Archive for July 9, 2018

Abbas Announces Palestinian Authority Will Continue Paying Bounties to Terrorists

July 9, 2018


Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said Sunday he will continue to pay stipends to Palestinian attackers and their families, in spite of the Israeli parliament’s decision to withhold tax funds collected on the PA’s behalf.

Abbas told a Fatah Central Committee meeting in the West Bank that the Palestinian government would continue to pay its “martyrs and prisoners and wounded people,” as it has since 1965, the Times of Israel reported.

“We will not allow anyone to interfere with the money that Israel is against us paying to the families of martyrs and prisoners,” he said, according to a transcript from a state-run media outlet.

The stipends amount to about $330 million, according to the report, which represents 7 percent of the Palestinian Authority’s $5 billion 2018 budget:

Israel has called on Palestinians for years to halt the stipends, which benefit roughly 35,000 families of Palestinians killed, wounded or jailed in the conflict with Israel, many of them accused of involvement in terror. Israel says the stipends encourage violence.

Among the beneficiaries are families of suicide bombers and others involved in deadly terrorist attacks on Israelis.

The Palestinians contend the number of stipend recipients involved in deadly attacks is a small fraction of those aided by the fund. They say that the tax revenue collected by Israel for them under past peace agreements is their money and that the Palestinian Authority has a responsibility to all of its citizens like any other government.

Israel’s punitive measure against the Palestinians mirrors the passage of the Taylor Force Act in the United States, which President Donald Trump signed into law as part of the $1.3 trillion spending bill passed in March. Force was an American serviceman who was stabbed and killed in March 2016 by a Palestinian while he was in Tel Aviv.

The law ends U.S. funding for the Palestinian Authority until it ceases bounty payments to terrorists and their families, with exceptions for Palestinian water and vaccination programs, eastern Jerusalem hospitals, and assistance to Palestinian security forces

Gazans say closing crossing a ‘crime against humanity,’ vow response

July 9, 2018

After Israel announces move in response to border violence, Hamas demands international community step in, Islamic Jihad calls move ‘declaration of war,’

Today, 8:32 pm

The Kerem Shalom crossing between Israel and the Gaza Strip is seen from the Gaza side of the border on June 7, 2015. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

The Hamas terror organization called Israel’s decision to close the Kerem Shalom crossing with Gaza a “crime against humanity” on Monday, hours after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the move to respond to cross border violence.

“Netanyahu’s approval of additional measures to intensify the siege and prevent the entry of materials and goods to Gaza is a new crime against humanity,” Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said.

Barhoum also accused the international community of being silent on “the crime of the suffocating siege on the Gaza Strip,” and called on it to take “immediate action” to end the blockade of the Strip.

Kerem Shalom, the only cargo crossing between Gaza and Israel, has been subject to a strict blockade by Israel for the past 11 years that is meant to prevent terrorist groups from bringing weapons into the Strip. Egypt also tightly controls the nearby Rafah border crossing into the Sinai.

The Islamic Jihad terror group said the step was a “new declaration of war” and vowed to respond.

“Once again, the government of Zionist terror announces a war on the Palestinian people by intensifying its oppressive siege that has multiplied the suffering of the Palestinian people for more than 11 years,” it said in a statement.

“We are coordinating with the factions and forces to evaluate all developments, including the occupation’s most recent measures, which we are dealing with as a new declaration of war on the Palestinian people,” Islamic Jihad added.

Fighters from the Islamic Jihad terror group march during a military drill near the border with Israel, east of the town of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, on March 27, 2018. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Earlier, Netanyahu said Israel will be undertaking measures to pressure Hamas, including closing Kerem Shalom, the main commercial passageway between Israel and the coastal enclave.

Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman said he had instructed the military “to take a number of steps” to respond to “Hamas provocations” on the border.

“We are not looking for a confrontation or for a military venture, but in the way Hamas operates, the [situation] deteriorates and [Hamas] is liable to pay the full price, a much heavier price than Operation Protective Edge,” Liberman added, referring to the 2014 war with the terror organization.

