Here are all Dish posts following the Iranian “opposition” group MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq) including their attempts to get themselves removed from the US terrorist list.
MEK Street
by Chris Bodenner
Trita Parsi sounds the alarm over the powerful lobbying efforts of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) to get removed from the US government’s list of terrorist groups:
[T]he desire to de-list them in Washington seems partially driven by gravitation towards covert military action against Iran. Neither sanctions nor diplomacy have yielded the desired results on the nuclear issue, and some in Washington are advocating using the MEK to conduct assassination and sabotage campaigns inside Iran. As one former State Department official put it, the “paradox is that we may take them off the terror list in order for them to do more terror.”
Parsi also insists that de-listing the MEK “would spell disaster for the Iranian pro-democracy movement.” Jasmin Ramsey concurs:
Iranian politics are complex and can be as confusing as US foreign policy is on Iran, but of this you can be certain: the MEK and it’s “parliament in-waiting” is considered illegitimate at best by the vast majority of Iranians living inside and outside of Iran. It can’t serve the interests of the US government or normal Iranians either. But that doesn’t seem to matter to the likes of Rudy Giuliani, Tom Ridge, John Bolton and other neoconservatives, far right-wingers and their European counterparts (ever heard of Lord Corbett of Castle Vale?). …
[I]s it naive to hope that the mainstream media which failed so badly in the run up to the Iraq war with figures like Ahmed Chalabi will give this group better investigative coverage?
Thu Jul 7, 11:56am:
by Chris Bodenner
Daniel Larison gathers voices against the lobbying efforts of MEK to get off the terror list:
Michael Rubin has been sharply critical of MEK boosters here in the U.S. for some time now, and he most recently called out Michele Bachmann for her foolish support for the group, which she refers to as “one of the bravest Iranian dissident groups” and “freedom-seeking.” Bachmann is hardly alone in her folly. She has quite a lot of company, as Muhammad Sahimi tells us.
Larison’s takeaway:
[De-listing MEK] will not only help the [Iranian] regime to consolidate power in the name of anti-terrorism, but it will be an unexpected propaganda boost for the regime by convincing most Iranians that the U.S. has sided with a group they understandably regard as an enemy of their country.
The BBC did a three-part exposé on the MEK you can watch here, here and here. This issue is particularly pressing because changes to the terror list could be made during its five-year review coming up in August.
Annals Of Absurdity
by Zack Beauchamp
The MEK, a Iranian cult-of-personality Marxist terrorist organization immensely unpopular among Iranians, is staging a rally outside the White House today to protest its place on the terrorist organization list. When was the last time you could remember any other terrorist organization that killed Americans demonstrating outside the White House and lobbying influential American politicians? What’s next, HezbollahPAC?
And just to make apparent the bunkum that is the MEK’s claim to leading the democratic opposition, here’s an editorial from Kaleme, a leading Green newspaper:
Mojahedin-e Khalq is the symbol of “violence and terror” in Iran and the slightest mention of this word [MEK] and the remembrance of this organization is needed to remind the Iranian audience of the violence, terror, and treason they caused. As long as the groundwork of this organization is cult-like behavior, the only solution for them is to submit to foreigners in order to stab its own people in the back. Any country that supports this organization defames itself among the Iranian people and remains infamous for defending violence and betrayal.
It’s hard to think of anything worse we could do in the name of supporting Iran’s democracy movement than delisting the MEK. For more evidence, here‘s leading Iran expert Abbas Milani, firsthand observer of the MEK Elizabeth Rubin, and some great roundups from Chris last month.
Is Israel A Sponsor Of Proxy Terrorism?
Bob Wright investigates the MEK (whose American sponsors run ads during GOP debates). Meanwhile, I read in the Times of London (paywalled):
New evidence indicates that foreign nationals in Israel continue to allow the Mossad to use their passports… “Matthew” emigrated to Israel from London in 2009, and joined the Israeli military shortly afterwards. Just before he started duty, he was approached by a young woman from the Mossad and asked if he was “committed to the state of Israel.” When she asked Matthew if he was willing to do “a small thing to help”, such as, for example, lend his passport, he did not refuse … Matthew received his passport back in 18 months and wa surprised to find stamps in it from Turkey and Azerbaijan, two countries he had not visited.
Two other Brits are interviewed in the paywalled piece.
The Neocons’ Terrorists
A disturbing portrait of the MEK, a terrorist group that, because it is anti-Iranian, was once favored by the Bush-Cheney administration. The decision on whether to lift its terror label is now on secretary Clinton’s desk. Here’s hoping she maintains the status quo.
Lobbying For Trouble
It’s been a bad week for MEK, the Iranian opposition group still hard at work trying to buy its way off the US terrorist list. First, a few more of their supporters, Newt Gingrich and Pulitzer-prize winning columnist Clarence Page, got into hot water over their involvement with the group. Now the WaPo reports that the MEK’s activity with US political figures might be illegal:
In recent weeks, new questions have been raised about whether private meetings, conference calls and other contact with officials at the State Department and elsewhere in the administration over the past year require the advocates’ registration as lobbyists or agents of a foreign entity. Under federal law, advocates for foreign organizations are required to register as lobbyists and provide details about their clients and income. But the MEK supporters have not registered, which would require disclosing the amounts they are paid and the identities of officials with whom they meet.
Nothing new for Newt, of course.
The Dish 