Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   The good news is that there is a way to get off the terrorist list. The bad news is that the Mujahadeen e-Khalq found out that lobbying and speaking fees help   (guardian.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Scary, speaking fees, mujahedeen  
•       •       •

1272 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Sep 2012 at 12:18 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



28 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-09-24 11:50:55 AM  
There's old Barack 'Carter II' Obama being soft on terrorists again and supporting the Iranian regime again.

Sorry, I got ahead of the daily Republican Talking Points. When's Rush on? I need to be told what to think.
 
2012-09-24 12:10:54 PM  
I have been assured that the "terror watch list" is assembled with full due process and with a readily available means of appeal. If it were not, then for what reason would some activists advocate prohibiting individuals whose names appear on the list from possessing firearms?
 
2012-09-24 12:20:10 PM  
Sure, maybe they are still a terrorist group (or maybe they aren't). But if they are, they plan on terrorizing Iran and not the U.S. So, I'm not seeing a problem with this.

Besides, the Obama administration had no choice than to delist the MEK. There was a court order that State Department had to either submit evidence that the MEK was lying about renouncing terrorism or get them off the list. Since there is no evidence our government was willing to provide, then they had to abide by the court's decision.
 
2012-09-24 12:22:36 PM  

bdub77: There's old Barack 'Carter II' Obama being soft on terrorists again and supporting the Iranian regime again.

Sorry, I got ahead of the daily Republican Talking Points. When's Rush on? I need to be told what to think.


Keep in mind, Euro/England/other allies have also delisted MEK as terrorists as well.
 
2012-09-24 12:30:51 PM  

bdub77: There's old Barack 'Carter II' Obama being soft on terrorists again and supporting the Iranian regime again.

Sorry, I got ahead of the daily Republican Talking Points. When's Rush on? I need to be told what to think.


They are back to Obama is a terrorist.
 
2012-09-24 12:32:21 PM  
www.subsys.de
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-09-24 12:33:54 PM  
It now claims it has renounced terror and devotes itself to establishing an Iranian democratic form of government that would replace the rule of the Ayatollahs.

The eternal myth of the "Iranian moderates." I remember them from the late 1980s. If we made a secret deal with them, arranged to sell some missile parts as a show of good faith, they could get the government and affiliated terrorist groups to cut back on kidnapping and terrorism.
 
2012-09-24 12:40:15 PM  
It now claims it has renounced terror and devotes itself to establishing an Iranian democratic form of government that would replace the rule of the Ayatollahs.

Replace "Ayatollahs" with "Shahs" and you've got the Ayatollah's organization over 33 years ago.
 
2012-09-24 12:50:33 PM  

kbronsito: Sure, maybe they are still a terrorist group (or maybe they aren't). But if they are, they plan on terrorizing Iran and not the U.S. So, I'm not seeing a problem with this.


Because allying ourselves with terrorist groups has never come back to bite us in the ass.
 
2012-09-24 12:53:23 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: bdub77: There's old Barack 'Carter II' Obama being soft on terrorists again and supporting the Iranian regime again.

Sorry, I got ahead of the daily Republican Talking Points. When's Rush on? I need to be told what to think.

Keep in mind, Euro/England/other allies have also delisted MEK as terrorists as well.


There you go again. Letting silly things like facts get in the way.
 
2012-09-24 12:59:25 PM  
Cooperating with a radical dissident group in order to destabilize a hostile country?

Yeah, that never ends badly.

imageshack.us
 
2012-09-24 01:13:37 PM  

kbronsito: Sure, maybe they are still a terrorist group (or maybe they aren't). But if they are, they plan on terrorizing Iran and not the U.S. So, I'm not seeing a problem with this.

Besides, the Obama administration had no choice than to delist the MEK. There was a court order that State Department had to either submit evidence that the MEK was lying about renouncing terrorism or get them off the list. Since there is no evidence our government was willing to provide, then they had to abide by the court's decision.


If they're going to terrorize someone else they'll terrorize YOU eventually too. Did we REALLY not learn this lesson from our involvement in Afghanistan which led to 9/11?

Sometimes today's friend is tomorrow's enemy.
 
2012-09-24 01:28:42 PM  
Did they get a chance to speak with the current president this time?

inquirer.files.wordpress.com

I'm not sure if this week they are terrorists or as Reagan called them, "The moral equivalent of our founding fathers".

/Freedom fighter or terrorist? The difference appears to be whether you have air support for your bombing of innocent women and children in towns and villages.
 
2012-09-24 01:29:29 PM  
Our government is for sale.
 
2012-09-24 01:41:19 PM  

birdboy2000: Our government is for sale.


Every government is for sale. Some just have a higher price tag than ours. The only way to fix it is to elect people with some dignity and personal fortitude, starting with not electing businessmen ever again.
 
2012-09-24 01:46:40 PM  
CitronR: Possession of true dignity (as opposed to conceit and haughtiness) and personal fortitude (the strength to maintain one's values despite prevailing winds) are two virtues that are among the surest guarantees that one does not succeed in modern America.
 
2012-09-24 01:50:10 PM  
Everyone needs their Contras.
 
2012-09-24 01:54:34 PM  

swahnhennessy: Everyone needs their Contras.


imageshack.us
 
2012-09-24 02:05:44 PM  
markosun.files.wordpress.com

Ah yes the old "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" trick...works every time.
 
2012-09-24 02:09:16 PM  

mongbiohazard: kbronsito: Sure, maybe they are still a terrorist group (or maybe they aren't). But if they are, they plan on terrorizing Iran and not the U.S. So, I'm not seeing a problem with this.

Besides, the Obama administration had no choice than to delist the MEK. There was a court order that State Department had to either submit evidence that the MEK was lying about renouncing terrorism or get them off the list. Since there is no evidence our government was willing to provide, then they had to abide by the court's decision.

If they're going to terrorize someone else they'll terrorize YOU eventually too. Did we REALLY not learn this lesson from our involvement in Afghanistan which led to 9/11?

Sometimes today's friend is tomorrow's enemy.


Just because it happened in Afghanistan doesn't mean it has to happen every time. I don't see the contras putting bombs in time square or the Kossovar Liberation Army blowing up american airliners.

And delisting them is not the same as providing material support. The white house and state department didn't even want to delist. They got forced into it by the judiciary. Up until now they had resisted all attempts to delist and stalled the hell out of the proceedings. I seriously doubt that from there they'll move to provide any government support to this group. Worse Case Scenario: After being delisted, the MEK uses its new legal status to fund raise in the USA to promote democracy in Iran. If they are lying about using peaceful means, then they bomb a target in Iran or assassinate one of their political leaders and we put them back on the list. (in fact, if they do go violent... our government can be slow to react and back on the list. That way, returning them to it becomes a bargaining chip in future negotiations with Iran).
 
2012-09-24 02:43:56 PM  
cdn.motinetwork.net
 
2012-09-24 03:01:22 PM  

ZAZ: It now claims it has renounced terror and devotes itself to establishing an Iranian democratic form of government that would replace the rule of the Ayatollahs.

The eternal myth of the "Iranian moderates." I remember them from the late 1980s. If we made a secret deal with them, arranged to sell some missile parts as a show of good faith, they could get the government and affiliated terrorist groups to cut back on kidnapping and terrorism.


Not that I am Pro-Iranian regime but they haven't kidnapped anyone for 30 years so, at the time they were grabbing up CIA section chiefs, so I guess they kept up that part of the bargain, I'm sure the missile parts didn't last as long
 
2012-09-24 04:05:40 PM  

kbronsito: mongbiohazard: kbronsito: Sure, maybe they are still a terrorist group (or maybe they aren't). But if they are, they plan on terrorizing Iran and not the U.S. So, I'm not seeing a problem with this.