Over the past three months, weekly clashes have taken place on the Gaza border, with Israel accusing Hamas of using the demonstrations as cover to carry out attacks and attempt to breach the security fence. The “March of Return” protests have also seen Palestinians fly airborne incendiary devices toward Israeli territory, sparking hundreds of fires in southern Israel and causing millions of shekels in estimated damages.

Immediately after Netanyahu spoke, the Israel Defense Forces confirmed that Kerem Shalom would be closed to all commercial goods into and out of the Gaza Strip.

The army said humanitarian aid, notably food and medicine, would still be allowed into Gaza, but would require special permission from the military liaison to the Palestinians, Maj. Gen. Kamil Abu Rokon.

According to the IDF, the idea of closing Kerem Shalom was proposed by IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot and was approved by Netanyahu and Liberman.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, center, is briefed on the escalation on the northern border along with IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, left and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, right, on February 10, 2018. (Ariel Hermoni/Defense Ministry)

The military said the closure would continue as long as Palestinians persist in launching incendiary kites and balloons into Israel.

The crossing has been closed a number of times in the past three months, after sustaining damage from fires set by Palestinian protesters.

In addition to closing the crossing, the army said it was prematurely ending the temporary extension to the permitted Gaza fishing zone, which had allowed fisherman to sail up to nine miles from the coast in order to take advantage of the summer fishing season.

Netanyahu’s announcement came after opposition leaders slammed him for what they described as a lackluster response to the border violence and kite fires.

Yesh Atid party leader Yair Lapid told reporters earlier Monday that the prime minister was not doing enough to counter airborne arson attacks.

“For four years, he has done nothing regarding Gaza,” he said. “He knew, we all knew that there would be a new round of violence, but he did nothing. And now the round of violence has come. Our fields are being burned.”

He claimed that Netanyahu is waiting for the Trump administration to present its peace plan and has therefore not acted to stem the arson attacks from Gaza.

Israeli firefighters extinguish a blaze in a field in southern Israel, which was caused by kites flown by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, on June 20, 2018. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Zionist Union chairman Avi Gabbay told his faction meeting that in the four years that have passed since the 2014 Gaza war, Netanyahu has “failed to provide security to the people of Israel.”

“It’s clear that Netanyahu is no longer Mr. Security,” he said, referring to a nickname given to the prime minister. “Mr Security would have used the opportunity presented after the war to create a plan, to bring security, to provide us with some forward thinking. Instead: Nothing.”

Raoul Wootliff and Judah Ari Gross contributed to this report.



Report: North Korea Tried to Extort $1B from Israel, Offering to Stop Arms Sale to Iran

July 9, 2018

Photo Credit: The Fisher Institute For Air and Space Strategic Studies

North Korean nuclear warheads

North Korea offered to end its missile sales to Iran and Syria in exchange for a cash payment of $1 billion from Israel back in 1999, according to a report published by The Wall Street Journal, describing information revealed in a new book by a man named Thae Yong Ho, a former North Korean interpreter who defected to South Korea in 2016.

The offer was allegedly made to then-Israeli Ambassador to Sweden Gideon Ben-Ami, by his North Korean counterpart, at a cafe in Stockholm cafe.

Israel reportedly turned down the proposal and instead made a counter offer of food aid in exchange for Pyongyang’s promise to end its missile sales to Israel’s enemies.

North Korea rejected the offer, and has continued to supply nuclear technology, ballistic missiles and other weapons to Iran and Syria ever since.

Ben-Ami confirmed the report, telling Israel’s “Kan” public broadcasting corporation that he and his North Korean counterpart in Sweden, Son Mu Sin, conducted several covert meetings between 1999 and 2002.

Ten North Korean scientists were reportedly killed when Israel destroyed a Syrian nuclear facility that was under construction in September 2007. The plant was reportedly close to completion, and acquiring the ability to produce radioactive materials at the time of the air strike.

