More Talks to Remove MEK from Terror List

In yet another attempt at destabilizing Iran, Hillary Clinton will soon announce a decision by US State Department on whether or not to remove Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), or “the people’s holy warriors,” from its terrorism registry. Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), cautioned that doing so “would allow the Mujahedin to receive US funding and become a powerful force in support of war with Iran, just like the Iraqi exiles who deceived us into war with Iraq did.”

In an age where the word terrorism or bomb is enough to get you arrested and thrown out of the airport, why are American officials and policy wonks pressing for the removal of MEK from terror watch list? They, just like the Taliban and the Contras, are valuable pawns, or so they think,  in the quest for American dominance of the Middle East. MEK is so highly valued by the war-with-Iran crowd because they were the group that “revealed” the Natanz nuclear site and brought to light documents concerning the Iranian nuclear program in 2002. As Gareth Porter argued, the documents provided by MEK and their political extension, the National Council of Resistance in Iran, were fabricated:

The German source said he did not know whether the documents were authentic or not. However, CIA analysts, and European and IAEA officials who were given access to the laptop documents in 2005 were very sceptical about their authenticity.

The Guardian’s Julian Borger last February quoted an IAEA official as saying there is “doubt over the provenance of the computer”.

A senior European diplomat who had examined the documents was quoted by the New York Times in November 2005 as saying, “I can fabricate that data. It looks beautiful, but is open to doubt.”

Scott Ritter, the former U.S. military intelligence officer who was chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998, noted in an interview that the CIA has the capability test the authenticity of laptop documents through forensic tests that would reveal when different versions of different documents were created.

The fact that the agency could not rule out the possibility of fabrication, according to Ritter, indicates that it had either chosen not to do such tests or that the tests had revealed fraud.

Additionally, MEK’s “discovery” of the Natanz site was doubted by many keen observers of Iranian politics who noted the groups friendly relationship with Israel, as well as their lack of key posts in government positions that would have made any relevant information hard to come by.

Since 2002, new information has emerged indicating that the MEK did not obtain the 2002 data on Natanz itself but received it from the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad. Yossi Melman and Meier Javadanfar, who co-authored a book on the Iranian nuclear programme last year, write that they were told by “very senior Israeli Intelligence officials” in late 2006 that Israeli intelligence had known about Natanz for a full year before the Iranian group’s press conference. They explained that they had chosen not to reveal it to the public “because of safety concerns for the sources that provided the information”.

Israel has maintained a relationship with the MEK since the late 1990s, according to Bruck, including assistance to the organisation in beaming broadcasts by the NCRI from Paris into Iran. An Israeli diplomat confirmed that Israel had found the MEK “useful”, Bruck reported, but the official declined to elaborate.

Not only can MEK not be trusted as an objective source of information, but the violence carried out against Americans in the past by this terrorist group should give great pause to anyone, especially members of government, considering supporting this group. Additionally, the bipolar nature of American-MEK relations, from the worst of enemies to best of friends and back again, gives absolutely zero assurance that this group would be conducive to American interests even in the near future.

While the War Party is hoping that MEK will be a valuable propaganda tool in initiating an attack on Iran, they ought not fool themselves into thinking that MEK will bring about regime change internally. Universally hated in Iran for siding with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war, Iranians have little tolerance for this troublemaking group.

It’s best the US just stayed out of the whole brouhaha.

30 thoughts on “More Talks to Remove MEK from Terror List”

  1. When you look at all the vidence, it is clear that it would be incredibly unwise to delist the MEK. Therefore, we can conclude that the US government will go ahead and do it – Hillary will get AIPAC brownie points and more Americans will die.

    1. What you see in these article is not "evidence" at all. The story of a laptop being smuggelled out of Iran has noting to do with the MEK. It was US governement who said they had confiscated it. So Gareth Porter is writing these lines to misslead the public on behalf of the Iranian regime and receive 6 digit sums for consultations. According to documents leaked on the Internet from an ongoing court case, NIAC's Trita Parsi and Gareth Porter (quoted in this article) invoiced Iranian authorities nearly $100,000 for consultations on "Iran Negotiations".

