THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Refusal to remove MEK’s terrorist designation betrays democracy

With Iran reportedly making progress on its nuclear program, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has an opportunity to recognize an Iranian opposition group that is dedicated to democratic reform; has a secular, pro-Western outlook, and is most feared by the Iranian rulers. There’s only one catch: She must first remove the group from the U.S. list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO).

Removing any group from the FTO list is never easy, as doing so inevitably runs the risk of being seen as soft on terrorism. But, if ever there were a case for so acting, it is with regard to a group known as the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK).

Indeed, the MEK should never have been designated as an FTO in the first place. An ardent opponent of the mullahs who run Iran, the MEK was put on the U.S. list in 1997 as a gesture to Tehran at a time when U.S-Iranian relations seemed to be thawing.

The group had engaged in armed resistance first to the shah and later against the mullahs as a last resort because both regimes had eliminated the last vestiges of peaceful political activity. As a result, the Iranian government has jailed, tortured and executed tens of thousands MEK members. Many of its members, mostly former political prisoners, have fled Iran since the 1980s, with several thousand settling in Camp Ashraf in Iraq.

At the end of the Iraq war, the MEK disarmed under the supervision of the U.S. Army and renounced violence. It has embraced its own bill of rights that calls for a free and democratic Iran. The MEK has endorsed the emancipation of women, the separation of government and religion in Iran, the ability of Iranians to worship as they choose, and adherence to internationally recognized human rights. In light of these actions, MEK members in Camp Ashraf were deemed “protected persons” under the Fourth Geneva Convention and were to be shielded by the U.S. military.

Other governments have recognized that the MEK is not a terrorist group. In 2008 and 2009, respectively, Britain and the European Union removed the MEK from their lists. Some 90 members of Congress have called for the MEK to be removed from the U.S. list, and the bipartisan support is growing.

In addition to myself, former national security officials from the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations have joined this call, including John R. Bolton (U.N. ambassador), Andrew Card (White House chief of staff), Gen. Wesley Clark, Louis J. Freeh (FBI director), Gen. James L. Jones (national security adviser), Gen. Richard Myers and Gen. Peter Pace (chairmen, Joint Chiefs of Staff), Gen. James T. Conway (commandant of the Marine Corps), Michael B. Mukasey (attorney general), Tom Ridge (Homeland Security secretary), Howard Dean (Vermont governor), Bill Richardson (New Mexico governor), and Togo D. West Jr. (Secretary of the Army), to name just a few

Despite these developments and the fact that a nonviolent, disarmed group cannot as a matter of law be an FTO (the use of violence is the fundamental criterion for such a designation), the State Department so far has delayed the delisting of the MEK. A federal appeals court in July 2010 ordered the department to reconsider its position. All deadlines have come and gone.

This inaction has had tragic consequences. On April 8, thousands of Iraqi troops, backed by Humvees and armored personnel carriers, invaded Camp Ashraf and killed 36 residents and wounded hundreds more, all MEK members. The United States failed to safeguard Ashraf despite its pledge to do so. The unarmed residents had no means of resistance and they remain under threat.

Members of Congress attempted to investigate the attack but were turned away by the Iraqi government, which cited the U.S. terrorist designation as a reason to wall off the camp from U.S. lawmakers as well as to justify its violent treatment of the residents.

The FTO designation not only imperils the people of Ashraf, but it also casts a shadow on a group that is working to advance the values the United States has long hoped to see in Iran. The MEK is not a terrorist group and it is time for the United States to join our partners in the EU and Britain and take the MEK off the FTO list.

Any delay in delisting the MEK runs the risk of undermining the values of our nation based on the rule of law. It sends the wrong signal to Iran, the most active state exporter of terrorism, that it can continue to use its proxies to eliminate its opponents and evade the consequences. The regime in Iran wants nothing less than eliminating the MEK, which it views as a threat. They desire to see the MEK members at Camp Ashraf eliminated, thus killing the hope for change in Iran. As a great nation, we should not stand by and allow this to happen.