Germany considers Iranian bid to withdraw 300 million euros cash: Bild

July 9, 2018

By One America News Network July 9, 2018

Source Link: Germany considers Iranian bid to withdraw 300 million euros cash: Bild

{Suddenly, the Mullahs are concerned about Iranian citizens traveling abroad. Must be credit card problems for their children enrolled in western universities. – LS}

BERLIN (Reuters) – German authorities are considering a request by Iran to withdraw 300 million euros from bank accounts held in Germany and transfer the cash to Iran, Bild newspaper reported Monday, citing unnamed government officials.

Tehran is seeking withdraw the funds from the Europaeisch-Iranische Handelsbank AG (eihbank) because it is worried that it could run out of cash when fresh U.S. sanctions against its financial sector take effect, Bild said.

Washington has announced new sanctions on Iran and ordered all countries to stop buying Iranian oil by November and foreign firms to stop doing business there or face U.S. blacklists.

One of the world’s biggest shipping lines, France’s CMA CGM, announced on Saturday it was pulling out of Iran for fear of becoming entangled in U.S. sanctions after U.S. President Donald Trump abandoned the 2015 nuclear agreement in May.

Iran told the German Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) it needed the cash from the accounts “to pass on to Iranian citizens who require cash while travelling abroad, given their inability to access recognised credit cards,” Bild said.

BaFin was now reviewing the request, which had been briefed to senior officials in the chancellery, foreign ministry and finance ministry, the newspaper reported.

The finance ministry had no immediate comment. The Bundesbank, BaFin and the foreign ministry declined to comment. A spokeswoman for eihbank declined to comment, citing bank secrecy laws.

U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies fear the money could be used to fund armed groups in the Middle East, but German government officials said they had no indications of such plans, Bild reported.

Foreign ministers from the five remaining signatory countries to the nuclear deal — Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia — offered a package of economic measures to Iran on Friday but Tehran said they did not go far enough.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Robin Pomeroy)


Top Iranian general: Forces in Syria ‘awaiting orders’ to destroy Israel

July 9, 2018

Hossein Salami says Tehran also ‘creating might in Lebanon to fight our enemy from there with all our strength’ and eradicate ‘evil Zionist regime’

By Times Of Israel staff July 9, 2018

Source Link: Top Iranian general: Forces in Syria ‘awaiting orders’ to destroy Israel

{Somehow, I think Israel has already considered that possibility. – LS}

In a recent speech, the deputy commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) boasted that the “Islamic army in Syria” in the Golan Heights was awaiting orders to eradicate the “evil regime” of Israel.

He also said the Tehran-backed Hezbollah terror group had 100,000 missiles aimed at Israel.

IRGC Deputy Commander Hossein Salami (YouTube screen capture)

In a recent speech, the deputy commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) boasted that the “Islamic army in Syria” in the Golan Heights was awaiting orders to eradicate the “evil regime” of Israel.

He also said the Tehran-backed Hezbollah terror group had 100,000 missiles aimed at Israel.

“We are creating might in Lebanon because we want to fight our enemy from there with all our strength,” he stated. “Hezbollah today has tremendous might on the ground that can on its own break the Zionist regime. The Zionist regime has no strategic-defensive depth.”

In the speech for the anti-Israel al-Quds Day in June, translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Hossein Salami said that the dangers Israel faces today are greater than at any time in history.

“Today an international Islamic army has been formed in Syria, and the voices of the Muslims are heard near the Golan,” he said. “Orders are awaited, so that… the eradication of the evil regime [Israel] will land and the life of this regime will be ended for good. The life of the Zionist regime was never in danger as it is now.”

Salami stressed that “the Zionist regime constitutes a threat… to the entire Islamic world. That is the philosophy of the establishment of this regime.”

He praised Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led the 1979 Iranian revolution, for making the destruction of Israel a goal of the regime.

Khomeini “spread the rationale of eradicating Israel as a new notion in the world’s political discourse,” Salami said. “Since then, the Zionist regime is fearful, delusional, and worried.”

