Daniella Pletka of the Enterprise Blog wrote an article on MKO’s lobby in the United States and its lobbying efforts to get support for its removal from FTO list of US Department of State. Her illuminating post on MKO terrorists’ lobby in her country, as usual encountered with a deluge of Ad hominem attacks by MKO agents.
In her post Ms. Pletka offers evidences on MKO cult-like nature and dictatorial system:
The Hill reported on Sunday that the U.S.-designated terrorist group the Mujahedin e Khalq (aka the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, aka the National Council of Resistance) has acquired lobbying help from Democratic powerhouse Akin Gump to support its removal from the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization list.
To be fair to Akin Gump, plenty of GOPers have taken up cudgels for the MEK, though the direct cash payoff to them is less clear.
The MEK has for years lobbied aggressively via a myriad of front groups to be taken off the terrorism list. Shrewd lobbyists, they have moved well beyond their street corner and airports campaign (“support Iran’s starving children”) to “grassroots” organizations and hired guns. And I get why they don’t want to be on the terrorism list; it comes with a spate of sanctions and restrictions that are odious to most groups no matter their intentions. But what of their partisans? Do they know the MEK? If not, check out Michael Rubin’s piece on the MEK or this FBI report from 2004, the list of murdered Americans, the money laundering, the cult-like behavior, the … terrorism. Is it all a lie? Has the MEK seen the light? Or is this a way of trying to oust the foul regime in Tehran?
She ends the post by posing some controversial questions:
And here’s another question: Where’s the FBI and the Justice Department? A terrorist group is lobbying in the United States. It’s paying top political fixers to make its case. It’s paying speaking fees to former government officials. Where’s the money from? How’s it being transferred? And would it be okay for Hezbollah to do this? Al Qaeda?
Following the fallacious attacks by sympathizers of the cult of Rajavi, Danielle Pletka posts another piece to respond on June 16. She confirms her arguments by addressing the commenters individually:
Yesterday, I wrote a post on the Mojahedin E Khalq, a U.S. designated terrorist group that has, through supporters, hired a big Dem lobbying firm to help them get off the State Department’s terrorism list. And as expected, I got a deluge of comments to the post. Here are some highlights: Apparently, according to commenter CNGS, some “intelligent folks” get that the MEK, a “group with a shinning [sic] record of close t[o] a half century of struggle against the Sheik and the Shah, having irrigated the tree of liberty with the blood of more than 120,000 martyrs,” is the best alternative to the mullahs now ruling Iran. After all, according to AH, the “MEK was put on terrorist list because of some lobbyist in Washington.”
… as for the lobbying that got the MEK on the list, all I can say is that they should have been on the list years before. Killing Americans in terrorist attacks merits a listing. Read the FBI report. I linked to it yesterday, here it is again. READ IT.
Then there were some other comments, in Alexgeorge1’s vein: He thinks that we “neocons better answer for the debacle you created in Iraq, handing that country to the terrorist mullahs of Iran on a silver platter.” Apparently, I also do wrong to reference my colleague Michael Rubin, whom Shahab accuses of writing “yellow journalism at best.” A few just helpfully offered “shame” on me.
Some comments in response; take them in the vein of helpful hints to the policy and etiquette impaired:
—Calling me names isn’t going to win me (or anyone) over to your cause.
—Organizations that used to be headquartered in Baghdad taking money from Saddam Hussein should probably shy away from the topic of Iraq. It might appear you miss dear old Saddam.
—Suggestions that the MEK was put on the terrorism list to appease Iran are well placed, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be on the terrorism list.
—Just because well-known people have taken up the cudgels for the MEK doesn’t whitewash the stain of American blood nor address the question of the group’s own record of Islamism, cult-like behavior, murder, terrorism, or money-laundering. I note that no one denied those points in my original piece.