Gen. Henry H. Shelton is the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/25/unshackle-irans-main-opposition/

THE HUFFINGTON POST

There has been a lot of talk lately about what losing the AAA credit rating means for America. But America’s failure to keep its promise to the people of Camp Ashraf in Iraq also threatens to diminish our great country. Currently there are 3,400 Iranian opposition members known as the MEK who live in Iraq at Camp Ashraf, many of whom had family members imprisoned, tortured and executed by the Iranian Mullahs.

Despite the fact that the MEK has renounced violence since 2001, some believe and promote the idea that the MEK is a terrorist organization. There are key facts, which have been obscured, omitted or ignored in recent articles written about these 3,400 unarmed people. First, a lot has changed since the MEK was classified as a terrorist organization in 1997. In recent testimony to Congress by Martin Indyk, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs under Clinton, it was revealed that the motivation behind the ’97 classification was to help open a dialog with the ruling party of Iran.

Second, in July 2010, the U.S. Appeals Court in Washington DC ruled that the group was actually not given due process in 1997 and ordered the State Dept. to reevaluate the terrorist designation. Notably the governments of France, Britain and the EU have already ruled that the MEK is not a terrorist organization. Currently the only two nations that remain in agreement on what is now a discredited classification are America and Iran.

Third, In 2006 the U.S. military peacefully disarmed the inhabitants of Camp Ashraf. American FBI agents visited Ashraf and questioned all of the 3,400 residents. None were found to be associated with terrorists or terrorism. The US military made a promise in writing that each resident would be protected against outside threats.

Fourth, in 2009, and again in 2011, American troops were ordered to leave the vicinity of Ashraf by the Iraqi Government — then led by Prime Minister Maliki. Iraqi troops went into Ashraf and killed 47 unarmed civilians in cold blood. Most of the hundreds who were wounded were denied medical care as American troops stood idly by just a few miles away.

Fifth, while the residents of Ashraf are currently asking to be re-located to other countries, the plan currently being pushed by Lawrence Butler from the US State would instead relocate them to another area in Iraq and “guarantee” their safety. Yet neither the American or Iraqi governments have thus far kept their word to the residents of Ashraf.

Some are suggesting that a distinguished group of bipartisan and knowledgeable counter-terrorism American experts, including former Directors of the CIA, NSA, NSC, FBI, an Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security, Chiefs of the Joint Staff, Marine Corps Commandant, NATO Commander, CENTCOM Commander, DOS Asst Sec for Counter-Terrorism, governors, ambassadors, generals, and many others, are being paid for their support of the residents of Ashraf.

This is simply not true. America gave its word to the MEK that we would protect them. We believe that allowing 3,400 people to be murdered in cold blood and breaking that promise is wrong. We believe that in the end this debate is about America, not the people in Ashraf. America is a country that values freedom and the rule of law. We must keep our word and help the people of Ashraf get out of Iraq. We must support those who peacefully and through democratic means fight for their freedom. If we fail and again stand by as 3,400 unarmed men, women and children, in Ashraf are murdered by the Iranian Government or its Iraqi proxies, we diminish ourselves as a great nation. Its time for America to keep its word to the people in Ashraf.

Howard Dean, MD is former Governor of Vermont. While he has delivered paid speeches for the MEK through the Harry Walker agency, he was not paid for this column and any opinions represented are his own based on the humanitarian issues involved.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-dean/america-must-keep-its-wor_b_933345.html

FoxNews.com

Today, the organization has strong bipartisan support in both the U.S. House and Senate. The poisonous “terror tag” has been removed by both the United Kingdom and the European Union years ago, yet it remains in place the United States, a naive and inhumane bit of leverage against the Iranian regime, who hate the idea of an organized democratic opposition.  

Meanwhile, the MEK has provided accurate intelligence to the U.S. regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its deadly meddling in Iraq.  

U.S. counter-terrorism professionals—including the former heads of the FBI and the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff–are perplexed that an organization that has provided so much assistance to the United States still remains listed as an “FTO.” To many of us who have dedicated our lives to fighting terrorism, the removal of the MEK from the FTO list is as necessary as it is certain.

Enter the “document”.