Israel has for years warned of Iran’s ongoing attempts to entrench itself in Syria, and has been waging a quiet campaign to prevent Tehran from establishing a new front on its border. That campaign came into the light and shifted into more open conflict in February, when an Iranian drone carrying explosives briefly entered Israeli airspace, before it was shot down. In response Israel launched a counterattack on an air base in Syria, hitting the mobile command center from which the drone had been piloted and killing at least seven members of the IRGC.

Tehran vowed revenge after the T-4 army base strike. On May 10, the IRGC’s al-Quds Force launched 32 rockets at Israel’s forward defensive line on the Golan Heights border. Four of them were shot down; the rest fell short of Israeli territory.

In response, over the next two hours, Israeli jets fired dozens of missiles at Iranian targets in Syria and destroyed a number of Syrian air defense systems. The operation was widely seen as a success in Israel.

But Salami boasted of Iran’s success in launching the rockets, claiming the barrage silenced Israel.

“When the Zionists bombed the T-4 base in Syria and killed some young men, they thought that they would get no reaction. They thought that America’s and England’s support could frighten the resistance front. They thought that no one would respond,” Salami said. “But the response came in the Golan, and dozens of missiles were fired, along with the message ‘If you respond, we will flatten the heart of Tel Aviv into dust.’ They were silent, and did nothing further.”

Iran has been accused by Israel, the Trump administration, Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries of supporting terrorism and instability in the region.

Salami blamed Israel for all the Middle East’s troubles.

“All the problems of the Islamic world stem from the existence of the false, counterfeit, historically rootless, and identity-less regime named Israel,” he said.

On Sunday Syrian air defenses were activated near the T-4 air base, in response to an airstrike on the facility, which Syrian state media attributed to the Israeli military, although as a rule, the Israeli military does not comment on its operations abroad.

Europe cannot cope with any further armed conflict on the continent

July 9, 2018

European leaders are not only unable to counteract the demographic crisis on the Old Continent, but also lose ground in terms of defense. President Trump’s skepticism and reservation about the military ideas of European bureaucrats Ankara’s increasingly aggressive actions towards Cyprus and Greece, and the rapprochement between Turkey and Russia highlight NATO’s weakness on the eve of its summit in Brussels.

Europe stands no chance if forced to face conflict on three fronts. Two of them are of conventional character: on the eastern flank, where there are continuous tensions with Russia, and in the Balkans near the border with Turkey. The third concerns the Mediterranean area, where young and strong men from Africa and Central Asia cross European borders with the support of a thousand people from the continent’s heartland. Europeans are also militarily involved in Afghanistan, Syria and take part in the growing conflict in Mali.

While Europe is losing its allies, Russia and Turkey are looking for alternative directions of cooperation. Turkey has ceased to be a credible member of NATO, and there are growing fears of the US’s non-engagement in European conflicts. The Gefira team compares the capabilities of the North Atlantic Alliance, without taking into account the American and Turkish armed forces, with those of Moscow and Ankara. The conclusion is clear: the European potential is too weak to deal with any dispute on NATO’s eastern and south-eastern borders.

The comparison shows that European NATO countries spend more than four times on armaments than the Kremlin and Ankara. Despite the fact that the size of the Alliance’s European troops is greater by more than 350,000 people, the advantage of Russian and Turkish ground and air forces is noticeable. NATO’s Navy seems to be stronger, as evidenced by the ratio of nine aircraft carriers to one Russian, but Russia has three times more nuclear submarines. An important element is nuclear equipment: in total, European NATO countries only have 515 nuclear warheads, while Russia has 7,000.

An additional obstacle to the European part of the Alliance is that their troops do not have uniform command. Actions taken by Italy, Poland and Hungary, as well as the euro crisis and migration issues show that Berlin is not able to lead Europe in the face of external threats. France is also trying to take control of European troops, but this has led to the destruction of Libya, while military adventures in Mali are doomed to disaster.

