If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISIL?

If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISIL?

If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISILRamin Mazaheri, Press TV, January 10 2020:… If Washington assassinated Soleimani because he was a “terrorist”, then logically they should now de-list ISIL as a terrorist group. Why not just come clean, finally? The entire world acknowledges that Soleimani fought terrorism, but if he must be rebranded as a “terrorist” in the West – in Orwellian fashion – then the time has come for the US and its allies to admit they are collaborating with ISIL. Fighting against ISIL makes one a “terrorist”, not fighting with them. Why is that so hard to believe? The current US president said the same thing – are we both wild conspiracy theorists? If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISIL?

If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISILIran Fighting US Sponsored ISIS and MEK

If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISIL?

I remember when ISIL first burst into the global consciousness – with the fall of Mosul on June 4, 2014. I happened to be visiting my parents.

My mother rushed in and told me that terrorists in Toyotas had overrun Iraq’s second-largest city in a modern-day Mongol Horde.

I rolled my eyes.

I explained to her that, as usual, she was exaggerating. What she was describing was undoubtedly impossible, and I patiently explained why:

The West has satellites which are tracking everyone at every moment – surely they would see fleets of armed trucks speeding towards Iraq. Undoubtedly they would open fire, not only to get the human target practice they so adore but because – despite an alleged “withdrawal” at the end of 2011 – they had 30,000 American soldiers and contractors in Iraq to protect. Certainly they would have seen this mass army amassing before they ever left their barracks and notified somebody to do something, if the US didn’t want to fight them. Frankly, not even the US would unleash something which my Mom was describing.

Moms… so gullible and prone to worry, eh? They mean well, but I had no doubt I was totally in the right, and if my Mom wouldn’t or couldn’t understand… what can a son do but humor their mom?

It turned out that I was the gullible one and that my Mom was right. (As I get older I realize this happens more often than I would have previously imagined.)

I was gullible to believe that the US would not do all those things I told my mom they would not, but I was not totally stupid: The spectacularly swift rise of ISIL still cannot be properly explained by Washington.

Tectonic Shift In World Order After Unforced Error By Trump

But the current US president claimed to have the answer in August 2016 – Donald Trump said his predecessor Barack Obama was the “founder of ISIS”.

Certainly that resonated around the world and inside the US. 9/11 made widespread the knowledge that the US created the Taliban, who had come back to bite the hand that fed it. That September Obama returned US soldiers to Iraq, something the average American surely did not want.

Trump toned down his comments slightly, but Trump the campaigner had done what he repeatedly did and what immediately earned him the enmity of the US 1%, Deep State and Wall Street – he openly told truths about US neo-imperialism, which no US presidential candidate had ever even come close to suggesting. Combine this “Main Street” honesty with his similar “you can’t say that” truths against free markets/free trade, as well as the total corruption of the two US political parties, and that’s how you get a reality-TV star as president of the self-appointed “leader of the free world”.

The US returned to Iraq, but they continued to let ISIL run free. Today, the whole world knows that Iranian General Qassem Soleimani – appallingly assassinated by Trump – was the architect who led ISIL’s defeat.

John Bolton’s efforts to remove MEK from Terror list

But the US has known of Iran’s leadership in the war on terror, and the West’s terrorist tolerance, for years. On June 5, 2015, top US news magazine Newsweek ran a story about Soleimani entitled “Iranian Military Mastermind Leading Battle to Recapture Tikrit from ISIS”.

And yet Washington’s propaganda line, being dutifully and unquestioningly repeated by countless US and Western “journalists” is that Soleimani was killed because he was a “terrorist”?

That is insulting on too many levels to list in this brief article.

But it’s not only the brave, incredibly missed martyr Soleimani – whom I described as “the Muslim Che Guevara”, because both were international anti-imperialist fighters and heroes slain by Washington – but all of Iran which fights ISIL.

The West knew this already, too: When it comes to foreign policy Newsweek never seriously deviates from the Washington & Wall Street propaganda lines – the notion is laughable – which is why they probably deeply regret their 2nd-most recent issue: on December 27, 2019, their very cover featured Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei with the caption, “If Iran falls, ISIS rises again.”

