Leading Conservatives Openly Support a Terrorist Group

Leading neo conservatives, Glenn.



Leading Conservatives Openly Support a Terrorist Group

Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com

http://www.lewrockwell.com/spl2/cons...errorists.html

Imagine if a group of leading American liberals met on foreign soil with – and expressed vocal support for – supporters of a terrorist group that had (a) a long history of hateful anti-American rhetoric, (b) an active role in both the takeover of a U.S. embassy and Saddam Hussein's brutal 1991 repression of Iraqi Shiites, (c) extensive financial and military support from Saddam, (d) multiple acts of violence aimed at civilians, and (e) years of being designated a "Terrorist organization" by the U.S. under Presidents of both parties, a designation which is ongoing? The ensuing uproar and orgies of denunciation would be deafening.

But on December 23, a group of leading conservatives – including Rudy Giuliani and former Bush officials Michael Mukasey, Tom Ridge, and Fran Townsend – did exactly that. In Paris, of all places, they appeared at a forum organized by supporters of the Mujaheddin-e Khalq (MEK) – a group declared by the U.S. since 1997 to be "terrorist organization" – and expressed wholesale support for that group. Worse – on foreign soil – they vehemently criticized their own country's opposition to these Terrorists and specifically "demanded that Obama instead take the [] group off the U.S. list of foreign terrorist organizations and incorporate it into efforts to overturn the mullah-led government in Tehran." In other words, they are calling on the U.S. to embrace this Saddam-supported, U.S.-hating Terrorist group and recruit them to help overthrow the government of Iran. To a foreign audience, Mukasey denounced his own country's opposition to these Terrorists as "nothing less than an embarrassment."

The whole government is a terrorist organization. Isn't writing something like this redundant?

Yeah. I've been talking about this for several years now. I'm glad someone is finally picking up on this. And I really wish Ron would pick up on this story in the 2012 debates. It would be classic. "Hey Rudy. Why are you supporting terrorists that killed Americans back in the 1970s"? Ron played nice last go round. This time he needs to swing for the fences...and a few heads while he's at it.

They seem about as "terrorist" as the Founding Fathers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kludge

They seem about as "terrorist" as the Founding Fathers.

---

:rolleyes: They're about as "terrorist" as Al Qaeda. Probably more so because I doubt AQ ever acted independently of the CIA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmdrake

:rolleyes: They're about as "terrorist" as Al Qaeda. Probably more so because I doubt AQ ever acted independently of the CIA.

---

Yes, opposition to one of the most oppressive anti-Christian, anti-democracy regimes through relatively peaceful means to achieve leftist ideals of Democracy is pretty much Al Qaeda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kludge

Yes, opposition to one of the most oppressive anti-Christian, anti-democracy regimes through relatively peaceful means to achieve leftist ideals of Democracy is pretty much Al Qaeda.

---

Did you even read the article? The MEK KILLED AMERICANS BEFORE THEY DECIDED THEY HATED THE MULLAHS MORE If hating Iran is enough to prove your a "good guy" then we were wrong to attack Iraq. (Actually we were wrong to attack Iraq but for different reasons).

Oh, and by the way. The reason the MEK fell out with the Mullahs is because the MEK is communist. Yes these are Islamic MARXIST terrorists.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...d/para/mek.htm

MEK was founded in the 1960s by a group of college-educated Iranian leftists opposed to the country’s pro-Western ruler, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Although the group took part in the 1979 Islamic revolution that replaced the shah with a Shiite Islamist regime, MEK’s ideology, a blend of Marxism and Islamism, put it at odds with the postrevolutionary government. In 1981, the group was driven from its bases on the Iran-Iraq border and resettled in Paris, where it began supporting Iraq in its eight-year war against Khomeini’s Iran. In 1986, MEK moved its headquarters to Iraq where it received its primary support to attack the regime in Iran. During the 2003 Iraq war, U.S. forces cracked down on MEK’s bases in Iraq, and in June 2003 French authorities raided an MEK compound outside Paris and arrested 160 people, including Maryam Rajavi.

The article cites no source on the attacks of US military & contractors in Iran, and I can't find one elsewhere. Though, I'm not sure I should hate a group for killing US military & defense contractors helping a regime oppress them.

At any rate, PMOI hasn't committed any type of terrorist act in over a decade since publicly renouncing terrorism and are one of the few secular revolutionary groups in the Middle East demanding democracy. They've already been removed as a terrorist organization by the EU.

I'm not trying to cheer for PMOI, but I think you'll have a hard time convincing people this is news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kludge

The article cites no source on the attacks of US military & contractors in Iran, and I can't find one elsewhere. Though, I'm not sure I should hate a group for killing US military & defense contractors helping a regime oppress them.

At any rate, PMOI hasn't committed any type of terrorist act in over a decade since publicly renouncing terrorism and are one of the few secular revolutionary groups in the Middle East demanding democracy. They've already been removed as a terrorist organization by the EU.

I'm not trying to cheer for PMOI, but I think you'll have a hard time convincing people this is news.

---

Do you deny the fact that they are Marxists too? And no it's not news. Our country has a long history of supporting terrorists when it fits our agenda. Anyway I hope Ron Paul uses this in the 2012 debates. Let ghouliani come up with a reason for supporting Marxists that once sided with the Islamic revolution in Iran and are still on our state department's terrorism watch list.