The lack of command procedures without Washington participation is one problem. Logistics is another. Although there are plans to transfer the Alliance forces to the eastern flank, the distance is too large to respond to an unexpected attack. However, given the increasing risk of conflict between Greece and Turkey, NATO countries should reconsider organizational issues that will allow their armies to move more efficiently not only to the east, but also to the south of Europe. Instead of focusing on deterrents, Europe should determine the appropriate logistical procedures that are the basis for a smooth response to an attack on one of the Alliance members.

Although NATO troops are more numerous than Russian and Turkish, even if Article 5 has come into force, no country will sacrifice all of its armed forces. The North Atlantic Treaty gives freedom to members in choosing the means and methods of military defense of a NATO member. Even if each state allocates 10-20% of its soldiers and military equipment (which we consider as a limit anyway), it will not be able to oppose Russian or Turkish troops.

Drawing on the Global Firepower ranking, in the table below, we have compiled the data related to the number of military personnel and items of equipment for three types of armed forces as well as NATO’s and Russia’s budget expenditures.1)Numbers apart, also technological issues are important i.e. a state’s ability to modernize its military equipment. The Turkish and Russian weapons are regularly tested in operations in the Middle East, which makes it possible to improve them. Most European armies use their equipment only on the training ground and during maneuvers.

First border: USA and Europe
Diplomats admit it openly: Transatlantic relations have been deteriorating for years.2)Washington is less willing to finance European defense, which is not to the liking of European decision makers who have become accustomed to the United States’ sponsorship to such an extent that many countries are not increasing defense spending to reach the agreed 2% of GDP in 2024. Washington spends USD 647 billion a year on defense, while the military expenditures of other NATO states amount to USD 268 billion. The American president announces that he he is sick and tired of funding European defense.3)On the other hand, European leaders state that this new American doctrine “has no friends but enemies.”4)The rejection of the climate change conference provisions by the United States as well as Washington’s withdrawal from the nuclear agreement with Iran, resulting in the re-imposition of sanctions on Tehran, is a bone of contention that brought about a rise in oil prices by hitting importers of this raw material, including Europe.

The trade war waged between the EU and the United States negatively affects transatlantic relations as demonstrated by the recent G7 summit. In addition, Washington is skeptical about European defense plans related to the creation of the European Intervention Initiative, stating that they undermine current forms of cooperation.5)The growing tension between Europe and the United States may have its apogee at the July NATO summit, when the United States, in order to show the weakness of European allies, may decide to limit its military presence on the Old Continent, and possibly leave the organization altogether. It is important that a few days after the meeting of the Alliance leaders, a meeting of President Putin and President Trump will take place in Helsinki. It is also worth adding that Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko (Ukraine is not a NATO memeber) will take part in the July NATO summit in Brussels. spreading the Alliance’s influence to the East may elicit Moscow’s decisive response.

The second border: NATO and Turkey
Europe is openly pointing to Russia as an enemy that could intensify operations in eastern Ukraine or open a new front in the Baltics or Transnistria.6)7)However, while the war with Russia in our view is rather less likely, the second – more realistic – place of conflict is the Balkans and Asia Minor. Ankara raises territorial claims against Nicosia and Athens. It can be exemplified by the border violation of Greek air zone by Turkish fighters,8)or even the Turkish blockade of European ships exploring gas fields in the economic zones of Cyprus.9)The annexation of Cyprus by Turkey and the attack on Greece (which is also a NATO member) would launch Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

Turkey and the other NATO members have diverging interests. An example of this is the “Olive Branch” launched at the beginning of this year against the US-equipped People’s Protection Units (YPG), which is the largest Kurdish militia in Syria.10)This causes Ankara to be marginalized by the North Atlantic allies, which Gefira’s team had previously signaled.11)In the current situation, Turkey is not an actual member of the Alliance. Erdoğan’s victory and the strengthening of his position under the presidential system will result in Turkey’s greater activity, and the confrontation between Europe and Ankara, whether it concerns Cyprus or the Greek islands in the Aegean Sea, has become very likely.

