Introduction by Chris Moore:
The following is an article by Glenn Greenwald, in which he discusses the U.S. government-designated terrorist group MEK (the so-called People’s Mujaheddinand), and its connections to top U.S. neoliberal and neocon politicians.
It's now been confirmed that the MEK is the group behind the assassinations of Iranians scientists.
Back in November of 2011, Justin Raimondo of AntiWar.com was all over the story of the MEK and its previous terrorism against the U.S., its bizarre, Marxist-theocrat ideological fusion, its connections to Israel, the Israel lobby, and corrupt U.S. politicians, and the not-so-puzzling source of its funding.
My own "back of the envelope" take on the MEK is that it is yet another Trojan horse front for radical, anti-Islamic "secularism," which, just as was "secular," anti-Christian Bolshevism, is itself a front for Zionism and Jewish supremacism.
The important characteristic to remember about these Jewish Zionists and their left-wing "secular" and right-wing, neocon and charlatan-Christian, Judeo-Christian Zionist accomplices is that not only do they hate Islamic civilization, but they hate Christian civilization (i.e. Greco-Christian Western civilization, formerly known as Christendom) because of each one's historical intolerance for Jewish usury and gangsterism. And Jewish Zionist gangsters, of course, inevitably end up in bed with similar, low character, racketeering ideologies, ideological Trojan horses, and Ponzi scheme economic systems (e.g. "secular" communism, liberal fascism, Keynesianism, neoconservatism) and pseudo-Christian, charlatan ideologies like Judeo-Christian Zionism.
Indeed, the MEK might be viewed as a fledgling, pseudo-Islamic version of Judeo-Christian Zionism, but with one foot in the Marxist camp, and one foot in the "Godly" camp.
It's important to never underestimate the ideological breadth, scope and sophisticaation of the front groups these self-worshipping and money-worshipping Zionists are capable of conjuring for their own ends, and the ends of there temporary partners in crime. (As in all viper's nests, there's inevitably an eventual clash between species of snakes, for example when Stalinists eventually turned against the Jewish Bolsheviks after the two teams had together done their worst in eradicating millions of former Russian elites, Christians, dissidents and simple peasants.)
And lest anyone believe that these murderous Jewish con artists are the vanguard on the road to human "progress" and enlightenment, think of the whirlwhind that has been unleashed since Zionist "emancipation": Imperialism, colonialism, mechanized mass murder, world wars, communism, fascism, now Zionist and Globalist neo-fascism in support of dollar hegemony...
Israel, MEK and state sponsor of Terror groups
A new report claims that MEK is behind the assassination of Iran's scientists, and Israel funds them
(Salon.com) -- by Glenn Greenwald --
One of the most under-reported political stories of the last year is the devoted advocacy of numerous prominent American political figures on behalf of an Iranian group long formally designated as a Terrorist organization under U.S. law. A large bipartisan cast has received substantial fees from that group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK), and has then become their passionate defenders. The group of MEK shills includes former top Bush officials and other Republicans (Michael Mukasey, Fran Townsend, Andy Card, Tom Ridge, Rudy Giuliani) as well as prominent Democrats (Howard Dean, Ed Rendell, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark). As The Christian Science Monitor reported last August, those individuals “have been paid tens of thousands of dollars to speak in support of the MEK.” No matter what one thinks of this group – here is a summary of its activities – it is formally designated as a Terrorist group and it is thus a felony under U.S. law to provide it with any “material support.”
There are several remarkable aspects to this story. The first is that there are numerous Muslims inside the U.S. who have been prosecuted for providing “material support for Terrorism” for doing far less than these American politicians are publicly doing on behalf of a designated Terrorist group. A Staten Island satellite TV salesman in 2009 was sentenced to five years in federal prison merely for including a Hezbollah TV channel as part of the satellite package he sold to customers; a Massachusetts resident, Tarek Mehanna, is being prosecuted now ”for posting pro-jihadist material on the internet”; a 24-year-old Pakistani legal resident living in Virginia, Jubair Ahmad, was indicted last September for uploading a 5-minute video to YouTube that was highly critical of U.S. actions in the Muslim world, an allegedly criminal act simply because prosecutors claim he discussed the video in advance with the son of a leader of a designated Terrorist organization (Lashkar-e-Tayyiba); a Saudi Arabian graduate student, Sami Omar al-Hussayen, was prosecuted simply for maintaining a website with links “to groups that praised suicide bombings in Chechnya and in Israel” and “jihadist” sites that solicited donations for extremist groups (he was ultimately acquitted); and last July, a 22-year-old former Penn State student and son of an instructor at the school, Emerson Winfield Begolly, was indicted for — in the FBI’s words — “repeatedly using the Internet to promote violent jihad against Americans” by posting comments on a “jihadist” Internet forum including “a comment online that praised the shootings” at a Marine Corps base, action which former Obama lawyer Marty Lederman said “does not at first glance appear to be different from the sort of advocacy of unlawful conduct that is entitled to substantial First Amendment protection.”
