When Democracy Turns into hypocrisy

There is no doubt that today hypocrisy has become a part of US policy towards Tehran. The overt double standard in the attitude of some of US former politicians has been observed in their recent speeches at MEK's propaganda campaigns where paid politicians offered their support to a terrorist designated group.

There is no doubt that today hypocrisy has become a part of US policy towards Tehran. The overt double standard in the attitude of some of US former politicians has been observed in their recent speeches at MEK's propaganda campaigns where paid politicians offered their support to a terrorist designated group.

Paul R. Pillar of The National Interests suggests that the motivation to advocate a terrorist cult originates from "a combination of pecuniary interests and scant knowledge about the nature of the group" and also "a destructively simplistic, Zero-sum attitude regarding policy toward Iran". He believes that even the enemies of the United States have enemies that are terrorist groups. [1]


Former congressman, Lee Hamilton is one of those prominent figures who admitted having received a "substantial amount" to appear on the panel in favor of MEK last month. He told the journalists that he was not aware of the cult-like nature of the group, according to Barbara Slavin of IPS. "They presented me with a platform that was thoroughly democratic" Hamilton said. "Were they misleading me? You always can be misled."[2]


For those US policy makers who make efforts to invest on MKO as a tool against Islamic Republic, the group seems to be a potential means to advance US policy regarding Iran. "To think of the MEK as some kind of policy tool to use against Tehran is both foolish and bizarre," Paul Pillar writes. He reminds them that MKO has "virtually no support within Iran". [3]But US warmongers seem to be very choosy about their allies.


In its turn, MKO propaganda machine works hard to present the cult as a democratic organization and repeatedly claims that it has renounced violence. Indeed, whether or not MKO has left violence or poses any threat to the West, it is a harmful policy to harbor a destructive cult that always poses a potential threat to Iran-US relations. The group is absolutely resented by the Iranian public and those alive in the 1980's never forget the group's chaotically partnership with Saddam Hussein.


That's why Pillar concludes his article by suggesting that “any favor done to the MEK would not only needlessly complicate any possibilities for reaching understandings with Tehran, on nuclear program or anything else, but also needlessly antagonize many members of the Iranian public. " [4]


Getting in bed with a terrorist destructive cult with no support from its country fellow men is like getting in bed with your worst enemy.



References:

[1] R.Pillar, The National Interest, consorting with a Cult, March16, 2011
[2] Slavin, Barabra,IPS, US: Iranian Terrorist Group courts Friends in high Places,March1,2011
[3] R.Pillar, The National Interest, consorting with a Cult, March16, 2011
[4]ibid



Leave your comments

Post comment as a guest

0 / 300 Character restriction
Your text should be in between 10-300 characters
Your comments are subjected to administrator's moderation.
  • No comments found