Europe distances itself from its military allies. Australia, Canada or Japan, potential partners of the Old Continent, do not see any special interest in engaging their own troops in possible disputes in this area. While European policy-makers lose their allies, Moscow and Ankara are trying to create bilateral and multilateral forms of military cooperation. The Old Continent is unable to cope with the escalation of the aforementioned conflicts, without the support of the United States and Turkey. The North Atlantic Pact depleted by two members is losing importance, and the diverging interests of NATO countries deepen existing divisions. Considering the above list of hypothetical events, it should be noted that the Alliance, contrary to the opinion of many analysts and the mainstream media citing them, cannot be perceived as a permanent military arrangement.


1. 2018 Military Strength Ranking, The Global Firepower 2018.
2. Donald Tusk warns EU leaders to ‘prepare for the worst’ in EU-US relations, Deutsche Welle 2018-06-28.
3. Ahead of NATO Summit, U.S. President Exhorts Allies to Pay Up, Foreign Policy 2018-06-27.
4. EU must ‘prepare for worst-case scenarios’ under Trump, top official warns, The Guardian, 2018-06-27.
5. US fears closer EU defence ties could undermine Nato, Financial Times 2018-02-12.
6. On the road to war with Russia, traffic may be biggest US enemy, South China Morning Post, 2018-06-25.
7. NATO focuses on speed in the Baltics amid worries over Russia, NBC News 2018-06-23.
8. Turkish jets violate Greek air space amid spike in aggressive rhetoric from Ankara, Ekathimerini, 2018-06-05.
9. Turkey navy forces back Italian drillship: Cyprus, The Local 2018-02-24.
10. Erdogan: Operation in Syria’s Afrin has begun, Al-Jazeera 2018-01-21.
11. Different standards of NATO: Article 5 never applies to Turkey, Gefira, 2018-02-01.

Hired Guns: Former American and European Bigwigs Lobby for Iranian Terror Group

July 9, 2018

By – on

Historians have concluded that history is cyclic unless one learns from its mistakes; we will be doomed to endure an endless repetition of the cause and effects of poor management systems. French author Charles Pinot Duclos observed:

“We see on the theater of the world a certain number of scenes which succeed each other in endless repetition: where we see the same faults followed regularly by the same misfortunes, we may reasonably think that if we could have known the first we might have avoided the others. The past should enlighten us on the future.”

The People’s Mujahedeen of Iran, commonly known as the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq or MEK, is a notorious Iranian resistance group; it was once listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the United States for its alleged killing of U.S. personnel in Iran during the 1970s, and for its ties to former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. This group receives funds from many sources, including Saudi Arabia.

MEK also began a multiyear, multimillion-dollar lobbying campaign to remove itself from the terrorist list, including possible financial rewards to American political figures including Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, Howard Dean, MG Paul E. Vallely, John Bolton and others.

Recognizing the group’s rejection of violence, the State Department delisted the MEK in late 2012, but voiced ongoing concerns about its alleged mistreatment of its members.

Many of these former high-ranking US officials – who represent the full political spectrum – have been paid tens of thousands of dollars to speak in support of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) or MEK. Ironically, these heavyweight politicians never talk about MEK’s violent and anti-American past history, but they refer to them as “freedom fighters” with “values just like us,” as democrats-in-waiting ready to serve as a vanguard of regime change in Iran. Why?

Aside from monetary rewards, some argue that the MEK has provided invaluable information to the US about the Iranian nuclear sites. OK, great! But does this automatically make them freedom fighters, ready to switch places with current mass murderers who have been holding onto power with their fists? Hardly!! Exchanging one Islamist group with another is not a change at all: it’s lunacy!

