Bargaining with the Devil

It would seem that there is a great deal at stake for the 150 MEK supporters in Congress. Whether it is these congressional members who are providing Jafarzadeh, the MEK spokesman, with aerial photos of Iran’s nuclear facilities, or vice versa, the Bush administration is having a field day with it at the UN General Assembly.

Of course, the doctored satellite images that took America to war three years ago, proved costly. Body bags and a depleted treasury have prompted the Pentagon to revisit its preemptive nuclear doctrine. The justification would be saving lives – obliterating cities to save a thousand American lives and half a billion dollars seems reasonable. Rumsfeld is right on the ball. School children will grow up learning that Iran had to be nuked so that the Iranians would stop sponsoring terrorists that were going to harm Americans with their nukes 10 years down the line. Oil was reaching $100 a barrel. We wanted to keep Alaska clean for you all.

Sadly, the mainstream media is following suit. Regrettably, there is no free press in this society – it is simply a mouthpiece of corporations and the government. Else, why would the speaker of a terrorist cult the MEK be given a platform? And why would the facts about Iran’s nuclear program be distorted to such an extent?

Even the once reputable The Economist writes "two decades of nuclear deception” (September 10-16th, 2005). The uninformed author of this article, or the ill-intentioned writer, should be reminded that Iran was openly soliciting bids to buy reactors from different countries after Germany, under pressure from the U.S., withheld its reactors which had been duly paid for. In fact, in 1996, Iran filed a lawsuit against Germany’s Kraftwerk Union at the International Commerce Commission.

More importantly, as a signatory to the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the construction of a facility, even a nuclear facility, does not have to be reported to the IAEA (Natanz is a case in point). The only stipulation is that 180 days PRIOR to introducing any nuclear material, the NPT member has to declare the existence of the facility. The construction of the Natanz facility is not a violation of the NPT as the Bush administration would have us believe, echoed by the media. The NPT does allow a member to legally build any nuclear facility, including one for uranium enrichment, so long as it is declared, and safeguarded by the IAEA, and is intended for peaceful purposes.

As for the revelations of Natanz, though Jafarzadeh would like to take credit, if treason can be given credit to; it was revealed by Seymour Hersh, the renowned journalist who exposed the My Lai massacre and the human right abuses at Abu Gharib prison (and Afghanistan), that it was indeed Israel that provided the MEK with the intelligence reports, many unfounded, regarding Iran’s nuclear sights.

The 150 congressional members have betrayed the trust of the American people by bargaining with the devil, the MEK, a terrorist cult who betrayed their own people”

Related posts

First blow of the Trump administration to MEK: Pompeo not in the cabinet

In the conflict between Iran and Israel, where do the MEK stand?

Friend or Foe? Saddam’s Shifting Stance on the MEK