They are marxists .

I'd take a secular Marxist over a Muslim Theocratic Fascist, but it doesn't really matter because they're small, terrorized by the current Iranian regime, and relatively unorganized. I sympathize with them, but I wouldn't want the US funding them as means of another proxy war there. I wouldn't complain if it became news, but I wouldn't want to see RP being the one making it news.

Same kind of Marxists the CIA overthrew in Iran before .....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kludge

I'd take a secular Marxist over a Muslim Theocratic Fascist, but it doesn't really matter because they're small, terrorized by the current Iranian regime, and relatively unorganized. I sympathize with them, but I wouldn't want the US funding them as means of another proxy war there. I wouldn't complain if it became news, but I wouldn't want to see RP being the one making it news.

---

Yeah , down with the funding . Let some newspaper reporter put that out .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kludge

I'd take a secular Marxist over a Muslim Theocratic Fascist, but it doesn't really matter because they're small, terrorized by the current Iranian regime, and relatively unorganized. I sympathize with them, but I wouldn't want the US funding them as means of another proxy war there. I wouldn't complain if it became news, but I wouldn't want to see RP being the one making it news.

---

You still don't get it. For one thing secular Marxists have killed far more people than "Muslim theocrats". And there are no "Islamo fascists". That's a BS made up term by the neocons and frankly I'm shocked that you fell for that. Fascism is corporatism. The United States is far more fascist than Iran. Fascism is not about hating Jews or burning books. It's about a particular economic theory.

Further, the reason these Islamo Marxists hate the theocracy in Iran is not because the regime is repressive. They hate it because the regime isn't oppressive enough.

Lastly Ron Paul would do good to use this story at an opportune time, whether you agree with that or not. It's a way to show the hypocrisy and the weakness of the neocon position. The neocons aren't against terrorism per se. They are just on paper against terrorism that they supposedly don't control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oyarde

Yeah , down with the funding . Let some newspaper reporter put that out .

---

No newspaper is going to point that out due to Operation Mockingbird. And even it if did get out it would be buried and/or spun to where it wouldn't have its needed effect. To wake up voters were need to shock them back into their senses. Ron Paul should use this information in the debates. Just because it goes against someone's pet agenda who's ok with terrorism in certain circumstances is no excuse. Make ghouliani explain why he supports a group that killed Americans (here's another source) is Marxist and has been on Republican and Democrat state department terrorist lists. And if ghouliani tries to come back with the lame "enemy of my enemy" argument, Ron could respond with the point that this was our excuse for supporting Saddam, and then later Bush used Saddam's attack on Iran as part of the justification for invading Iraq.

This story fits perfectly with Ron Paul's blowback argument and it would make it more salient. It's kind of hard to argue against the proposition that we shouldn't be supporting people that we ourselves say are terrorists. This would fly a lot better than the "ask Al Qaeda why they attacked us" line IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmdrake

You still don't get it. For one thing secular Marxists have killed far more people than "Muslim theocrats". And there are no "Islamo fascists". That's a BS made up term by the neocons and frankly I'm shocked that you fell for that. Fascism is corporatism. The United States is far more fascist than Iran. Fascism is not about hating Jews or burning books. It's about a particular economic theory.

Further, the reason these Islamo Marxists hate the theocracy in Iran is not because the regime is repressive. They hate it because the regime isn't oppressive enough.

Lastly Ron Paul would do good to use this story at an opportune time, whether you agree with that or not. It's a way to show the hypocrisy and the weakness of the neocon position. The neocons aren't against terrorism per se. They are just on paper against terrorism that they supposedly don't control.

---

I kind of like your summarization of them being against terror they do not control . This is applicable to many govt.'s , I believe .

Rome is burning...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kludge

I'd take a secular Marxist over a Muslim Theocratic Fascist,

---

Something else I forgot to mention. The MEK is not secular. It's an ISLAMIC Marxist organization! So even if you Islamists more than you do Marxists that is still no excuse to have any sympathy for the MEK. The more I think about it the more I am convinced that this issue is the silver bullet to get Ron Paul past the "foreign policy handicap" that he had to deal with last time. No matter how you look at it, this collusion with the MEK makes no freaking since whatsoever. And Ron could tie this back to our early support of Islamists in Afghanistan and how that helped lead to the creation of Al Qaeda in the first place.

The MEK opposes Islamic law, favoring a separation of church and state.

It's worth considering the group may be taken off the US terrorist group list like it was in the EU if this became major news.

"These facts explain why the Iranian government is infuriated and is using its proxies in Iraq to call for the extradition of the members of MEK to Iran. As long as the MEK is located in Camp Ashraf, the Tehran regime will be resisted in Iraq. The MEK not only actively opposes and exposes Iran’s terrorist activities in Iraq, but also acts as a model for secular Iraqi Moslems. The moderate Shiite Moslem MEK deems itself as the antithesis of Tehran’s fundamentalist mullah regime and seeks to create a secular, democratic Iran, a goal which appeals to the many moderate Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis. The MEK provides a humanitarian and peaceful alternative to the extremist and fundamentalist Islam presented by the mullahs. "
http://www.globalpolitician.com/print.asp?id=2740