The amount of the fees being paid to these officials is vague, but judging by the money handed to certain individuals, the total could well be in the millions. For example, the former governor of Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, was allegedly paid $150,000 for seven or eight speeches. Elaine Chao, President Trump’s transportation secretary, received $50,000 in 2015 for a five-minute speech, according to reports. Giuliani, who spoke at a conference in Paris on behalf of Iranian resistance figures alongside 18 other international guests, has been known to charge up to $100,000 for a single appearance, and sometimes demands private jets to charter him to appearances and much more.

MEK Supporters

Generals Tom McInerney and Paul Valley, former CIA officer Clare Lopez, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia Jim Atkins, Representative Ileana Ros Lehtinen, former Governor of Kansas Sam Brownback, former Congressman Bob Filner, former Congressmen Tom Tancredo, former Senators Jim Talent and Kay Bailey Hutchinson, former Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy, who on this video is confessing to getting paid, scholar Daniel Pipes, John Bolton, the current advisor to President Trump, John Dean, Victoria Toensing of DiGenova & Toensing, retired general Wesley Clark, and even AIPAC have also supported the group. Several of the aforementioned officials have been the recipients of lucrative speaking fees. Saudi Arabia has been on the forefront, supplying the MEK with limitless financial resources in an attempt to topple the Iranian regime.

 MEK Opponents 

Scholar Michael Ledeen, bestselling author and Iran expert Ken Timmerman, CSP founder and CEO Frank Gaffney, Iranian activist Manda Ervin, and the entire Iranian people.

Perhaps money is the explanation. Otherwise, Giuliani’s relationship with the MEK, a bizarre terrorist organization that has killed Americans, is inexplicable.

“Iranians are both bitter about American pressure and their own government,” said Suzanne Maloney of the Brookings Institution, who added, however, that, “one way or another the regime will try to discredit and taint those who dissent as somehow driven by outside support or orchestration.”

Karim Sadjadpour, an expert on Iran at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said: “They’re widely viewed as a backward and intolerant cult by their opposition peers in Iran,” he said. “After the terrorist label is dropped, Mr. Sadjadpour said, “I don’t think the world really looks that much different. U.S.-Iran relations will remain hostile, and the M.E.K. will remain a fringe cult with very limited appeal among Iranians.”

Like a chameleon, the MEK has adopted a new name to fool gullible and greedy politicians. But a cult can’t change its spots. They can’t even bring themselves to admit their founder (Masoud Rajavi) is dead. For now, they are enjoying support from the usual suspects — the Arab “royal” petro states, some elements in Israel, of American and European politicians who would do anything for a financial reward.

American establishment figures who support the cult of Rajavi will have lot of explaining to do someday. Ignoring the lessons of history will ultimately backfire on them. No wonder why people around the world are suspicious when it comes to American foreign policy.

The MEK is almost universally denounced by Iranians around the world, and still are regarded as a terrorist group. After the MEK aided in the Islamic Revolution in 1979, bloody street battles took place against Iran’s eventual leadership. As a result, the MEK literally waged war against Iranians. The group took refuge in Ashraf, Iraq, where they aided Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War. Saddam Hussein went on to employ this special brigade in his deadly operations against Kurds and in repressing the Iraqi Shia.


Sel-serving politicians upporting the MEK, this most dangerous terrorist group, is tantamount to betraying the ideals of America — the flag holder of freedom in the world. The motives for the strange bedfellows rallying in support of the MEK are difficult to decipher, given the overwhelming evidence exposing the evils of this gang of Islamist cultists. The politicians supporting this cult better be warned. Whatever their motives, they are repeating President Jimmy Carter’s monumental folly that brought the infamous Ayatollah Khomeini to power and birthed Islamist jihadism of both Shite and Sunni varieties.

This time around, these misguided and/or deluded hired individuals circling Madam Rajavi will most assuredly be disgraced and disappointed. The Iranian people shall, for a certainty, frustrate and defeat the cultist schemers and their cohorts. The Iranian people have suffered for four decades under the yoke of Islamic tyranny and will in no way allow its replacement by a refurbished edition blessed by mercenary politicians.

In this case, history shall not repeat itself. Freedom shall prevail.