Yes. Of course. The whole world knows this about Iran, about Soleimani and about the anti-terror ideals of the Iranian Islamic Revolution. The whole world knows the US and their allies do nothing to stop ISIS.

For decades Iran has been the only country which has sacrificed time, money and lives for foreigners in the international fight against US capitalist-imperialism. This is why the illegal, inhuman slaying of Soleimani must be dressed up as “anti-terrorism” by Washington.

Trump’s Strange, Tense Campaign Against Iran (MEK, Rajavi cult)

I described how, ever since the WMD lie of 2003, US democracy has featured a “false-life syndrome”, where everyone is forced to publicly repeat lies about the machinations of the Pentagon. The Iraq War fundamentally changed US democracy by demanding that no one seriously question the official narrative – no matter how preposterous – something which did occur during their Vietnam War.

WMDs, Soleimani and the creation and support of ISIL – all lies from Washington. If the US did not support ISIL why did Soleimani have to be invited by the Iraqi government to fight them? Either the spectacularly-funded US military is even more rife with corruption than we already know, or they never planned to fight ISIL, but to aid them.

And who is aided more by the slaying of Soleimani than the ISIL terrorists?

That is the fundamental moral question, and this question goes beyond geopolitical strategy – at least to the average, normal person.

However, Western liberal, aristocratic, domestically-resented democracies cannot honestly answer. This is why Germany, France and the UK all publicly supported the assassination, in great shame to their own people.

If Washington assassinated Soleimani because he was a “terrorist”, then logically they should now de-list ISIL as a terrorist group. Why not just come clean, finally?

The entire world acknowledges that Soleimani fought terrorism, but if he must be rebranded as a “terrorist” in the West – in Orwellian fashion – then the time has come for the US and its allies to admit they are collaborating with ISIL. Fighting against ISIL makes one a “terrorist”, not fighting with them.

Why is that so hard to believe? The current US president said the same thing – are we both wild conspiracy theorists?

Hardly – we are simply two people who know just a bit of basic history. Hillary Clinton – who would have probably started a full-scale war with Iran by now – got the horrific, despised anti-Iran cult the MKO (MEK) de-listed even though they are still detestable terrorists and murderers. The US supported the Taliban. The US supports the neo-Nazi groups who led the coup in Ukraine, and who could easily be behind the latest example of the inhuman Western sabotage of airplanes in Iran – today’s terrible crash of a Ukraine International Airlines flight from Tehran.

Why not ISIL as well?

Above all, it would make it clear that Washington’s main enemy in the Muslim World is the continued success and support of the 1979 popular revolution in Iran, and the bad example it sets for their neo-imperial clients worldwide.

Trump claims he wants to fight ISIL, and even claims he is willing to work with Iran to do so, but then he assassinates the leader of the anti-ISIL fight and falsely brands him a “terrorist”?

Pompeo Set To Back The Wrong Group Again (MEK, Rajavi cult)

Calling anti-terror hero Soleimani a “terrorist” is obviously a desperate way to falsely brand all of Iran as “terrorists”, but the world now knows the real truth better than ever. Washington, in their imperialist arrogance, believes that we do not.

Newsweek, Obama, the Clintons and Trump do not care for Iraq or about stopping ISIL, not like Soleimani and Iran.

No amount of Orwellian, mind-erasing doublespeak from Washington will ever change that, and no matter how much they aid ISIL by assassinating its enemies.

Assassinations Supporting MEK Sanctions – US obeys no laws

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of the books ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’ and the upcoming ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism.’

End

If Soleimani Is A Terrorist , When Will The US De-list ISIL?