With the State Department’s imminent decision, a number of detractors of the MEK have engaged in a last ditch campaign to hype a November 2004 document which they claim is an “FBI Report,” as evidence that the MEK was planning terrorist acts. I’ve seen the so-called “report.” I, myself, have written reports on terrorist organizations. And believe me, this amateurish collection of vague and unsubstantiated charges is no FBI “report.”

The document, known in FBI parlance as a “Letterhead Memorandum (LHM),” indicated the FBI was investigating individuals with ties to the MEK in a “criminal” investigation, not a “terrorism” investigation. It has no author and no FBI file number, making its validity highly questionable. After further examination, the LHM is actually comprised of two completely separate documents, pasted together.

The cover page of the LHM (dated November 2004) was prepared by the Los Angeles Office of the FBI as part of its criminal investigations about individuals with alleged ties with the MEK. 

In a recent article, Trita Parsi, an Iranian-American critic of the MEK, claims that the “FBI Report” finds that the MEK “continued to plan terrorist acts at least three years after they claimed to renounce terrorism.” But, there is nothing in the LHM that substantiates that claim as it focuses clearly on criminal matters — such as immigration smuggling by a number of Iranian nationals.

The LHM fails to make any reference to a single “terrorist” activity after 2001. And, some of the alleged incidents described as terrorism amount to nothing more than Iranian exiles pelting rotten eggs at Iranian regime officials on foreign trips. Incredibly, one of the examples and criteria of “past terrorist activities” is: “June 1981, the MEK began large scale protests against Khomeini.”

The second portion of the LHM, which appears to be clipped from a completely different document, is apparently meant to be a guide for agents to conduct field interviews. It begins by saying, “In anticipation of potential interviews of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) members who are detained in Iraq, the following is a guide…that may prove helpful in interviews.” 

This document could not have been prepared in November 2004 because the “potential” interviews were actually already completed by that time (as mentioned earlier in the LHM). 

Roughly seven months before the document’s date, in May 2004, several different U.S. government agencies, including the Departments of State, Justice, Defense, Homeland Security and Treasury (as well as the CIA, the FBI, and the DIA), completed their interviews with the members of the MEK residing in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. As a result of these interviews, the U.S. government granted the MEK members at Camp Ashraf ‘protected persons’ status under the Fourth Geneva Convention after finding “no basis to charge any member of the group with the violation of American law,” according to the New York Times

The section in the LHM entitled “Current Terrorist Activity” refers to purported investigations of alleged “telephone calls” discussing “acts of terrorism.” If “telephone calls” were used as justification to label “terrorist activity” the LHM would have been labeled “SECRET” or “Terrorism Investigation” versus “Criminal Investigation.” 

Citing a Canadian newspaper, the Ottawa Citizen, the LHM charges that Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction were being hidden in Camp Ashraf, the besieged home of the MEK in Iraq. However, ten years after the invasion of Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction have been discovered anywhere in Iraq, let alone at Camp Ashraf.

The very existence of a public FBI LHM is suspect; the FBI and intelligences agencies are not known for providing investigative information to the public.

The MEK shares an important objective with the U.S.; to support democratic change in Iran that would bring human rights protection and freedom for its citizens. The MEK’s removal from the FTO list would show Western support for the Iranian people and their desire for freedom. Delisting the MEK would strengthen America’s hand in its complex relationship with Tehran and would be of material assistance in achieving U.S. regional and international goals of combating terrorism and halting the spread of nuclear weapons.

The MEK’s listing is, and has always been, about politics and not national security.  Louis Freeh, former director of the FBI said he and other former U.S. military, intelligence and diplomatic leaders would not have spoken in favor of the MEK “if there was some secret, classified magic bullet that legally or factually justified keeping this freedom fighting organization on the list. There is none.”

The FTO list is an important tool in combating terrorism, but its designations must stand to reason. If due process is completed in an impartial and objective manner and not influenced by the likes of an unsubstantiated, amateurish cut-and-paste job like the LHM, then it would lead to delisting the MEK.

