• 7 July 2011
  • Posted By Jamal Abdi
  • 3 Comments
  • Congress, MEK, Neo-Con Agenda

Former U.S. officials have admitted to receiving cash to speak at pro-MEK conferences.  Now, officials who may be getting paid to publicly advocate in support of MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq) are being invited to testify before Congress.

Today at 2pm, a House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee is holding a hearing on the MEK in which three out of the four witnesses  have appeared at conferences to advocate for the MEK to be removed from the U.S. terror list.

[update: watch the hearing live here]

Among the officials is former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who flew to Paris last December to appear alongside MEK leader Maryam Rajavi and call for the U.S. to remove MEK from the terrorist list and start “offering all possible overt and covert support to the opposition.”

Interestingly, the only official testifying today who has not participated in pro-MEK events, Ray Takeyh, has been falsely smeared by MEK as being “pro-ayatollah” and “a leading figure of the pro-Iranian regime circles.”

Unfortunately, none of this comes as a surprise.  In fact, the Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), and top members like Ted Poe (R-TX), are themselves avowed supporters of the MEK.  They even recently led a delegation to Iraq where they pushed the MEK agenda and promptly got themselves kicked out of the country.  The embarrassing incident prompted the U.S. Embassy in Iraq to publicly distance itself from Rohrabacher and his pals and explain the group did not speak for the U.S.

If only now somebody would step up to explain why the laws aren’t being enforced to prevent former officials from getting paid to appear alongside terrorist leaders like Maryam Rajavi.

To learn more about the MEK and its campaign of political pressure, visit www.MEKterror.com.

Posted By Jamal Abdi

    3 Responses to “MEK supporters brought to testify before Congress”

  1. Pirouz says:

    MEK? Ain’t those the pipple fightin’ those terrible eye-ray-nians? Yeah, those terrible eye-ray-nians; the ones that stone wimmin to death; that totalitarian state. Those pipple are terrible.

    I mean, even that there NIAC trash-talks eye-ran–and they’re eye-ray-nian! . Everybody’s doin’ it’!

    We gottta take out eye-ran. Yes sir-ee, let’s back MEK against those terrible eye-ray-nians.

  2. Patrick says:

    Why is NIAC is so pissed at MEK ? Let these poor people do their thing. What ever that thing is…….

    • David Elliott says:

      Why is NIAC getting involved in the debate over the potential de-listing of the Mujahedin?

      The MEK opposes the core principles that NIAC stands for: peace, democracy, human rights, and a strong Iranian-American community.

      We stand for peace, not war. We support a resolution to the many troubling issues regarding Iran, including the government’s disregard for human rights and the rule of law, through peaceful solutions. This is a position shared by Iran’s indigenous human rights and democracy movement. The MEK has a long history of using violence and human rights abuses to achieve its political ends. The MEK is also a major force for war with Iran.

      We stand for democracy. We believe the Iranian people are the only ones who can choose Iran’s destiny, not policymakers in Washington, cult leaders in Paris or autocrats in Tehran. History has proven that non-violent means provides the best prospects for replacing dictatorships with democratic regimes. Leaders of the Iranian Green movement have expressed deep concern about the potential de-listing of the MEK, due to its negative impact on their non-violent struggle for democracy. The MEK stands for authoritarian rule and seeks to replace Iran’s current unelected rulers with its own unelected ruler, Maryam Rajavi.

      We stand for human rights. We have called for stringent human rights mechanisms to be put in place in Iran to protect the human rights of the Iranian people. Just as we cannot sit idly by while the Iranian government’s violates human rights, we cannot be silent as the MEK abuses its members. The State Department, the FBI, Human Rights Watch, RAND, and others have documented MEK human rights abuses and cult activities carried out against its rank and file members, including forced detainment at Camp Ashraf, forced separation from spouses and children, and torture that has led to death.

      We stand for a strong Iranian-American community. We support a politically active, civically engaged Iranian-American community whose voices are heard by policymakers in Washington. The MEK seeks to monopolize the political space in Washington and to drown out our community’s voices to advance an agenda we oppose in the name of our community and the Iranian people.

      But the MEK is a cult whose members are not responsible for the decisions of its leaders. Should we not support these innocent captives of the MEK?

      The situation for many of the members of the MEK is tragic. We support protections for these innocent people suffering under MEK leadership. RAND predicts that a full 70% of the inhabitants of Camp Ashraf were brought to the camp under false pretenses or against their will. The FBI has documented how children of MEK members are separated from them and used for fraudulent fundraising in Europe. But the suffering that occurs under the MEK cannot be addressed by further legitimizing the leaders of this cult organization.