Yet here we have numerous American political figures receiving substantial fees from a group which is legally designated under American law as a Terrorist organization. Beyond that, they are meeting with the Terrorist leaders of that group repeatedly (Howard Dean told NPR last year about the group’s leader, Maryam Rajavi: “I have actually had dinner with Mrs. Rajavi on numerous occasions. I do not find her very terrorist-like” and has even insisted that she should be recognized as Iran’s President, while Rudy Giuliani publicly told her at a Paris conference in December: “These are the most important yearnings of the human soul that you support, and for your organization to be described as a terrorist organization is just simply a disgrace”). And, after receiving fees from the Terrorist group and meeting with its Terror leaders, these American political figures are going forth and disseminating pro-MEK messages on its behalf and working to have it removed from the Terrorist list.
Given all the prosecutions of politically powerless Muslims for far fewer connections to Terrorist groups than the actions of these powerful (paid) political figures, what conceivable argument is there for not prosecuting Dean, Giuliani, and the rest of them for providing “material support for Terrorism”? What they are providing to MEK is the definitive “material support.” Although these activities (along with those of the above-listed prosecuted Muslims) should be protected free speech, the U.S. Government has repeatedly imprisoned people for it. Indeed, as Georgetown Law Professor David Cole noted, these activities on behalf of MEK are clearly prosecutable as “material support for Terrorism” under the standard advocated by the Bush and Obama DOJs and accepted by the Supreme Court in the Holder v. Humanitarian Law case of 2009, which held that even peaceful advocacy on behalf of a Terrorist group can be prosecuted if done in coordination with the group (ironically, many of these paid MEK supporters have long been advocates of broad application of “material support” statutes (when applied to Muslims, that is) and have even praised the Humanitarian Law case). If we had anything even remotely approaching equal application of the law, Dean, Giuliani, Townsend and the others would be facing prosecution as Terrorist-helpers.
Then there’s long been the baffling question of where MEK was getting all of this money to pay these American officials. Indeed, the pro-MEK campaign has been lavishly funded. As the CSM noted: ”Besides the string of well-attended events at prestigious American hotels and locations, and in Paris, Brussels, and Berlin, the campaign has included full-page advertisements in The New York Times and Washington Post — which can cost $175,000 apiece.” MEK is basically little more than a nomadic cult: after they sided with Saddam Hussein in his war with Iran, they were widely loathed in Iran and their 3,400 members long lived in camps in Iraq, but the Malaki government no longer wants them there. How has this rag-tag Terrorist cult of Iranian dissidents, who are largely despised in Iran, able to fund such expensive campaigns and to keep U.S. officials on its dole?
All of these mysteries received substantial clarity from an NBC News report by Richard Engel and Robert Windrem yesterday. Citing two anonymous “senior U.S. officials,” that report makes two amazing claims: (1) that it was MEK which perpetrated the string of assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and (2) the Terrorist group “is financed, trained and armed by Israel’s secret service.” These senior officials also admitted that “the Obama administration is aware of the assassination campaign” but claims it “has no direct involvement.” Iran has long insisted the Israel and the U.S. are using MEK to carry out Terrorist attacks on its soil, including the murder of its scientists, and NBC notes that these acknowledgments “confirm charges leveled by Iran’s leaders” (MEK issued a statement denying the report)...MORE...LINK
Citing risk of "terror," Judeofascist Blinkin calls for repatriation of Islamic State fighters, but not of Jewish State fighters (he needs them on Wall Street) - Secretary of State Antony Blinken emphasized the importance of repatriating foreign terrorist fighters to limit the risk of them returning to the Islamic S...
1 day ago
Post a Comment