Thank you, Paul Blumstein, for inviting me to speak at your meeting of The South Bay Libertarians about the Iranian communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists who have murdered Americans and Iranians in Iran and who have committed war crimes in Iraq by forcing large numbers of Iraqi civilians to stand in long lines on roads so that MEK tanks could run over and crush the Iraqis to death, the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) and the Democrats and Republicans in Congress who support and protect them, and about some of the principled libertarians who have opposed the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites), the Iraq war lies, or the MEK. I shall explain to you, also, how one Libertarian Party candidate has earned my endorsement and votes so that other future Libertarian Party candidates can learn from his success.
On January 15, 2003, a full-page advertisement appeared in the New York Times (page A19): “150 Members of U.S. Congress Declare Support for the People’s Mojahedin (PMOI), Call for an End to Iran’s Terrorist Regime”. This advertisement contained the names of only 6 of the signers of the “Iran Statement”: Democrats Bob Filner (California), Sheila Jackson-Lee (Texas), Edolphus Towns (New York); Republicans Lincoln Diaz-Balart (Florida), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Florida), Tom Tancredo (Colorado). Shortly after this advertisement appeared, American soldiers went to war in Iraq and killed some of these Saddam Hussein-supported Marxist terrorists (as classified by the State Departments of former President Bill Clinton and of President George W. Bush) in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. In June 2003, the French police arrested the leader (Maryam Rajavi) and many supporters plus confiscated hundreds of thousands of dollars of their funds. Some members of this communist cult responded by burning themselves to death in front of news cameras. Afterwards, some members of Congress continued to support publicly the group (known also as the MEK, MKO, or Rajavi Cult), including a letter sent by Democratic Congressman (and son of a Communist Party candidate for Congress) Bob Filner, claiming that the MEK shares Western democratic values. The Fox News Channel retained as an analyst Alireza Jafarzadeh, who operated for many years from the National Press Building in Washington, D.C., as a spokesperson for this group’s press office, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, an MEK supporter while a Republican Senator, raided Jafarzadeh’s home to take boxes of documents. According to the State Department, the MEK murdered American military officers and Rockwell International employees. Anti-war critics are correct in criticizing chickenhawks, neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites), and other traitors who support the MEK. In July 2004, the American government recognized each MEK terrorist as a protected person under the Fourth Geneva Convention and required the American military to protect America’s enemies.
Americans who rely solely upon the evening television news or upon their local newspapers are unlikely to know the truth about the 150 or more traitors in Congress who support the communist takeover of Iran and the takeovers of many other countries by any leader or group willing to enslave their people to appease the neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites).
Many Americans do not understand that the American government has permitted a small number of corporations to buy television networks and stations, radio stations, newspapers, and book publishers and retailers. Contrary to the traditional American value for freedom of the press, much of America’s media today is closer to the controlled media described in George Orwell’s 1984.
The last frontier for freedom of the press has become the Internet. Even at online political discussion forums, however, moderators may serve as unpredictable gate keepers.
As an elected member of the Republican Party Central Committee, Los Angeles County (1990 to 1992) and as a conservative Republican candidate for the California State Assembly endorsed by the California Republican Assembly (1992), my conservative views should have been welcome at any truly conservative forum.
By contrast, you will find my postings at even some progressive Web sites. For example, the Rocky Mountain Progressive Network has included my comments on "Tancredo and Terrorists" at its ProgressNow.org Weblog.
Most conservatives I have met at political events do not know that the self-named neo-conservatives are not conservatives. They do not know the Trotskyite origins of the neo-conservatives. They do not know that neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites), even in President George W. Bush’s Republican administration, support using the American military to impose communist or other totalitarian regimes in other countries in the name of democracy.
Rescued at West Coast Libertarians by Paul Blumstein
The posted goal of the West Coast Libertarians, the online forum for the California affiliate of the Libertarian Party, is: “Our goal is nothing more nor less than a world set free in our lifetime, and it is to this end that we take these stands.”
After I made some postings about the MEK at West Coast Libertarians, the moderator responded with a message that he had seen enough of my lengthy diatribes. Paul Blumstein came to my defense with this posting:
From: "Paul Blumstein" <pbandj@...> Date: Wed May 25, 2005 9:46 am Subject: Re: [West Coast Libertarians] Republican Marxists
Fred, I realize that you are a moderator and I am not. However, I'd like to publicly express my opinion.
I find Professor Foote's postings of interest. I feel that anyone who doesn't is always free to bypass his postings in favor of postings that they do find of interest. And, of course, those who disagree are free to state why they do so.
We are libertarians. Therefore, we claim to be tolerant of opinions, whether or not we agree with them. Since the Professor is expressing a libertarian opinion, we should even be more tolerant.
Middle East Experts
In 1970, while I was a student at Harvard Business School, the United States Department of Commerce hired me to go to Iran for the summer to research commercial opportunities in Iran. Before going to Iran, I went to Washington, D.C. to be briefed by the Iran desk officers of different departments of the Federal government. Only one of the Iran desk officers had ever been to Iran. America has done a poor job of hiring qualified persons to work in the Federal government and of training workers. This problem was not confined only to Iran desk officers. While working at the American Embassy in Tehran, I learned that the British foreign service officers spoke Persian and remained in Iran for many years. By contrast, many American foreign service officers join the foreign service to see the world. They live in American compounds, do not bother to learn the languages of the countries in which they work, and want to move to different countries as soon as possible.
