Saturday, April 15, 2006

Raw Story: U.S. engaged in state-sponsored terrorism in Iran


While the Bush administration continues to bluster about its "global war on terror", we now are beginning to learn that they are actively supporting and employing members of a terrorist organization in Iran known as MEK, according to a report today in Raw Story.

Last Thursday, Raw Story's Larisa Alexandrovna reported (On Cheney, Rumsfeld order, US outsourcing special ops, intelligence to Iraq terror group, intelligence officials say) that, according to former and current intelligence officials, the Pentagon has been using a right-wing terrorist organization known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) as an operational asset "to create strife in Iran in preparation for any possible attack."

"[I]nstead of securing a known terrorist organization, which has been responsible for acts of terror against Iranian targets and individuals all over the world – including US civilian and military casualties – Rumsfeld under instructions from Cheney, began using the group on special ops missions into Iran to pave the way for a potential Iran strike," Larisa reported.

"They are doing whatever they want, no oversight at all,” an intelligence source told Larisa.

Larisa reported that the MEK soldiers were told to "quit" their organization and were "renamed" in accordance with a plan conceived by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld so that they could be "converted" into a military special ops team.

According to a UN official close to the Security Council whom Larisa interviewed, the "newly renamed MEK soldiers" were being employed in the place of U.S. military advance teams to commit "acts of violence in hopes of staging an insurgency of the Iranian Sunni population." (emphasis mine)

“We are already at war,” the UN official told RAW STORY.


If true, how much credibility does our government have with its "war on terror" when it is employing some of the same tactics? Is one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter?

Apparently, our leadership is comprised of hypocrites. So what else is new?

While this story is damning enough on its own, it begins to beg the broader question surrounding the original impetus for this "war on terror". If our leaders are willing to employ terrorists to further their aims in Iran, were they also willing to do so back in 2001 when a sleepy American populace was so rudely awakened by the horrible events of 9/11? Perhaps the support of attacks on other nations' citizens is a far cry from inflicting such brutality on one's own, but history tells us that it may not be so far-fetched, after all, in this country.

What will it be next? I shudder to think.

8 Comments:

At 2:39 PM, Blogger Effwit said...

MEK was headquartered for many years in (and supported by) Iraq.

The U.S. bombed their camp at the outset of the 2003 Iraq war. However, they made peace with the U.S.. Rumors have circulated since then that they were on our team.

Iran protested our protection of a known "terrorist" group (MEK) when we refused to turn their operatives over to the Iranians.

Also, The Raw Story is a bit late on the story of U.S. military operations having begun in Iran.

Seymour Hersh published--way back in Jan 2005--that U.S. special forces were already operating in Iran.

 
At 5:11 PM, Blogger DrewL said...

Yes, the news about operatives being present in Iran isn't news, but the info about MEK was news to me.

It appears that one's perception of terrorism depends on who's doing the attacking and who's being attacked. I suspect the Soviets considered the mujahedeen in Afghanistan to be the equivalent of terrorists during the 1980s. And who supported the mujahedeen? The United States did. In fact, it was U.S. supplied surface to air missiles that allowed the mujahedeen to turn the tide in that conflict. Terrorists or freedom fighters? You be the judge.

 
At 4:42 PM, Blogger Effwit said...

DrewL:

You are right that (AFIAK) news of MEK involvement in the U.S. war plan has been not published anywhere previously.

You also make a very valid point, vis a vis the definition of a terrorist.

BTW, the Stinger buyback program is still in operation, although the useful battery lifetime of those weapons was supposed to have expired a decade ago. The Mujahedeen actually sleep with their missiles in cold weather to keep them warm. Lots of the re-purchased Stingers have been in working order.

 
At 9:36 PM, Blogger DrewL said...

I wonder if, when it gets really cold, it's a "Three Stinger Night"?

Joy to the World.

 
At 3:40 PM, Blogger Eric in Ottawa said...

Of course they are.

This entire fiasco was very transparent from the very beginning (the whole war on terror).
Just look at how successful previous War on ____ ventures have been in the past, and who benefitted and who didn't benefit from them.

It amazes me that so much of the American public blindly swallows the tripe they are fed.

The American school systems have not been entirely good at telling history so much as telling rose tinted fairy tales.

I get the feeling many are overdue for a rude awakening via a retelling from a more global perspective.

 
At 3:45 PM, Blogger Eric in Ottawa said...

Oh, and as to what's next:

Bigger and better of course. That is the American way.

Only THIS time, much of the population will not fall for it. Everyone's level of awareness/consciousness has been raised by the past 6 years. Being lied to repeatedly will do that to you after a while. After a while your gut rejects it and the veil is lifted.

 
At 8:33 PM, Anonymous CC said...

where u be, Monsieur D?

 
At 11:28 PM, Blogger DrewL said...

Just taking a bit of a break due to recent work/travel demands, etc. Also, I'm a big NHL hockey fan, so playoff time garners a major share of my attention. Go Dallas Stars!!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home