and cohorts during the talks; it would guarantee an negative US reaction. It’s not “pressure,” it’s intentional insult to give power to those voices in Iran against a deal.

  4. Dan Crowther
    May 17, 2012, 1:41 pm

    They’re really pulling out all the stops – Obama is something else. I wonder if there will be retroactive immunity for the groups american shills. Obama shielding Fran Townsend and co. from prosecution for material support for terrorism would be oh so perfect, that would really say it all.

    I dont know that this increases the likelihood for war between the US and Iran directly, but it definitely greenlights an overt fight among the big powers for a iranian host, the west has decided it wants to destroy iranian society and remove the current government, if that can be done with iranians killing iranians, i suppose thats what the west prefers.

  5. HarryLaw
    May 17, 2012, 6:10 pm

    There are now two types of terrorist, those aimed at states the US does not like, and would like to regime change, those terrorists can be materially supported it seems by US citizens [since it appears the US government are helping such groups or turning a blind eye to them] here I mean Al qaeda and associated groups supporting the free Syrian army against Assad and also the MEK, a state dept listed terrorist group killing scientists in Iran and materially supported with lucrative speaking engagement fees from the MEK to the likes of John Bolton R Giuliani Howard Dean, Tom Ridge et al, and then there are the other terrorist groups or as I prefer to call them National Liberation movements like Hezbollah and Hamas, were should you donate a penny to, will see you in jail for life, the hypocrisy is stunning, do the US think the rest of the world stupid?

Leave a Reply