Richard R. Schoeberl has over 16 years of counterintelligence, terrorism, and law enforcement experience. Mr. Schoeberl is a former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent where his experience ranged from service as a field agent to leadership responsibilities in executive positions at FBI Headquarters and the National Counterterrorism Center where he provided oversight to the United States international counterterrorism effort. Mr. Schoeberl held collateral duties in the FBI as an FBI Certified Instructor and a member of the FBI SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) program. 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/22/its-time-to-lift-terror-tag-from-iranian-opposition-group-mek/#ixzz1VmbLdkEn

The New York Times

To the Editor:

“An Iranian Cult and Its American Friends,” by Elizabeth Rubin (Sunday Review, Aug. 14), repeats unfounded allegations against the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran.

The People’s Mujahedeen, also known as MEK, never cooperated with Saddam Hussein in his crackdowns against Kurds and others, and the current Iraqi foreign minister has confirmed this. Such allegations are spread by Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security to demonize the resistance.

Other than repeating the mullahs’ misinformation against the resistance by labeling it as a “cult,” the article does not mention any specific act of terrorism for which the group should remain designated by the United States State Department as a foreign terrorist organization.

Whether one is a terrorist can only be decided based on the facts, and in the case of the MEK, courts in Britain, the European Union and the United States have determined time and again that it isn’t involved in terrorism.

LORD CORBETT OF CASTLE VALE
Chairman
British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom
London, Aug. 14, 2011

The letter was signed by 39 other members of the committee.

To the Editor:

Elizabeth Rubin’s article on the MEK suggests that it deserves to remain on the State Department foreign terrorist organization list because of cultlike qualities that she observed when she visited its camp in 2003. Clearly, this is not the standard for designation as a terrorist group, with all the consequences that attach to such a label.

For that reason, the highest courts in Britain and the European Union have removed the MEK from their respective terrorist organization lists. And last year, the United States Court of Appeals in Washington chided the State Department for failing to provide proper evidence to warrant such a designation. The State Department has not yet responded.

The issue of who should rule Iran in the event its theocratic, terrorist mullahs can ever be replaced by a democratic regime is a question for the Iranian people to decide. It is not for the United States, as Ms. Rubin suggests, to prejudge who should contend for the support of the Iranian people in a free election.

ALLAN GERSON
Washington, Aug. 15, 2011

The writer is one of the lawyers representing the MEK in its efforts to be removed from the State Department list of foreign terrorist organizations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/19/opinion/removing-an-iranian-opposition-group-from-the-us-terror-list.html

THE HUFFINGTON POST

What is an organization deemed by the US State Department to be dedicated to terrorism — an FTO, or Foreign Terrorist Organization — supposed to do when it believes the charge is spurious? Clearly, the consequences of such a determination are enormous because under federal law anyone providing as much as a nickel in support to an organization on the FTO list is subject to criminal penalties for aiding and abetting terrorism. So naturally, such an organization will try to do whatever it can to exercise its legitimate rights to correct the record, refute erroneous charges and seek de-listing.

This burden to act is especially acute if an organization placed on the FTO list happens to have thousands of its members situated in a foreign country where they stand to be forcibly removed to a truly terrorist regime where the fate of those “repatriated” will likely be death by firing squad or the hangman’s noose. And, where the US State Department FTO listing is manipulated as justification for random acts of violence against members of that particular organization coupled with continued threats of forced deportation, the compulsion to use all legitimate means to remove the unwarranted terrorist label is overwhelming.

This is precisely the situation the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) finds itself in today. The surprise is that it would be vilified for its efforts in a recent article in the Huffington Post by Christina Wilkie (“Mujahideen-e Khalq: Former U.S. Officials Make Millions Advocating For Terrorist Organization“, 8/8/11). There, Ms. Wilkie makes the sensational charge that the MEK is indeed a terrorist organization and that former top US national security officials are willing to prostitute themselves by saying the opposite. To illustrate her point, The Huffington Post chose to bunch photographs of these officials in a sort of rogues gallery captioned as “Terror Lobby”.

It is mindboggling to believe that one could imply that these prominent individuals are villains when they, more than most Americans, understand that Iran is the world’s most active supporter of terrorism and the MEK is dedicated to unhinging Iran’s repressive regime through free elections in which it can participate. Presumably, Ms. Wilkie realizes that the ruling mullahs of Iran would like nothing more than to have its new emerging satellite, the government of Iraq, repatriate the 3,400 MEK dissidents located in Iraq to face “justice” in Iran.