      If the MEK is delisted, and their clout and legitimacy expands in Washington, it will only tighten the MEK leadership’s grip on the individuals who have forcibly been brought into the cult. It will become increasingly difficult to resolve the serious human rights abuses that are conducted by the MEK. Instead, the leaders of the MEK must be held responsible and the members of the organization who have been indoctrinated, separated from their family, and even held against their will must be provided a way to leave the cult and chose their own future.

      http://www.niacouncil.org/site/PageServer?pagename=mek_faq

Leave a Reply




XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


Sign the Petition

 

7,349 signatures

Tell Google: Stop playing Persian Gulf name games!

May 14, 2012
Larry Page
Chief Executive Officer
Google Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, California 94043

Dear Mr. Page:

It has come to our attention that Google has begun omitting the title of the Persian Gulf from its Google Maps application. This is a disconcerting development given the undisputed historic and geographic precedent of the name Persian Gulf, and the more recent history of opening up the name to political, ethnic, and territorial disputes. However unintentionally, in adopting this practice, Google is participating in a dangerous effort to foment tensions and ethnic divisions in the Middle East by politicizing the region’s geographic nomenclature. Members of the Iranian-American community are overwhelmingly opposed to such efforts, particularly at a time when regional tensions already have been pushed to the brink and threaten to spill over into conflict. As the largest grassroots organization in the Iranian-American community, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) calls on Google to not allow its products to become propaganda tools and to immediately reinstate the historically accurate, apolitical title of “Persian Gulf” in all of its informational products, including Google Maps.

Historically, the name “Persian Gulf” is undisputed. The Greek geographer and astronomer Ptolemy referencing in his writings the “Aquarius Persico.” The Romans referred to the "Mare Persicum." The Arabs historically call the body of water, "Bahr al-Farsia." The legal precedent of this nomenclature is also indisputable, with both the United Nations and the United States Board of Geographic Names confirming the sole legitimacy of the term “Persian Gulf.” Agreement on this matter has also been codified by the signatures of all six bordering Arab countries on United Nations directives declaring this body of water to be the Persian Gulf.

But in the past century, and particularly at times of escalating tensions, there have been efforts to exploit the name of the Persian Gulf as a political tool to foment ethnic division. From colonial interests to Arab interests to Iranian interests, the opening of debate regarding the name of the Persian Gulf has been a recent phenomenon that has been exploited for political gain by all sides. Google should not enable these politicized efforts.

In the 1930s, British adviser to Bahrain Sir Charles Belgrave proposed to rename the Persian Gulf, “Arabian Gulf,” a proposal that was rejected by the British Colonial and Foreign offices. Two decades later, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company resurrected the term during its dispute with Mohammad Mossadegh, the Iranian Prime Minister whose battle with British oil interests would end in a U.S.-sponsored coup d'état that continues to haunt U.S.-Iran relations. In the 1960s, the title “Arabian Gulf” became central to propaganda efforts during the Pan-Arabism era aimed at exploiting ethnic divisions in the region to unite Arabs against non-Arabs, namely Iranians and Israelis. The term was later employed by Saddam Hussein to justify his aims at territorial expansion. Osama Bin Laden even adopted the phrase in an attempt to rally Arab populations by emphasizing ethnic rivalries in the Middle East.

We have serious concerns that Google is now playing into these efforts of geographic politicization. Unfortunately, this is not the first time Google has stirred controversy on this topic. In 2008, Google Earth began including the term “Arabian Gulf” in addition to Persian Gulf as the name for the body of water. NIAC and others called on you then to stop using this ethnically divisive propaganda term, but to no avail. Instead of following the example of organizations like the National Geographic Society, which in 2004 used term “Arabian Gulf” in its maps but recognized the error and corrected it, Google has apparently decided to allow its informational products to become politicized.

Google should rectify this situation and immediately include the proper name for the Persian Gulf in Google Maps and all of its informational products. The exclusion of the title of the Persian Gulf diminishes your applications as informational tools, and raises questions about the integrity and accuracy of information provided by Google.

We strongly urge you to stay true to Google’s mission – “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful” – without distorting or politicizing that information. We look forward to an explanation from you regarding the recent removal of the Persian Gulf name from Google Maps and call on you to immediately correct this mistake.

Sincerely,

[signature]

Share this with your friends: