USA military in bed with Iranian terrorists

[Andreus]

source....cnn.com

.....

U.S. protects Iranian opposition group in Iraq

POSTED: 11:07 p.m. EDT, April 5, 2007



BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- An Iranian opposition group based in Iraq, despite being considered terrorists by the United States, continues to receive protection from the American military in the face of Iraqi pressure to leave the country.

It's a paradox possible only because the United States considers the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, or MEK, a source of valuable intelligence on Iran.
Iranian officials tied the MEK to an explosion in February at a girls school in Zahedan, Iran. (Full story)

The group also is credited with helping expose Iran's secret nuclear program through spying on Tehran for decades. And the group is considered an ally to America because of its opposition to Tehran.

However, the U.S. State Department officially considers the MEK a terrorist organization -- meaning no American can deal with it; U.S. banks must freeze its assets; and any American giving support to its members is committing a crime.

The U.S. military, though, regularly escorts MEK supply runs between Baghdad and its base, Camp Ashraf.

"The trips for procurement of logistical needs also take place under the control and protection of the MPs," said Mojgan Parsaii, vice president of MEK and leader of Camp Ashraf.

That's because, according to U.S. documents, coalition forces regard MEK as protected people under the Geneva Conventions.

"The coalition remains deeply committed to the security and rights of the protected people of Ashraf," U.S. Maj. Gen. John D. Gardner wrote in March 2006.

The group also enjoys the protection of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

"The ICRC has made clear that the residents of Camp Ashraf must not be deported, expelled or repatriated," according to an ICRC letter.

Despite repeated requests, neither Iran's ambassador in Baghdad nor the U.S. military would comment on MEK, also known as Mojahedin Khalq Organization, or MKO.

But former U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said, "What we have here is a policy that described the people here from the MEK as a protected group, and one of our coalition partner countries is actually protecting them in the camp where they mostly are, but there is no change in our policy that the MEK, we still regard them as a terrorist organization."

When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, Green Berets arrived at Camp Ashraf to find gardens and monuments there, along with more than 2,000 well-maintained tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, anti-aircraft guns and vehicles.

All 3,800 camp residents were questioned by Americans -- including, interestingly, a female tank battalion. No arrests were made, and the camp quickly surrendered under a cease-fire agreement -- an agreement that also guaranteed its safety.

"Everyone's entry to the camp and his departure are controlled by the U.S. military police force," Parsaii said.

The MEK denies it is a terrorist group. Both Iran and the Iraqi government, however, accuse the group of ongoing terrorist attacks, and the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government wants it out.

"We gave this organization a six-month deadline to leave Iraq, and we informed the Red Cross," said Shirwan al-Wa'eli, Iraq's national security minister. "And presumably, our friends the Americans will respect our decision and they will not stay on Iraqi land."

For now, however, the United States continues to protect MEK.
"There are counter-pressures, too," Khalilzad said. "There are people who say, 'No, they should be allowed to stay here.' And as you know, around the world there are people with different views toward them."

 

[slobone]

I heard about this at least 2 or 3 years ago. Some people would describe MEK as a cult.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen_al-Khalq

At a minimum they're on the flaky side -- the all-female tank battalion suggests they've been watching too many James Bond movies.

It's very dubious that their "intelligence" from Iran is up to date or useful.

 

[69Strat]

The group also enjoys the protection of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

LOL, nothing like having the Red Cough on your side.

 

[jkirk3000]

Perhaps this goes under the doctrine, the enemy of our enemy is our friend, regardless of how bad this friend may be. We sometimes choose as allies groups or countries that are almost as bad as our enemies of the time. A perfect example of this would be WWII, where we not only allied with the Soviet Union under Stalin, but helped supply & feed them.

 

[Kulindahr]

What a tangled web....

Maybe they could be [STRIKE]redeployed[/STRIKE] relocated to, oh, Afghanistan.

 

[Just_Believe18]

Very awkward, I agree.

 

[Nishin]

Was it not supposed to be the "war against terror"

 

[Andreus]

this is a terifyingly complex issue and i have reread the article quite a few times and it just feels so wrong for so many reasons

aside from the rampant hypocricy of the basic protection of terrorists as the admin accuses pelosi of talking to terrorist sponsoring nations, there is the issue of failure to obey the wishes of the Iraqi government

i dont buy the whole issue of adhering to the geneva conventions because Dubyas AG went to the trouble of shedding us if that hindrance. Dont get me wrong, i dont agree with that decision, but it seems you cant have it both ways.

all for the posiblility of information....

i dont buy it

this is how saddam got in power and the least we can do for the men who gave their lives in this war is to not recreate that mistake

i wish i knew more about this whole issue

 

[JayHawk]

Well we should then stop the practice of offering deals for criminals turning on other criminals, never ever should we receive intel from insiders who snitch. The letter of the law is the letter of the law and we should not subvert it for any reason. We should simply be above such things. Maybe we will catch someone someday after they have done what ever they plan to do. We can raise a team of James bond like personas to fly their MG roadsters into Iran in the face of their entire military so that they can collect intel. Yep decisions like that are the reason we had no intel apparatus after 8 years of a demon caesar

 

[Andreus]

we will always disagree on this point maazda... i really like ya buddy and i have grown to respect you, but we will have to agree that we have different core values

the only reason we fight against the terorists is to protect our identity as a nation and protect our lives

if we destroy ourselves For the terrorists as we surrender our values just to save our hides in some misguided attempt to fight them, we are doing what they want.

we are dismantling the core values of america

for this reason i will always consider dubya's policies one of the greatest boosts al qaeda has ever been handed

 

[JayHawk]

Right and while I can fully understand that point of view, the method of working with a lesser evil to get to a larger threat is a staple of our criminal justice system. Why it should not transcend our fight external to the US I have no idea.

 

[Andreus]

well we may not agree but we at least understand each other and respect that understanding

thats alot

 

[Centexfarmer]

Right and while I can fully understand that point of view, the method of working with a lesser evil to get to a larger threat is a staple of our criminal justice system. Why it should not transcend our fight external to the US I have no idea.

well we may not agree but we at least understand each other and respect that understanding

thats alot

For the life of me, I don't understand why we don't see more exchanges like this in this forum.

This is why I personally like the both of you.

 

[Andreus]

wow

three regular CE&P posters with differing opinions that like each other

this may start a trend

thanks centex ... i feel the same way about you

 

[Kulindahr]

Right and while I can fully understand that point of view, the method of working with a lesser evil to get to a larger threat is a staple of our criminal justice system. Why it should not transcend our fight external to the US I have no idea.

The practice also distorts our 'justice' system.
Prosecutors regularly pile on five or six charges for a single momentary action, just to get a plea bargain down to one they think is close to the reality. That becomes habit, with results such as I have witnessed -- innocent people losing business, home, and marriage trying to fight the way the system is supposed to fight. attempting to prove their innocence, only to find that being charged with a half-dozen things for a single act weights the jury so against them that there is no way to win -- and it results in thousands of innocent people annually taking plea bargains, pleading "no contest" to something they never at all did, just to avoid the possibility of a decade in prison from a jury selected for its naivete instead of intelligence.

Similar distortions must result from the practice when used 'externally' -- including, not surprisingly, turning in innocent people for benefits in return... such as money.

 

[Sausy]

wow

three regular CE&P posters with differing opinions that like each other

this may start a trend

thanks centex ... i feel the same way about you

Hey,I like all of you guys too,and I think it's a great sign if we can continue being civil and even finding some common ground.Disagreement doesn't always have to be disagreeable.....and talk and communication might lead to more finding of common ground,at least respect and understanding for the other's views.I'm on the common ground train!