      The MEK do all their found raising from ordianry people. Read this article:

      I think they are right; MEK has no support among the people who endorse the Iranian regime and Ahmadinejad. These past four days have showed that MEK's support base extends only to the people who want freedom and democracy in their beloved country Iran and reject any appeasement of the Ayatollahs.

  2. Nice article but well past the prime. We have already been funding them for years. I suppose it's a little awkward always playing both sides of the fence.

  3. It always amazes me how antiwar writers are so clueless about the MEK/PMOI. But when you start your article by quoting a source like Trita Parsi it all comes together. The same Trita Parsi whose NIAC is viewed by the Iranian community with suspicion due to his links with the Iranian regime and advocacy for policies that benefit the Iranian regime ( ). His links with the MOIS agents like Massoud Khodabandeh who NIAC attempted to bring into the country several years ago would leave unbiased person wondering what is objectives really are. Fortunately, Khodabandeh was prevented from entering the country.

    With regards to the accuracy of MEK nuclear revelations Frank Pabian, a senior adviser on nuclear nonproliferation at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, strongly disagrees about the inaccuracy of PMOI/MEK and NCRI's revelations. “They’re right 90 percent of the time,” he said of the council’s disclosures about Iran’s clandestine sites. “That doesn’t mean they’re perfect, but 90 percent is a pretty good record.” ( )

    The tired stale accusation of the MEK attempting to ignite a war is what is disseminated by the Iran lobby to manipulate the sentiments within the antiwar community. The MEK has always called for the third option- no war, no appeasement only support for change by the people of Iran. The fact of the matter is that the State Department has been meddling in Iranian affairs by putting the MEK on the terror list in favor of the ayatollahs. Allegations against the MEK have been fabricated as has been proven by countless experts who have researched, dissected, and debunked them. ( & )

  4. @ @perspolis88

    MEK is a terrorist SECT and not an organization and has killed hundreds of ordinary Iranians. They are complete traitors that sold their country to Saddam. They live in a damn camp in Iraq and according to those who have escaped they are forcefully kept their and killed if they get caught escaping. They are isolated from the world, have no tv, radio, internet. Are not allowed to have sexual relationships or children…..

  5. The Rajavi's have friends in high places, otherwise the Iraqi government would have liquidated Camp Ashraf and forced the remainder to surrender to Iran shortly after 2003. These guys are seriously radioactive. Nobody wants to touch them except for the Neo-Cons. They just want to use them to start a war with Iran … and undoubtedly throw them under the bus as soon as it's convenient. The 1980 coup d'etat left anyone not named Khomeini shit outta luck and dangling from the gallows, so it wouldn't be the first revolution they got b0ned out of … like old times.

    1. Trying to tie the MEK to the "Neo-cons" is just another example of the Iranian regime's attempts to discredit them. All one needs to do is to take a look at the list of nearly 100 members of Congress who so far have co-sponsored HRES 60 calling for the removal of the MEK from the terror list to see the fallacy in that statement. Last I checked General Wesley Clark, Gov. Bill Richardson, Gov. Howard Dean, and former Rep. Patrick Kennedy are not Neo-cons either. This issue has bi-partisan support because because the terror label is unjust as alluded to by the 9th District Court of Appeals ruling in favor of the MEK last year. ( )

      The MEK are not radioactive. They have been the sacrificial lamb in efforts by the State Department to appease an expansionist extremist regime that murders its own people. A failed policy pursued as a result of the disinformation spewed by the Trita Parsi's and regime apologists who have economic interests intertwined with the Iranian regime ( ; ).

      1. Rather funny, that you listed Wesley Clark, Richardson, Dean and Kennedy as not being neo-cons.____Just because someone puts a D behind their name doesn't mean they are not neo-cons. Take a look at Obama!! Most of the Dems are neo-cons. ____Neo-con Republicrats rule Washington and have for a few decades. It's so obvious yet so many people seem to still believe there is a divide between parties when in fact other than wedge issues it's all just a game. ____Being fooled by their good cop bad cop stuff is for kids. The adults in the room figured it out a long time ago.