America has not improved since those days. Many persons being touted as Middle East experts have not lived in the countries about which they write and have not learned to speak the languages of those countries. Even worse, they do not care about the happiness and well-being of the people of those countries. For example, in 2002, Random House and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published a New York Times bestseller, Kenneth M. Pollack’s The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq”. Pollack wrote this book while working at the CFR. Previously, he has worked on Iraq policies at the National Security Council, and as a Persian Gulf military analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). After the American military invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the death and destruction caused by the invasion based upon war lies, Random House and the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution published Kenneth M. Pollack’s The Persian Puzzle. On page 425, Pollack admitted: “I have never been to Iran.” On page 426, Pollack admitted also: “I also do not speak any Farsi (Persian). The dribs and drabs of Arabic I have left after a decade of neglect provide some meager insight into the principal Iranian tongue, but that is the extent of it.” Pollack claimed that his ignorance of Iran permitted him to provide an “…unbiased portrait of the country”.
Following my marriage in Tehran, Iran in 1968 to my Iranian wife, Badri, I studied Persian at Harvard University. While a Harvard student, I had the opportunity to meet a true expert on Iran, Professor Richard N. Frye, Aga Khan Professor of Iranian. Professor Frye’s latest book, Greater Iran, contains his stories of 60 years of living in or writing about Iran and neighboring countries. Professor Frye taught his students how to read and write the languages used in Iran throughout its thousands of years of history. On page 322, Professor Frye mentioned that, in a meeting with then-Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, Professor Frye expressed his hope to be interred upon his death “…in the mausoleum of the late Arthur Upham Pope on the banks of the Zayendeh River in Isfahan….”
American soldiers and Iraqis are dying in Iraq because many Americans continue to listen to the ignorant neo-conservative (neo-Trotskyite) preachers of hate who advocate endless wars in the name of democracy. These Americans have not learned to seek information about the Middle East from those Americans who have lived in the Middle East, who have studied the languages of the Middle East, and who love the Middle East.
Lew Rockwell’s Honor and Dishonor Rolls
On April 13, 1999, Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., posted at the Ludwig von Mises Institute Web site a dishonor roll (naming Americans advocating more wars and destruction) and an honor roll (naming Americans who are attempting to stop wars). It is time to update the dishonor and honor rolls and to analyze in depth the contributions of some of the honor roll members.
Paul Sheldon Foote’s Dishonor Roll of Members of Congress
As noted earlier, the January 15, 2003 advertisement in the New York Times revealed only 6 names of the 150 members of Congress who support the communist overthrow of Iran. You will find 5 of those 6 names below in the lists of sponsors and co-sponsors of the Iran Freedom Support Act to date. Other members of Congress may add their names in the future.
No American should ever vote for traitors from any political party who support the communist or totalitarian takeover of any country by any means. Beyond the enslavement of the Iranian people, even the New York Times reported that many Iranians regard the Rajavi Cult as the Pol Pot of Iran:
“This past winter in Iran, when such a popular outburst among students and others was still just a dream, if you mentioned the Mujahedeen, those who knew and remembered the group laughed at the notion of it spearheading a democracy movement. Instead, they said, the Rajavis, given the chance, would have been the Pol Pot of Iran.”
On January 29, 2002, in his State of the Union Address, President George W. Bush used the term “axis of evil” to describe states that sponsor terror. The American invasion of Iraq on the pretext that Saddam Hussein had sponsored the neo-conservative (neo-Trotskyite)-supported MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists and the American threat to bomb Iran with nuclear weapons or to invade Iran and impose a Pol Pot-style regime make America the most evil terrorist nation in the world today.
S.333 Title: A bill to hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening behavior and to support a transition to democracy in Iran. Sponsor: Sen Santorum, Rick [PA] (introduced 2/9/2005) Cosponsors (30) Latest Major Action: 2/9/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
COSPONSORS(30), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
H.R.282 Title: To hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening behavior and to support a transition to democracy in Iran. Sponsor: Rep Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [FL-18] (introduced 1/6/2005) Cosponsors (318) Latest Major Action: 4/13/2005 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
COSPONSORS(318), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
The first response to my posting of this list came from Kenneth Timmerman, a supporter of the Iran Freedom Support Act and an author who has written many articles in the past critical of the MEK (Rajavi Cult). The following was our exchange of emails on this subject.
From: Kenneth Timmerman [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 10:28 AM To: Paul Sheldon Foote Subject: Re: America's Tratiors in Congress, September 11, 2005
Are you suggesting that people encourage members of congress NOT to support the Iran Freedom Support Act?
The Foundation for Democracy in Iran is a strong supporter of the bill. And, I hope you would agree, we have an unparalleled record of denouncing the MEK and their inroads on Capitol Hill. (I was the first to expose and denounce MEK campaign contributions in 1995 in an article in the American Spectator).
There is nothing in either version of the bill that would allow the MEK to receive funding. In fact, there is specific language that would prevent any funds from going to the MEK, because it cannot meet the pro-democracy standard. Section 302(b)(3) states that groups eligible for assistance must be “dedicated to democratic values and supports the adoption of a democratic form of government in Iran;” The MEK clearly fails this test. The MEK also fails the test of opposing terrorism, and supporting freedom of speech and freedom of association.