Besides, the Obama administration had no choice than to delist the MEK. There was a court order that State Department had to either submit evidence that the MEK was lying about renouncing terrorism or get them off the list. Since there is no evidence our government was willing to provide, then they had to abide by the court's decision.

If they're going to terrorize someone else they'll terrorize YOU eventually too. Did we REALLY not learn this lesson from our involvement in Afghanistan which led to 9/11?

Sometimes today's friend is tomorrow's enemy.

Just because it happened in Afghanistan doesn't mean it has to happen every time. I don't see the contras putting bombs in time square or the Kossovar Liberation Army blowing up american airliners.

And delisting them is not the same as providing material support. The white house and state department didn't even want to delist. They got forced into it by the judiciary. Up until now they had resisted all attempts to delist and stalled the hell out of the proceedings. I seriously doubt that from there they'll move to provide any government support to this group. Worse Case Scenario: After being delisted, the MEK uses its new legal status to fund raise in the USA to promote democracy in Iran. If they are lying about using peaceful means, then they bomb a target in Iran or assassinate one of their political leaders and we put them back on the list. (in fact, if they do go violent... our government can be slow to react and back on the list. That way, returning them to it becomes a bargaining chip in future negotiations with Iran).


If they go violent? Who do you think is killing Irans nuclear scientists?
 
2012-09-24 04:15:47 PM  

hourheroyes: Who do you think is killing Irans nuclear scientists?


Probably either the Israelis or the Iranian government itself.
 
2012-09-24 06:38:59 PM  
Seems to me several Al Qaeda #2s in Yemen and Iraq found a way off the Terrorist watch list.

www.deviantart.com

Oh, not that list, the list of groups. Never mind, carry on.
 
2012-09-24 07:14:41 PM  
I spent 2005 living in Ashraf Iraq amongst the MeK/PMOI scumbags. They are hardly repentant, and at least W had the sense to politely string them along Re: Iran.

These assholes made threats against the families of US soldiers they felt had slighted them in some way.

So it looks to me like we are going into Iran. The evidence against the MeK/PMOI is there. Choosing to ignore it means 'we' want something from them.
 
2012-09-24 10:42:44 PM  
The point, you guys are missing it.

The issue isn't that MEK is being de-listed, as much as it is that at the time that MEK was still listed as a terrorist organization, top politicians in both parties were receiving tens of thousands of dollars in speaking fees from them. Those politicians, like Howard Dean, Lee Hamilton, and Gen. Wesley Clark, then went on to advocate for their removal.

This is so clearly a violation of the law, and we've prosecuted Muslims for material support for terrorism for things that are much, much more trivial. And yet once again if you're politically-connected, the law just doesn't apply to you. If you want to advocate for MEK being off the terrorist list, hey fine, go for it, we have free speech in this country. But to accept money from them and then advocate is pretty clearly coordinating with a terrorist group - a federal crime.
 
2012-09-24 11:25:34 PM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: The point, you guys are missing it.

The issue isn't that MEK is being de-listed, as much as it is that at the time that MEK was still listed as a terrorist organization, top politicians in both parties were receiving tens of thousands of dollars in speaking fees from them. Those politicians, like Howard Dean, Lee Hamilton, and Gen. Wesley Clark, then went on to advocate for their removal.

This is so clearly a violation of the law, and we've prosecuted Muslims for material support for terrorism for things that are much, much more trivial. And yet once again if you're politically-connected, the law just doesn't apply to you. If you want to advocate for MEK being off the terrorist list, hey fine, go for it, we have free speech in this country. But to accept money from them and then advocate is pretty clearly coordinating with a terrorist group - a federal crime.


It's true, we did miss it.

I think it's because our government is so corrupt (perpetuated by both parties) that we gloss over these points, and simply attribute it to how the way things are. Lobbyists going against the general welfare of the American people? It's just the way things are, no big deal. Whether they took money from terrorists, banks that stole billions from Americans, or health insurance companies that put profit above the well-being of their consumers, seems to be of little distinction in the greater scheme of things.
 
Displayed 28 of 28 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report