    2. So individuals like: Eli Wiesel, Howard Dean, Patrick Kennedy, Bill Richardson, Louis Freeh, Desmond Tutu, Mary Robinson (the former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights), some 4,000 parliamentarians, primary from the socialist/democratic parties in Europe are neo-cons? What a shallow journalism.

  6. A bona fide terrorist group that openly maintains healthy ties with Israel- imagine that!

    The MEK will get its just desserts all in good time- they'll either be crushed by the Iranians, or they'll be abandoned and discredited by the West and THEN crushed by the Iranians. Either way, the MEK leaders- indeed, even the lowest rifleman- should know that to ally with any Western government is akin to making a deal with the devil- they'll get thrown under the bus just as soon as their usefulness has expired.

  7. MEK was and it always be a terrorist group, they simply betrayed their brothers and sisters in Iran letting them to be killed by the regime.., left Iran to joining Saddam Hussein and his regime fighting Iranian.

    That alone shows the fact that this group is and been a puppet to USA whom follows the direction made by Neo-cons whom their main office is somewhere in white house…!

    Look putting it simply.., MEK is a religious fundamentalism as the Turkish regime or the Libyan council is.., although they are modernized version of a modernized religious (they wear colorful ties and sometimes use Harvard color…!) .., but their brutality is as present Islamic Republic of Iran which contradict their idea in democracy.., here MEK and their “democratic” approach that they are talking or presenting for now.., soothes the US and NATO present foreign policies using these kind of organizations.., like in Libya to achieve their militarism goals. Otherwise MEK is no longer by the Iranian people considered a element of freedom nor they have power to do anything in Iran but spying for US and NATO.., here they are promised by US.., Hillary Clinton.., to be released as a Terrorist groups if they follow what US is dictating to them and for them to do.

  8. So individuals like: Eli Wiesel, Howard Dean, Patrick Kennedy, Bill Richardson, Louis Freeh, Desmond Tutu, Mary Robinson (the former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights), some 4,000 parliamentarians, primary from the socialist/democratic parties in Europe are neo-cons? What a shallow journalism.

    Also note that there have been a number high profile court hearings on the MeK, here in the US but most importantly in Europe's high courts (including one in UK and one in France). They all have rejected the unfair "terrorism" against the MeK..

    The FACT is: all true democratic and peace-loving and genuinely humanitarian individuals have been for the MeK. The list is too long to mention here.

    There was a pro-MeK meeting in Paris last month. More than 100,000 participated in it. That is an unprecedented show of support for the MeK. And that is outside its homeland. Never before in the history of any political party or organization.

  9. 1- MEK never asked for a war with Iran. In fact what they say is no war and no flirting with the criminal regime of Iran. Instead there is a third way which is supporting the "real" opposition of Mullahs who is MEK and some other groups that are all gathered in national council of resistance. All they need is for US and other countries to stopp handcuffing theem while they leaft the lobbyists of Mullahs free.
    2- Pleas estop distributing this lie that MEK killed US citizens. What you refer to was done more than 35 years ago. The muslim leaders of MEK were put in prison by SAVAK (intelligence service of Shah) then. Savak then supported a small marxist group of MEK members to change the ideology of MEK to marxism. that group killed a couple of US citizens but they killed 10s of MEK muslim members as well. The current leaders of MEK had nothing to do with that. The Muslim leaders came out of prison a few weeks before the recolution and started a new muslim MEK.

  10. 3- These links show why US congressmen support Ashraf and delisting of MEK:

    4- here are the links that show how Mr. Parsi and NIAC is connected to Mullahs and how supportive of them they are:

  11. Thanks for administering this abounding article! I feel absinthian apropos it and acclaim acquirements added on this subject. it's acutely accessible on account of me. I ability you array already added soon. dissertation editing services

Comments are closed.