When I was on the Hill in 1993 working for Tom Lantos I worked hard to educate staff and members to MEK lobbying practises. Too often what happened was that an MEK lobbyist would come round to a member’s office and get a staff member to sign onto a letter using a felt pen (standard practise) by saying, “Don’t you support freedom and democracy in Iran?”
But there is still a hard-core (Filner is one; Gary Ackerman and Tancredo are others) who buy into the MEK whole hog.
It’s a never-ending battle... Keep up the good work.
All best regards,
Kenneth R. Timmerman Executive Director Foundation for Democracy in Iran www.iran.org Reply to: email@example.com _____________________________________________________________
From: Paul Sheldon Foote [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 1:32 PM To: 'Kenneth Timmerman' Subject: RE: America's Traitors in Congress, September 11, 2005
I applaud all of the wonderful research and publications condemning the MEK you have accomplished through January 2003. In January 2003, you published an article critical of the New York Times for running a full-page advertisement for supporters of the MEK. That January 15, 2003 advertisement listed the names of 6 of the 150 members of Congress who had signed the Iran Statement. As a professor who relies upon a salary as a professor, I can write without trying to please the New York Times. As an independent writer supporting a family by attempting to sell books and articles, you could have made much more money and had more books on the New York Times bestseller list by writing on topics supporting the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites). I appreciate the sacrifices you made through January 2003.
Since January 2003, I have been searching for new articles or books authored by you covering the following subjects of enormous importance:
1.April 2003. The American military bombed Camp Ashraf, Iraq killing perhaps 100 to 200 of the MEK in a camp with more than 4,000 MEK members. It would have been easy for the American military to bomb and destroy all of Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Some Internet postings contain the suggestion that the American attack was staged. Did the MEK members at Camp Ashraf, Iraq know whether their leaders made a deal with America so that some of them must die? Why did the American military protect the MEK rather than designate them as prisoners of war? In the background paper to President Bush’s September 2002 remarks at the United Nations, President Bush listed the MEK as one of the few Saddam Hussein-sponsored terrorist groups operating in Iraq. Al-Qaeda was not even on President Bush’s list. If we went to war because of the MEK, then why are we protecting the MEK? I have been unable to find any postings by you on any of these issues.
2.June 2003. The French government arrested Maryam Rajavi and approximately 160 MEK members in France. Some MEK members responded by burning themselves to death in front of news cameras. With your extensive experience in France and with a book on the French betrayal of America, I expected to see a posting by you providing insights into what happened plus the names of the many members of Congress who signed letters of support for the release of Maryam Rajavi, America’s terrorist enemy.
3.July 2004. The Defense Department and the State Department ended their battle over the MEK by agreeing to a compromise. The American government would recognize all MEK members at Camp Ashraf as having Fourth Geneva Convention special person protection. I am still searching for anything you have published condemning this American government action and naming those in the American government who provided protection for the MEK. The MEK has murdered American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of innocent Iranians. In Iraq, Saddam Hussein ordered the MEK to kill Kurds and Shiites. The MEK leaders told the MEK members that they could not use bullets because the bullets would be needed for the invasion of Iran. Instead, the MEK forced large numbers of innocent Iraqis to stand in roads so that MEK tanks could run over them and crush them to death. Why have American politicians ordered the American military to protect these communist war criminals? I have found no postings or books by you on these issues.
4.Where is Massoud Rajavi? Is he hiding in Switzerland or in Camp Ashraf? Is he dead? Has he had a stroke? The Internet is filled with speculation. I expected to see your article with a definitive answer.
If the American government can change the designation of the MEK from terrorist, prisoner of war, or war criminal to Fourth Geneva Convention protected persons, it will be easy for the American government to claim that the MEK and front organizations are eligible to receive millions of dollars of support under the provisions of the Iran Freedom Support Act. Why did 5 of the 6 members of Congress you criticized in January 2003 become co-sponsors or sponsors of the Iran Freedom Support Act? Please send me any documents these members of Congress have issued condemning the MEK. Why is there no clause in the Iran Freedom Support Act stating explicitly that the MEK and its front groups will never be eligible for funds?
The MEK claims it is pro-democracy, including in a free book posted online: Democracy Betrayed. The MEK claims that Maryam Rajavi is the elected president of Iran. There never was an election in Iran or anywhere else of Maryam Rajavi. George Orwell warned about such totalitarian group claims in his book 1984 and in other writings. Even the New York Times reported that many Iranians regard the MEK as desiring to become the Pol Pot of Iran. While you have written (and even appeared on a comedy channel’s “news” program) about why American must attack Iran, you have not written about how many millions of Iranians will be murdered by the MEK if America imposes this communist regime on Iran. You should be defending the Iranian people from the second most evil group in the world today, the MEK. The most evil group in the world today is the group of American neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites), many of whom have become sponsors or co-sponsors of the Iran Freedom Support Act.
The sponsor of the House version of the Iran Freedom Support Act is Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. You did not include her on your list of hardcore supporters of a communist takeover of Iran. At age 7, she came to America from Havana, Cuba. She claims to be anti-communist. From her positions on issues, she appears to be only anti-Fidel Castro.
I would never work with any neo-conservative (neo-Trotskyite) on the passage of any legislation. In the last election, I refused to vote for Republican Congressman Chris Cox because he did not provide me with a written response as to whether he was one of the 150 signers of the Iran Statement or any of the earlier similar statements. Instead, I voted for the Libertarian Party candidate, Bruce Cohen. In the future, I shall vote only for candidates of any political party who support liberty, not those who support endless neo-conservative (neo-Trotskyite) wars in the name of American values and traditions. As a Vietnam veteran who fought against communists in Vietnam, I reject the claims of the chickenhawk neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) who claim that anyone who opposes them are cowards and traitors. They are the real traitors. There is not enough room in the Republican Party for those who support communism and those who oppose communism.
My hope is that the American voters will vote out of office all of the evil neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites), both Democrats and Republicans, before they drop nuclear bombs or impose communist governments in Iran or anywhere else.
Thank you for your good work through January 2003. Please email me any articles you have written since January 2003 on the issues listed above.
Professor Paul Sheldon Foote California State University, Fullerton PO Box 6848 800 North State College Fullerton, CA 92834-6848 USA
MEK (Rajavi Cult) Sources of Financial Support and Political Campaign Contributions: Follow the Money
Of the thousands of Iranian-American supporters of the MEK, the names of some of them have appeared on lists of campaign contributors to members of Congress. See, for example, "MKO Influence in U.S. Politics", for a list of the names and addresses of some Iranian-American MEK (Rajavi Cult) supporters and the members of Congress who accepted campaign contributions from them.
In September 2002, President George W. Bush claimed in his background paper for his remarks at the United Nations that the MEK received financial support from Saddam Hussein. On October 13, 2004, Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball reported to Newsweek readers that Saddam Hussein might have funded the MEK (Rajavi Cult) via the United Nations Oil-For-FoodProgram. According to a report by chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer, Saddam Hussein allocated to the MEK (Rajavi Cult) more than 38 million barrels of oil (worth approximately $16 million) during the four years prior to the American invasion. Isikoff and Hosenball noted that President George W. Bush has not responded to this report as a vindication for President Bush’s claim that Saddam Hussein had provided financial support to the MEK (Rajavi Cult). They suggested that it might be awkward politically for President Bush to discuss the MEK (Rajavi Cult) again.
For years, the French government provided support and protection to the MEK (Rajavi Cult) and other terrorist organizations.
Libertarian Party’s National Web Site and the MEK (Rajavi Cult)
With the great evil being done by hundreds of Democratic and Republican Party leaders, I expected to find the Libertarian Party's National Web site to be filled with exposures of the lies and of the attacks upon liberty in the world. Amazingly, the current content of the Libertarian Party’s National Web site stresses how “The Party of Principles” can gain votes by compromising those principles using the big-tent approaches of the Democratic and Republican parties. The prominent example is the posting of the June 29, 2005 "Iraq Exit Strategy" by some Libertarian Party staff members seeking online signatures of support.
There is not enough room in the big tent of the Republican Party for both neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites) attempting to impose communist regimes in the world and for traditional conservatives who fought in wars (as I did in Vietnam) against communist or other totalitarian regimes. In the 2004 election, I did not vote for Republican Congressman Christopher Cox because he did not provide me with a written response as to whether he had signed the Iran Statement or any earlier statement of support for the MEK (Rajavi Cult). Instead, I voted for Libertarian Party candidate Bruce Cohen. If the Libertarian Party continues with its big-tent approach, including both those who support American imperialism (including the communist takeovers of some countries) and those who support liberty, then the only option remaining for many Americans will be to change their Democratic or Republican party registrations to “decline to state”. If all political parties in America have failed, then it is time for Americans to become independent voters. Our Founding Fathers did not even include political parties in the Constitution. Currently, the American political party system is a total failure.
Paul Sheldon Foote’s Honor Roll of Some Libertarians Who Have Exposed Neoconservative (Neo-Trotskyite), Middle East, or MEK (Rajavi Cult) War Lies
Retired United States Air Force (USAF) lieutenant colonel, Pentagon insider Libertarian Party member (Virginia) and May 2004 convention speaker
At the Libertarian Party’s National Web site, a thorough researcher could find a posting of a brief announcement of Karen Kwiatkowski’s planned speech on Iraq War Lies for the May 2004 Libertarian Party convention.
The brief details included that this former Pentagon insider would discuss these Iraq War lies:
1.Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and state-sponsored terrorism were manufactured pretexts for an unjust pre-emptive war.
2.The real reasons for the Iraq war were to control the flow of oil, to return Iraq to supporting the American dollar instead of the Euro, and to add military bases in the Middle East.
3.There is no exit strategy for Iraq because America’s current political leaders intend to remain in Iraq.
The Libertarian Party’s announcement of her forthcoming speech concluded with:
“As such, her talk should serve as an interesting bookend to the speech by radio talk show host Neal Boortz, who is also speaking at the convention and whose support of the war has been strongly criticized by many Libertarians, while others follow Boortz in supporting the war.”
Libertarian Party members who want to read her numerous postings on Iraq War lies must go to other Web sites, such as to the LewRockwell.com archives.
In "The Secret of Al Kut" (September 22, 2003), she mentioned that Al Kut was the site of a Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) training camp but did not provide more details about the MEK (Rajavi Cult).
Libertarian Party member, Libertarian Party of District of Columbia Aaron J. Biterman’s Comprehensive Listing of Notable Libertarians Llewellyn (Lew) H. Rockwell, Jr.’s Stop War Honor Roll, April 13, 1999
Anyone reading the Libertarian Party’s National Web site would find little content relating to the enormous contributions Carol Moore has made to exposing neoconservative (neo-Trotskyite), Middle East, and MEK (Rajvi Cult) war lies. Instead, you must go to other Web sites to read her postings and to read about her protests, such as:
Carol Moore's main Web site includes photographs of an MEK protest in Washington, D.C., on November 19, 2004. While MEK supporters paraded with a mock missile on the back of a truck on Pennsylvania Avenue, Carol Moore’s photographs show also her simultaneous “Hands Off Iran” counter protest. Carol revealed that the MEK (Rajavi Cult) uses the tactic of creating front groups for different events. On this date, the front group was called The Committee for Freedom and Democracy in Iran.
This Web site reveals some of the bases for her “Hands Off Iran” counter protest:
1.The MEK protestors are pro-war Iranians.
2.The MEK is on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations.
3.The neo-conservatives support the MEK.
4.Sign: “Rajavi = Chalabi”
5.Sign: “Enron, not Iran” and “No Blood for Oil”
In both words and actions, Carol Moore has exposed the lies America’s political leaders have used to justify wars.
Libertarian Party candidate for President, 1996 and 2000 Llewellyn (Lew) H. Rockwell, Jr.’s Stop War Honor Roll, April 13, 1999 HarryBrowne.org
In "Leave Iraq alone!" (May 9, 2002), Harry Browne provided examples of America’s pretexts for invasion around the world and applied the examples to the American government, including the use of banned poisonous CS gas to kill 80 Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas.
Director, Antiwar.com Former Libertarian Party candidate and former Republican Party candidate Author of: An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard and of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement Llewellyn (Lew) H. Rockwell, Jr.’s Stop War Honor Roll, April 13, 1999
Justin Raimondo’s prolific postings at Antiwar.com and elsewhere represent some of the finest research on these subjects you can find anywhere. I no longer subscribe to the Orange County Register. I do not share the view of those who post lists of notable libertarians that the writers for the Orange County Register are libertarians. If someone can find any of their writings attacking the MEK (Rajavi Cult) and the members of Congress who support the Iran Freedom Support Act, please email the references to me. My plan is to continue donating to Antiwar.com to ensure that Americans have an honest source of information about the neoconservative (Trotsky-con, to use Justin Raimondo’s term), Middle East, and MEK (Rajvai Cult) war lies.
Roll Call for Congressman Ron Paul
Republican Member of Congress, Texas, 1978 – 1986, 1998 - present Speaker at May 2004 Libertarian Party Convention, billed as “Libertarians’ Favorite Republican” Libertarian Party candidate for President, 1988 Aaron J. Biterman’s Comprehensive Listing of Notable Libertarians Llewellyn (Lew) H. Rockwell, Jr.’s Stop War Honor Roll, April 13, 1999
Over many years, Congressman Ron Paul has posted hundreds of pages of excellent speeches and statements exposing neoconservative (neo-Trotskyite) and Middle East war lies. These are acts of political courage for anyone who must work and survive with hundreds of traitors in Congress and with many dishonest members of the American media.
Some quotations from his speeches and statements are:
“In 1996, after five years of sanctions against Iraq and persistent bombings, CBS reporter Lesley Stahl ask our Ambassador to the United Nations, Madeline Albright, a simple question: ‘We have heard that a half million children have died (as a consequence of our policy against Iraq). It the price worth it?’ Albright’s response was ‘We think the price is worth it.’ Although this interview won an Emmy award, it was rarely shown in the U.S. but widely circulated in the Middle East. Some still wonder why America is despised in this region of the world!”
“Claim: Iraq is an international sponsor of terrorism.
Reality: According to the latest edition of the State Department’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq sponsors several minor Palestinian groups, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), and the Kurdistant Workers’ Party (PKK). None of these carries out attacks against the United States. As a matter of fact, the MEK (an Iranian organization located in Iraq) has enjoyed broad Congressional support over the years. According to last year’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq has not been involved in terrorist activity against the West since 1993—the alleged attempt against former President Bush.”
“Sorry, Mr. Franklin, ‘We’re All Democrats Now’” (January 29, 2003)
“To dismiss terrorism as the result of Muslims hating us because we’re rich and free is one of the greatest foreign-policy frauds ever perpetrated on the American people.”
“Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:
They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.”
“In Ledeen’s most recent publication, The War Against the Terror Masters, he reiterates his beliefs outlined in this 1999 Machaivelli book. He specifically praises: ‘Creative destruction…both within our own society and abroad…(foreigners) seeing America undo traditional societies may fear us, for they do not wish to be undone.’ Amazingly, Ledeen concludes: ‘They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission.’”
“In Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, Ledeen praises a business leader for correctly understanding Machiavelli: ‘There are no absolute solutions. It all depends. What is right and what is wrong depends on what needs to be done and how.’ This is a clear endorsement of situational ethics and is not coming from the traditional left.”
“Ledeen believes man is basically evil and cannot be left to his own desires. Therefore, he must have proper and strong leadership, just as Machiavelli argued. Only then can man achieve good, as Ledeen explains: “In order to achieve the most noble accomplishments, the leader may have to ‘enter into evil.’”
“Neocons—anxious for the U.S. to use force to realign the boundaries and change regimes in the Middle East—clearly understand the benefit of a galvanizing and emotional event to rally the people to their cause. Without a special event, they realized the difficulty in selling their policy of preemptive war where our own military personnel would be killed. Whether it was the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin, or the Maine, all served their purpose in promoting a war that was sought by our leaders.
Ledeen writes of a fortuitous event (1999):
…of course, we can always get lucky. Stunning events from outside can providentially awaken the enterprise from its growing torpor, and demonstrate the need for reversal, as the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 so effectively aroused the U.S. from its soothing dreams of permanent neutrality.”
“The fact that neo-conservatives ridicule those who firmly believe that U.S. interests and world peace would best be served by a policy of neutrality and avoiding foreign entanglements should not go unchallenged. Not to do so is to condone their grandiose plans for American world hegemony.”
“This country still allows open discourse—though less everyday—and we who disagree should push the discussion and expose those who drive our policies. It is getting more difficult to get fair and balanced discussion on the issues, because it has become routine for the hegemons to label those who object to preemptive war and domestic surveillance as traitors, unpatriotic and un-American. The uniformity of support for our current foreign policy by major and cable-news networks should concern every American. We should all be thankful for CSPAN and the internet.”
“Michael Ledeen and other neoconservatives are already lobbying for war against Iran. Ledeen is pretty nasty to those who call for a calmer, reasoned approach by calling those who are not ready for war ‘cowards and appeasers of tyrants.’ Because some urge a less militaristic approach to dealing with Iran, he claims they are betraying America’s best ‘traditions.’ I wonder where he learned early American history! It’s obvious that Ledeen doesn’t consider the Founders and the Constitution part of our best traditions. We were hardly encouraged by the American revolutionaries to pursue an American empire. We were, however, urged to keep the Republic they so painstakingly designed.”
“We’re at the point where we need a call to arms, both here in Washington and across the country. I’m not talking about firearms. Those of us who care need to raise both arms and face our palms out and begin waving and shouting: Stop! Enough is enough! It should include liberals, conservatives and independents. We’re all getting a bum rap from politicians who are pushed by polls and controlled by special-interest money.”
The blemish on Congressman Ron Paul’s record has been his failure to expose the MEK (Rajavi Cult) and the neo-conservative (neo-Trotskyite) support for the communist takeover of Iran. Contrary to his quotation on the MEK, the MEK has conducted a terrorist attack in America in 1992. Even the Council on Foreign Relations
(CFR) acknowledges this act of terrorism. The MEK has murdered American military officers and Rockwell International employees in Iran. He is correct that hundreds of members of Congress support the communist MEK, a Marxist terrorist organization on the State Department lists of former President Bill Clinton and on the lists during the current administration of President George W. Bush. Congressman Ron Paul serves on the current Committee on International Relations (109th Congress) with two of the signers of the Iran Statement supporting the communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists: Republicans Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Thomas G. Tancredo. While Congressman Ron Paul has posted his opposition to attacking Iran, I have not found any speeches or statements naming or criticizing the traitors in Congress who support the communist takeover of Iran.
George Orwell’s Warning of Two Paths to Slavery
In 1944, George Orwell warned about the two paths to slavery. America’s neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites) understand George Orwell’s warning:
The Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek The Mirror of the Past by K. Zilliacus
Taken together, these two books give grounds for dismay. The first of them is an eloquent defence of laissez-faire capitalism, the other is an even more vehement denunciation of it. They cover to some extent the same ground, they frequently quote the same authorities, and they even start out with the same premise, since each of them assumes that Western civilization depends on the sanctity of the individual. Yet each writer is convinced that the other's policy leads directly to slavery, and the alarming thing is that they may both be right....
Between them these two books sum up our present predicament. Capitalism leads to dole queues, the scramble for markets, and war. Collectivism leads to concentration camps, leader worship, and war. There is no way out of this unless a planned economy can somehow be combined with the freedom of the intellect, which can only happen if the concept of right and wrong is restored to politics.
Both of these writers are aware of this, more or less; but since they can show no practicable way of bringing it about the combined effect of their books is a depressing one.
During the Spanish Civil War, George Orwell, a journalist and book author, went to Spain to fight by serving with the United Workers Marxist Party militia. The experience changed his life and writings. Rejecting communism after observing struggles in Spain between Stalinists and Trotskyists, he returned to England as a democratic socialist (in general terms, but suspicious of all forms of government) and wrote books and essays warning of the dangers of totalitarianism, such as: 1984 and Animal Farm. Available for free online, these books are important to anyone along the political spectrum who opposes totalitarianism.
Homage to Catalonia is filled with "truth is the first casualty of war" stories veterans of any war will understand. If millions of duped Americans read this book, chickenhawks will not remain in power. Orwell read newspaper stories of battles that he knew personally never happened. Likewise, no newspapers reported some major battles in which he fought. By serving as a soldier, Orwell learned the ability of the media to manipulate dupes. Soldiers fighting for competing totalitarian powers have killed each other based upon the lies their totalitarian leaders and media told them. George Orwell’s 1984 is the story of how one individual tries to learn the truth in a world in which three totalitarian powers have divided much of the world. While George Orwell wrote 1984 in 1949, each passing year reveals how accurate his forecasts have been. The main difference between George Orwell’s forecasts and the totalitarian practices of today is that the totalitarians are still able to use subtler techniques to manipulate the masses in the world. With millions of dupes in a country, there is no need for totalitarians to make extensive use of the more brutal control techniques.
While George Orwell knew from his personal experiences of the Communist path to slavery, he did not know from personal experience how Capitalism could become a path to slavery. Writings about Hayekian Socialism contain some warnings about how totalitarians can take people into slavery from capitalist societies.
How a Libertarian Party Candidate Earned My Endorsement and Votes
September 13, 2005 Bruce Cohen Libertarian Party Candidate for Congress, California District 48 34145 Pacific Coast Highway #244 Dana Point, CA 92629 Telephone: (949) 813-8001
Subject: Endorsement and Vote for Bruce Cohen for Congress
In the 2004 election, I voted for you for Congress because of your excellent positions on issues related to wars in the Middle East. As a registered Republican, a former elected member of the Republican Central Committee, Los Angeles County (1990 – 1992), and as a former conservative Republican candidate for California State Assembly (1992, endorsed by the California Republican Assembly), I could not continue voting for Republican Congressman Christopher Cox because he would not respond in writing as to whether he had ever signed any statement of support for the Iranian communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorist group on the list of terrorists posted by the State Departments of former President Bill Clinton and of President George W. Bush. In President George W. Bush’s background paper for his September 2002 remarks at the United Nations, President Bush listed the MEK as one of the few Saddam Hussein-supported terrorist groups and one of the few reasons why America should invade Iraq. Al-Qaeda was not even on President George W. Bush’s list. After the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, coalition forces attacked Camp Ashraf, Iraq, the headquarters in Iraq of the MEK. After coalition forces killed some of the thousands of MEK fighters, the MEK signed a ceasefire agreement in April 2003. The American military removed or destroyed the MEK’s remaining heavy arms and ammunition. Instead of treating the MEK as prisoners of war or as war criminals, the American government protected the MEK from the Iraqis who want to attack Camp Ashraf. After the previous war in Iraq, Saddam Hussein ordered the MEK to kill Kurds and Shiites in reprisal. MEK leaders told the MEK fighters not to waste any bullets on Iraqis because the bullets would be needed for killing Iranians when the Iranian MEK invaded Iran. So, the MEK fighters lined up on roads large numbers of unarmed, innocent Iraqis and ran over them with MEK tanks until the Iraqis were crushed to death. In July 2004, the American government announced that it was recognizing all of the MEK fighters at Camp Ashraf, Iraq with Fourth Geneva Convention protected person’s status protecting these Iranians from being repatriated to Iran. In addition to the war crimes in Iraq, the MEK have murdered American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of unarmed, innocent Iranians in Iran. The MEK has even conducted a terrorist attack in New York City. Even the New York Times has reported that many Iranians believe that the Rajavi Cult will be the Pol Pot of Iran. Even more dangerous than the MEK are the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) in the Democratic and Republican parties who support the MEK. The latest moves of the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) include a statement by Vice President Richard Cheney about plans to use nuclear weapons against Iran and the introduction of the Iran Freedom Support Act (S. 333 in the U.S. Senate with 1 sponsor and 30 co-sponsors to date; H.R. 282 in the House of Representatives with 1 sponsor and 318 co-sponsors to date). The neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) support the communist takeover of Iran by the MEK (Rajavi Cult). Americans, in the American Revolution tradition of Patrick Henry (“Give me liberty or give me death.”) should vote out of office every member of Congress who would deny liberty to anyone in the world, whether by imposing totalitarian regimes elsewhere or by taking away liberty in America with stronger and stronger versions of the Patriot Act.
During the 2004 election campaign, the National Iranian American Council’s Voter's Guide showed that Congressman Christopher Cox and Democratic Party candidate John Graham did not answer the NIAC voter guide’s questions. Only you, the Libertarian Party candidate, answered the following questions.
10. Do you support dialogue with the Iranian government?
Dialogue is always good. I also support dialogue with groups opposed to the current regime in Iran.
11. Do you support extending The Iran Libya Sanctions Act beyond 2006?
Frankly, I prefer repealing ILSA outright. Its net effect has been counterproductive not only to the original goals and intent of the Act itself, but has in fact, penalized Americans and their allies; not to mention potentially creating animosity towards us overseas.
12. Do you support funding Iranian opposition groups with US government funds?
I don’t support any type of foreign aid whatsoever. Instead of taxing individuals and businesses, they should be allowed to keep this money. If they as private individuals wish to support such a cause, I would encourage it.
13. Would you bring the issue of Iranian nuclear ambitions to the UN Security Council?
Discussing a matter as serious as this is always a good thing. I am concerned that the United Nations is not the fair and honest forum it once was, but it’s truly the only international forum for such discussion at this time.
14. Will your administration actively seek regime change in Iran or distanced support to pro-democracy groups?
While I don’t support directly intervening with money or troops, I do wish to encourage greater freedom, trade and friendship with Iran.