Link to the source

***

Pompeo supports MKO UANI TerroristsMEK Assassinated Americans

Also read:
https://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/nobody-can-be-comfortable-with-regime-change-involving-mek/

Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEK

Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEKMassoud Khodabandeh, Lobe Log, August 23 2019:… So, when Giuliani says we should be “comfortable” with this group, right-minded people the world over can honestly and unequivocally answer, “No, we are not comfortable ignoring this harsh reality just because the MEK amplifies an anti-Iran message to the world, and no, we don’t believe the MEK have any kind of future in Iran”. Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEK 

MSNBC_Massoud_KhodabandehThe MEK’s man inside the White House (Maryam Rajavi cult, Mojahedin Khalq)

Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEK

By: Massoud and Anne Khodabandeh (Middle East Strategy Conslultants)

Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEKLeaked photo of MEK’s Albanian headquarters

In 2017, John Bolton promised the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK)—wrongly, it turned out—that they would be celebrating in Tehran before the Iranian Revolution’s 40th anniversary in February 2019. This July, at the MEK’s five-day conference in Albania, keynote speaker Rudy Giuliani still insisted the MEK is a “government in exile” and claimed the MEK is “a group that should make us comfortable having regime change”.

For context, promoting a group which is universally despised by Iranians inside and outside the country as traitors already stretches credulity. There is no evidence that Iranians are calling for severe sanctions against themselves. Nor are they calling for regime change. The MEK’s only audience in this respect are a warmongering cabal of Americans, Saudis, Israelis, and British, who like to hear what they want to hear. The rest of the world just isn’t that comfortable with this bizarre, terrorist cult.

Lately, even Europe has distanced itself from lending succour to the group. The MEK no longer has free access to the European Parliament where its activists would harass the MEPs and their staff. This year the MEK was barred from holding its annual Villepinte rally in France and was also banned from rallying by Germany. As a result of this, MEK leader Maryam Rajavi has decamped from Paris to Albania and the MEK announced that Albania is the group’s new headquarters.

The move from Iraq to Albania ought to have allowed unprecedented access to Western journalists keen to investigate the honey pot around which the anti-Iran cabal buzz with excitement. They were soon disappointed, as the MEK built a de facto extra-territorial enclave in Manëz and posted armed guards to keep out unwanted attention. But although the group were physically hidden from view, they were very exposed through their cyber activities.

Although it had been known for some time that the MEK operates a click farm from Albania, it was Murteza Hussain in The Intercept who revealed how the MEK uses fake social media accounts to curate a false narrative about Iran to influence US policy. The Heshmat Alavi scandal focused media attention on what is really happening inside the MEK behind the slickly marketed brand image that Giuliani so admires. This endeavour to scrutinise the MEK has been aided by a series of photographs which were leaked from inside the MEK’s camp in Albania and published in Iran. The photos are very revealing, but in ways that the MEK probably didn’t intend or realise when they were taken. Since the MEK so zealously hides its inner world from public scrutiny, these photos offer us an unguarded glimpse into the operational and organisational life of the cult.

The fact that the photos were taken at all is significant. At first glance they could be showing a session for seniors at the local library or community centre. But we see the women are wearing military uniforms and the men are all wearing similar shirts. Some are wearing ties. This is something the MEK don’t ever do unless in a public facing role. This indicates the images have been deliberately staged for a particular external audience. Certainly they were not meant for internal consumption, but neither is this for the wider public or else they would be on the MEK’s own websites. Based on information about the MEK already in the public domain, we can assume these photos were commissioned by Maryam Rajavi as a marketing ploy to ‘sell’ the MEK brand to financiers and backers.

Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEKLeaked photos showing MEK members at work

There is clearly a deliberate effort to show that the MEK are “professional” workers in this computer room. Everyone is posed looking intently at a screen. Nobody is “off duty” in the pictures; yawning, stretching, drinking coffee, the normal activities of any workers. There is no evidence of relaxed, friendly chat between co-workers, everyone looks very serious. There are no cups of coffee or snacks on the desks. No pictures of family, husbands, wives, children, pets even. No plants or flowers. In spite of the rows of desks being squashed together closely, everyone looks very isolated.

There might be nothing wrong with that. After all, employers want to see their workers busy. But organisational photographs are also about marketing a brand, which includes marketing the core values of an entity. A group which claims, as the MEK does, that it is funded by public donations to struggle for democracy and human rights would surely want to create an image in the mind of the public about transparency, effectiveness, and positivity. By way of contrast, see how Human Rights Watch advertises its work culture. Even a quick Google image search on ‘call center worker’ reveals pictures of relaxed and smiling workers rather than people who look like battery hens. This is not the image any normal company or government office would use to promote their workplace.