The hangmen in Iran have already executed thousands of MEK members over the course of the last three decades. In further delegitimizing the MEK and its supporters, Ms. Wilkie’s article in fact aids and abets terror — terror not only against the MEK members, but against American troops and Iran’s own citizens who are the key victims of the terrorist policy practiced by Teheran’s regime.

Ostensibly, Ms. Wilkie’s concern is that the MEK remains a terrorist organization that dupes top-tier former US national security officials, including the former Attorney General of the United States, to jettison their US national security concerns in favor of a quick buck. Thus, the article begins with the old canard that the MEK is a Marxist organization. Never mind that the MEK itself denies that it has a Marxist bent. But, let us say that it is Marxist — whatever that means — in orientation. What difference should that make in being subjected to the terrorist organization label?

Similarly, Ms. Wilkie’s pronouncement that the MEK is a “cult” is meaningless, and dangerous. Even assuming the charge to be true, the fact remains that no US law allows placement of an organization on any terrorism list, or validates ignoring an impending humanitarian disaster, because it has “cult”-like qualities. Indeed, the very phrase gives license to irresponsible journalists or government officials to go after whomever they happen to dislike under the banner of the cult flavor of the month.

The only incident — and not evidence — Ms. Wilkie presents on the MEK’s terrorist inclinations is the accusation of its involvement in attacks on Americans more than three decades ago. But conspicuously absent is any mention of the fact that the MEK denied any role in those attacks, which were undertaken by a splinter group not affiliated with the MEK, which coincidently murdered MEK leaders as well.

Only on the second page of her article do we learn that the EU’s highest court has recently taken the MEK off its terrorism list because it found not a shred of evidence to indicate that it has engaged in any act of terrorism. Nor is any reference made in the article to the standards in international and US law about renunciation of terrorism as justifying terminating the terrorist label.

It is telling that the article does not even allude to the fact that three years ago, the highest court in Britain rebuked its own Foreign Office for ever having listed the MEK on its terrorism list, as no credible evidence formed a basis for such a designation.

And in May 2011, the French Judiciary dropped all terrorism and terrorism financing charges against the individuals affiliated with the MEK. The judgment concluded that “The dossier does not contain any evidence indicating an armed activity that would intentionally target civilians,” and that the MEK struggle amounted to “resistance against tyranny.”

Finally, there is no reference to the reasons that the US Congress — unless she deems them all duped as well — have by overwhelming majority asked the State Department to review the MEK listing as being inconsistent with the evidence at hand. 94 Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle, including Chairmen of the Select Intelligence, Armed Services and Government Oversight committees, cosponsored H.Res.60, which urges the Secretary of State “to remove the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran from the Department of State’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.”

Perhaps most ominously, Ms. Wilkie’s article fails to tell readers what the ex-US government national security officials actually said. Attorney General Michael Mukasey provided a scholarly and thorough analysis as to why the MEK should be delisted based on the governing law and pertinent facts. Director Louis Freeh explained the political environment in which the MEK was designated in 1997, when the White House had blocked Freeh’s efforts to indict Iranian regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, who had planned the bombing of the Khobar Towers, killing 19 American service members.

General Wesley Clark elaborated that he was familiar with the MEK for many years and that based on his own experience in the Balkans, the recent atrocities by the soldiers of Iraq against the MEK dissidents housed in Iraq was tantamount to a war crime and should be investigated. Secretary Ridge remarked that in none of the White House meetings dealing with threats to the United States was the MEK ever mentioned. And the State Department’s coordinator of counterterrorism until April 2010, Ambassador Dell Dailey, said he had found no evidence of MEK involvement in terrorism and had pushed to get the group off the list.

Ms. Wilkie contends, or at least strongly suggests, that because these former national security officials were the recipients of money from Iranian American communities sympathetic to the MEK, the voicing of their opinions puts them in the category of those aiding and abetting terrorism. Of course, the US Justice Department has never made such a slanted interpretation of US law. Indeed, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit in July of this year found that it was not convinced that there is any sound basis for classifying the MEK as an FTO and asked the State Department to produce further evidence as to why such a listing was appropriate. For months, however, the State Department has dragged its feet, neither agreeing to delist the MEK, nor forthrightly stating facts that support such a listing.