15. Should the US increase pressure on Iran for its activities in Iraq, or should we explore possibilities for cooperation with Iran in Iraq?
Both pressure and cooperation have merit in affecting Iranian foreign policy for the better. We have a wonderful opportunity at this time of great potential change and progress in Iran, to help guide them in the right direction.
The Orange County Register, the local newspaper whose editors claim to be libertarians, did not endorse you, the Libertarian Party candidate for Congress, who had provided these excellent answers while American soldiers were dying in Iraq. I no longer subscribe to the Orange County Register.
Now that Congressman Christopher Cox has left Congress to serve at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, there is a special October 4, 2005 election to replace him. The official ballot contains the names of 17 candidates: 10 Republican Party, 4 Democratic Party, 1 American Independent Party, 1 Green Party, and 1 Libertarian Party. Of the 17 candidates, you are the only candidate I know with quality posted positions on the issues relating to current and future wars in the Middle East.
I shall be mailing my official ballot with a vote for you. I endorse your candidacy to all patriotic Americans who do not want to see the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) use nuclear weapons and the American military to impose communist or totalitarian regimes in the world in the name of democracy. As a Vietnam veteran who fought against communists in Vietnam, I know that America’s most dangerous terrorist enemy in the world today is in America: the neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites).
Professor Paul Sheldon Foote California State University, Fullerton PO Box 6848 800 North State College Fullerton, CA 92834-6848
Many Republican Party members and activists have admitted to me that they are thinking about leaving the Republican Party because of the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites). They cannot go to the Democratic Party because neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) started and remained there plus the Democratic Party has others who would welcome communist takeovers around the world. The neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) have succeeded in gaining power by having members in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Some left-wing groups have misrepresented the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) as being extreme right-wing. I am still searching for an explanation of how supporters of Trotsky could be to the right of the supporters of Lenin in any political classification scheme. If the Libertarian Party and other political parties welcome neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites), too, then many current Republicans will have no choice except to change their party registrations from Republican to “decline to state”.
My message for future Libertarian Party candidates is that you can earn my endorsement and vote only by remaining true to libertarian principles. In the debates leading to the American Revolution, Patrick Henry said: “Give me liberty or give me death.” A minority of American colonists supported the American Revolution. Patrick Henry did not say that American colonists should compromise their principles to build a big tent. Unfortunately, on April 14, 2005, even the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) betrayed America by permitting the MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists to hold a convention at Constitution Hall with members of Congress addressing America’s terrorist enemies and making favorable comparisons with President George Washington and with the American Revolution. This is a similar communist technique that the New York Times and some others in the American media plus many American political leaders used to gain support for Fidel Castro as the “George Washington of Cuba” in 1959. No one has the right to enslave Americans, Iranians, or anyone else in the world. There is no room for compromise with the worst terrorist group in the world today: neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites). Americans should be applauding the efforts in America, in Iran, and everywhere else to defeat the totalitarians who have duped American soldiers into dying for them in the name of democracy. As a Vietnam veteran, I have learned that you do not need to go around the world to find the worst enemy. For the world, today, the worst enemy is in America: neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites).
Recommended Books on the MEK (Rajavi Cult)
Singleton, Anne, Saddam’s Private Army: How Rajavi Changed Iran’s Mojahedin from Armed Revolutionaries to an Armed Cult, Iran-Interlink (UK), 2003. ISBN: 0-9545009-0-3.
This is the best single book available today on the MEK. Unfortunately, no American publisher is promoting this book in America. You must order it from the United Kingdom. The British author and her Iranian husband spent approximately 20 years inside the MEK, including time at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. She included extensive discussions of cult techniques and of why it is difficult to leave the MEK (Rajavi Cult) even in the United Kingdom.
Banisadr, Masoud, Masoud: Memoirs of an Iranian Rebel, Saqi Books, 2004. ISBN 0863563740
This Iranian author spent nearly 20 years of his life in the MEK, including at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. He described brainwashing and torture of MEK cult members at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Unlike some MEK cult members, he did not die from the punishment. After leaving the MEK (Rajavi Cult), he wrote a lengthy book explaining exactly how the MEK finds new members and how it brainwashes and tortures its members.
Abrahamian, Ervand, The Iranian Mojahedin, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 1989. ISBN 0-300-05267-7
While this book has not been updated since 1989, it contains the scholarly research of an Iranian-American professor who interviewed Massoud Rajavi and other MEK leaders.
Democracy Betrayed: A Response to U.S. State Department Report on the Mojahedin and the Iranian Resistance, Foreign Affairs Committee, National Council of Resistance of Iran, B.P. 18, 95430 Auvers-sur-Oise, France.
This is my favorite of the free books the MEK and its front groups have posted online because: (1) this book is an excellent example of how communist groups claim to be democratic. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China are examples of totalitarian countries claiming to be democratic (2) this book contains some of the names of the members of Congress the MEK likes, such as Senator John Kerry, 2004 Democratic Party candidate for President.
This is Anne Singleton’s Web site in the United Kingdom. The content includes extensive documentation about the MEK (Rajavi Cult), stories of cult members who have escaped from the MEK, and a lot of European documents the American neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) do not want Americans to read.