In the MEK’s advertising photos the workers are gender segregated. Men sit in one room, women in another. The women all wear hijab. There is no pluralism here. The use of garden chairs and workers using glasses unsuited to screen work reveals that this management doesn’t care at all about the safety, comfort or wellbeing of the workers. They are using a mixture of outdated monitors and laptops. The cables are frayed and tangled.

There is no indication that the workers are happy at their workstations or enjoying their work. Why would they be with the picture of their leader bearing down on them, as in all dictatorships, lest they forget why they are there and who is in charge? (The picture of a solitary Maryam Rajavi is a clear acknowledgement that her husband Massoud Rajavi is dead.)

The MEK’s cultic system means that decisions are imposed from the top down. This means that those decisions are only as intelligent as the leadership. What Rajavi doesn’t understand is that these photos show beyond any words that the MEK doesn’t share our values. The leader is selling unthinking, unquestioning, obedient slaves, people who won’t act or speak unless ordered to do so. And that would only be ordered if it were productive for the MEK, regardless of the needs or desires of the worker.

What these images portray are conditions of modern slavery. These are elderly people who are unable to escape this cult and are coerced into performing work for which they receive no recompense. They exist on cruelly basic accommodation and sustenance, whereby even asking for new underwear puts the petitioner under question about their loyalty to the leader and the cause. They cannot leave because in Albania they have nowhere to go, no identity documents or work permits, no money, and they do not speak the local language. And also because the Trump administration wants the MEK to be there.

So, when Giuliani says we should be “comfortable” with this group, right-minded people the world over can honestly and unequivocally answer, “No, we are not comfortable ignoring this harsh reality just because the MEK amplifies an anti-Iran message to the world, and no, we don’t believe the MEK have any kind of future in Iran”.

(End)

Nobody Can Be “Comfortable” With Regime Change Involving MEK

Link to the source

***

The Many Faces of the MEK, Explained By Its Former Top Spy Massoud KhodabandehThe Many Faces of the MEK, Explained By Its Former Top Spy Massoud Khodabandeh

*** 

Also read:
https://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/bolton-vs-zarif-on-mek-iran/

Bolton Vs. Zarif On MEK

Bolton Zarif MEK IranMassoud Khodabandeh, Lobe Log, May 03 2019:… Hillary Clinton did not take money from the MEK while it was listed as a terrorist entity. And taking the group off the U.S. terrorist list, though controversial at the time due to the MEK’s own well-funded pressure campaign, was not wrong, as it enabled the UNHCR to relocate the members to the safety of a third country. Her plan to correct the mistakes of the Bush administration was a vital step toward making the Middle East and the rest of the world, including the United States, a safer place. Meanwhile, John Bolton continued to take money to promote the MEK’s warmongering agenda against American interests. Bolton’s False Flag Op Involving MEK

مسعود خدابنده آن سینگلتون پارلمان اروپا 2018Secret MEK troll factory in Albania uses modern slaves (aka Mojahedin Khalq, MKO, NCRI ,Rajavi cult)

Link to the source

Bolton Vs. Zarif On MEK  

By: Massoud Khodabandeh (Middle East Strategy Conslultants)

Bolton Zarif MEK Iran Bolton’s False Flag Op Involving MEKHillary Cinton and John Bolton

When Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif took to the airwaves during his visit to the UN in New York, particularly for an interview with Fox News, a frisson of surprised anticipation swept the American political polity. How was it possible that Iran, the pariah nation, not only had the audacity to enter the lion’s den, but from there to lecture the lion on its dirty behavior!

Of course, this is a spat that Iran cannot easily win. What mattered most was that Zarif did not go for the throat of the lion but instead those who are pulling its chain. In short, he accused a “B team”  of actively working to wage war on his country. And he singled out National Security Advisor John Bolton for supporting the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK), a group that believes in fomenting violent regime change in Iran.

A goaded Bolton went on Fox News to reply. But instead of answering Zarif’s accusations, Bolton merely blamed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for taking the MEK off the U.S. terrorism list in 2012. This was fantastic hubris. Bolton himself supported the MEK all the time it was on the list, attending rallies and taking speakers’ fees worth tens of thousands of dollars.