Journalists considering a story accusing an organization of being a terrorist entity can hardly afford to turn a blind eye on the consequences of what they write, especially when the lives of thousands of individuals may be endangered.

Allan Gerson is the Chairman of AG International Law in Washington D.C. He is presently involved with other attorneys in representing the PMOI/MEK in its efforts to be removed from the State Department List of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allan-gerson/post_2286_b_924434.html

THE NEW YORK POST

Don’t betray Iranian refugees

Some 3,400 innocent Iranian dissidents now living in a camp in Iraq are in imminent danger of being slaughtered. These men, women and children — members of Mujahedin-e Khalq, or People’s Mujahedin, a longtime Iranian opposition movement — trusted America’s promise to protect them. But the gradual US withdrawal from Iraq leaves that promise in doubt.

As a former base commander of Camp Ashraf, the official name of the MEK’s besieged refuge, I’d like to make one thing clear: Despite charges that the MEK is a terrorist organization, these people are American allies. It would be foolish, as well as wrong, to abandon them.

As America pulls back, Iranian influence is on the rise in Iraq — notably in Diyala Province, where Camp Ashraf is located. As Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Iran’s President Mahomoud Ahmadinejad grow closer, the MEK’s situation becomes more critical.

These innocents’ vulnerability was made tragically clear on April 8, when elements of the Iraqi army used US-supplied vehicles and equipment to raid the camp, killing 34 defenseless people and wounding nearly 350.

In videos of the event, we witness the courage of the residents of Ashraf. Despite knowing they may be the next to die, they rush to rescue their fallen comrades.

Courage under fire is an admirable trait. Killing unarmed people is murder. Yet the State Department has done nothing of substance to address these attacks or the overall Ashraf situation.

Sadly, the State Department even now continues to list the MEK as a terrorist group — a listing made 14 years ago to placate the rulers in Tehran in yet another failed diplomatic outreach. (A court has now ordered State to review the listing.)

As the former antiterrorism/force protection officer for all of Iraq, I know the “factual” basis for the listing is false. For example, Hoshyar Zebari, now Iraq’s foreign minister and the longtime head of international relations for the Kurdistan Democrat Party International Relations, has repeatedly confirmed that the MEK did not attack the Kurds in the 1990s. Yet State still cites such supposed attacks in its annual report on terrorism. And just last month, State’s point man on Ashraf, Ambassador Lawrence Butler, repeated the canard again in a New York Times interview.

The real benefactors of the fall of the MEK will be Ahmadinejad and the Iranian regime — which has long sought custody of these refugees in order to eliminate them as enemies of the state.

The MEK surrendered to the US military without firing a shot, turned over all its weapons, accepted consolidation at Camp Ashraf, formally renounced terrorism, accepted protected-person status under the Fourth Geneva Convention and provided the Free world with crucial intelligence, including vital data on Iran’s development of a nuclear weapons program. They met every requirement we placed on them.

Yet in early 2009, we turned the protection of Ashraf over to the Iraqis — despite numerous warnings that too many elements of Iraq’s government are eager to curry favor with Iran. This is like putting the Mafia in charge of the FBI Witness Protection Program.

As validated in the April 8 videos, the “protectors” murdered Ashraf residents. Now, the United States wants Ashraf residents to accept relocation to a different, more remote site in Iraq. The refugees see this as an invitation to a massacre — not unlike the 1995 slaughter of Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica.

The MEK has fulfilled its end of commitments. The United States has come up very short, and the residents of Camp Ashraf are paying the price. It is long past time for us to make things right.

For starters, that means removing the MEK from the US terrorist list and moving Ashraf residents to third countries where their safety can be guaranteed.

Col. Wesley Martin US Army (Ret.), served as the senior antiterrorism/force-protection officer for all Coalition forces in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/abandoned_allies_HCjcM8v310sbGvMaIUVrhM