Bolton’s accusations against Clinton do not hold water. He, along with then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, started the war with Iraq partly on the pretext that Saddam Hussein supported terrorist groups, including the MEK, as an instrument of his foreign policy. Bolton was also on board with Rumsfeld when the United States unilaterally granted Protected Persons status to the MEK even while it was recognized a terrorist entity—in direct violation of international law.

With the election of President Obama in 2009, newly appointed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was left to clear up the mess Bolton and the cabal of neoconservatives created in Iraq. One of those problems was continued U.S. support for the MEK (which the United States designated a terrorist entity in 1997). With the help of a new tough negotiator in the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, Clinton set about finding a peaceful resolution to the standoff between the sovereign Iraqi government and the unwanted and parasitic MEK.

Clinton searched for third countries to absorb the MEK. But the MEK, enjoying the backing of anti-Iran regime change pundits in Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States (including Bolton), dug in its heels and refused to be disbanded. In the end, only the dependent NATO ally Albania agreed to take the group’s members. Clinton authorized $10 million for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to transfer the MEK to Albania. She paid another $10 million for the establishment of a de-radicalization institute in Tirana to first deal with the MEK as preparation for handling returning Islamic State families. Another $10 million languishes in the account of the U.S. embassy in Tirana, money to rehabilitate the MEK members into normal society that Bolton and his cabal blocked.

All this was written into an agreement between the governments of Iraq, the United States, and Albania along with the UNHCR and the MEK. At that time this author was working as a consultant to the Iraqi government on security issues, including the safe containment and deportation of the MEK. I was relieved when the Obama administration found a safe and above all a peaceful solution to the threat posed by the MEK to the security of Iraq. I was pleased to find in this agreement specific steps toward humanizing individual MEK members and restoring them to normal life and their families.

As someone familiar with the MEK, John Bolton must then and is certainly now fully cognizant of the beneficial elements of this agreement. Yet, almost as soon as President Trump was elected, the de-radicalization project was put on hold, allowing the MEK over the next year to regroup and reactivate its anti-Iran activities. With the support of Bolton, former Senator John McCain, Rudi Giuliani, and a whole cast of minor cheerleading warmongers, the MEK has constructed a purpose-built closed training camp in Albania in which the members are kept as modern slaves to serve the MEK’s propaganda and terrorist agenda.

For all her faults, Hillary Clinton did not take money from the MEK while it was listed as a terrorist entity. And taking the group off the U.S. terrorist list, though controversial at the time due to the MEK’s own well-funded pressure campaign, was not wrong, as it enabled the UNHCR to relocate the members to the safety of a third country. Her plan to correct the mistakes of the Bush administration was a vital step toward making the Middle East and the rest of the world, including the United States, a safer place. Meanwhile, John Bolton continued to take money to promote the MEK’s warmongering agenda against American interests.

Before 2016, Iran did not have a diplomatic presence in Albania. Its embassy there dealt primarily with economic and cultural relations. But in 2018, the Albanian government of Edi Rama expelled two newly arrived Iranian diplomats at the behest of the Trump administration. John Bolton boasted about the achievement. Due to overt US support for the MEK, Iran drew its front line not in the Middle East but on the edge of the EU.

Now, with the Iranian foreign minister boldly speaking to the media inside the United States, Bolton has been reduced to deflecting rather than rebutting his accusations. Bolton’s master plan for a war against Iran has not only backfired but prompted Tehran to redraw its front line once again, this time in Washington, DC itself.

Massoud Khodabandeh is the director of Middle East Strategy Consultants and has worked long-term with the authorities in Iraq to bring about a peaceful solution to the impasse at Camp Liberty and help rescue other victims of the Mojahedin-e Khalq cult. Among other publications, he co-authored the book “The Life of Camp Ashraf: Victims of Many Masters” with his wife Anne Singleton. They also published an academic paper on the MEK’s use of the Internet.

(End)

Bolton’s False Flag Op Involving MEK

***

Bolton Zarif MEK Iran 1

Bolton Zarif MEK Iran 2

Bolton Zarif MEK Iran 3

Bolton Zarif MEK Iran 4

Bolton’s False Flag Op Involving MEK

Also read:

*** 

Also read: