Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
Nejat Society
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
© 2003 - 2024 NEJAT Society. nejatngo.org
Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

The Threat of Tamerlans Trained in the MEK

Almost every day we hear of car bombing, suicide bombings and terror attacks, in news headlines. The most recent ones occurred in Baghdad and a Marathon competition in Boston. The first question to be answered is that who committed the act? To answer the question, you almost always come across a fanatic who has been involved with an extremist group, otherwise the terrorist is a lunatic person. In case of mentally ill attackers the reason is obviously explained by psychologists but in case of extremist bombers the reason is complex and sometimes bizarre which requires different specialists to clarify the issue. Extremist invader usually belongs to highly manipulative groups that exploit their members to deliberately injure or kill other individuals or even their own comrades. Such groups are called “destructive cults” or “harmful cults”. The crucial point about such groups is that the harm is not always physical; it can also include psychological harm which is often hidden to the public. The very example of such type of cults is the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (the MKO) which had been effective to manage its image as a “democratic opposition” to the Islamic Republic of Iran, not a destructive cult of personality with a long history of physical harm against its own nation and numerous reports, testimonies and interviews on the psychological harm the group carries on its own members and recruits.

Jeremiah Goulka, one of the authors of the Rand Institution report on  the MKO for US defense Department states: ”I studied the MEK (MKO) for the US military and visited Camp Ashraf, the MEK facility 40 miles north of Baghdad. I also I interviewed former MEK members. As Human Rights Watch also concluded, I saw that the MEK is a cult. It uses brainwashing, sleep deprivation and forced labor to indoctrinate members.

“It segregates men from women, mandates celibacy, forces married members to divorce (except for its leaders), and separates families and friends who must seek permission just to converse.

"MEK members must report their private sexual thoughts at group meetings and endure public shaming. In a Catch-22, those who deny having sexual thoughts are accused of hiding them and shamed, too. The cult had but one purpose: to put itself in charge in Iran.”[1]

After the Iranian Revolution and with the beginning of Massoud Rajavi’s leadership over the MKO, the introductory phase of the cult-like establishment of the group emerged. This was an intense experience for members who were enthusiastically welcomed in the group. Soon, the MKO –which has totally turned into a cult –increased the demands. Members had to devote their whole time, money and energy to the leader. Rajavi’s demands were justified as necessary to overthrow the Islamic Republic.

Relationships outside Camp Ashraf and now Camp Liberty became impossible; contact with families and friends became forbidden unless they would help the with the cause of the group. Deviation from Rajavi’s dogma ended with severe punishment and rejection. Ultimately the demands became unbearable.

The BBC correspondent Owen Benet Jones also writes of the life inside MKO Camps:

“For Example, it requires its members in Iraq to divorce. Why? Because love was distracting them from their struggle against the mullahs in Iran.

"And the trouble is that people love their children too.

"So the MEK leadership asked its members to send their children away to foster families in Europe. Europe would be safer. The group explained.

"Some parents have not seen their children for 20 years and more.

"And just to all to the mix, former members consistently describe participating in regular public confession of their sexual fantasies.” [2]

Leaving the MKO is a fight because members fear sever, punitive reaction of the authorities of the group. What they began in joy – in dream of having a better life  — ends in terror and pain. They spend hours a day conducting “cleansing” sessions which are very commonly held in all destructive cults whether for exorcism or for self-criticism. There are many stories and interviews of horrible cultic practices of the MKO leaders including "Salvation Dance”, "Ideal Summit" and …Studying their stories indicates that motivations and manipulations causing cult-like behavior are present everywhere around us and ex-members of the MKO are not so different from other people. The threat of the destructive MKO cult is no impossible.

As Tamerlan Tsarnaev 27, who was a Jihadist Chechen had a great influence on his younger brother  Dzhokar, each member of a harmful cult can exert impact on people around him in order to commit crimes like Boston bombing.

Massoud Banisadr former member of the MKO speaks of the effective cult indoctrinations on members. In his interview with Steve Hassan, a cult expert explains that how a cult member can simply be radicalized to set himself on fire – as the MKO members did in June 2003 – and launch terror acts. He asserts that the MKO trained the first women suicide operators at least in Islamic history.Regarding that Banisadr was involved in the MKO for 20 years, he believes that if the MKO or Al-Qaida operatives are tried in civil trial, they welcome any sentence because as cult members they have been indoctrinated to go to heaven after death .[3] This way he explains the threat of mind control cults.

It is crucial for the world community especially the West –where the MKO is today much more active than any other time – to know about the MKO cult to avoid being caught in it. They should be aware of the hidden cult thinking operating among their politic men.

 Coleen Rowley of the Antiwar.com criticizes American Neocons including Rudy Giuliani who “pompously claim on national TV that he was surprised about any Chechens being responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings because he’s never seen any indication that Chechen extremists harbored animosity toward the US; Giuliani thought they were only focused  on Russia”.[4]

Rowley notifies that “useful” terrorists for US Neocons are not limited to Chechenya’s friends or Afghan Mujahedeen but the MKO is one of the enemies of their enemy too. "Of course, Giuliani also just happens to be one of several neocons and corrupt politicians who took hundreds of thousands of dollars from MEK sources when that Iranian group was listed by the US State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO),” He writes .”The money paid for these American politicians to lobby (illegally under the Patriot Act) US officials to get MEK off the FTO list”. [5]

Today at least 3 thousand Tamerlans are manipulated and indoctrinated in the MKO camps, Camp Liberty, Iraq and Ouver Sur d’Oise in the suburb of Paris. These brainwashed suicide operators are members of the Cult of Rajavi who a few weeks ago opened an office a block from the White House. The windows of the House open to the menace of a destructive cult.

By Mazda Parsi

References:

[1]Goulka, Jeremiah, The Cult of MEK, The American Prospect, July18, 2012

[2]Bennett Jones, Owen, An Iranian mystery: Just who are the MEK? BBC News, April15, 2012

[3]https://www.nejatngo.org/en/posts/5167

[4] Rowley, Coleen, Chechen Terrorists and the Neocons,Antiwar.com, April22, 2013

[5]ibid

May 9, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Camp Liberty

Review of the situation of the inhabitants of Camp Liberty

Our purpose in the present article is to briefly review the severe humanitarian problems of the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) forces in Camp Liberty in Iraq. We intend to express our concerns, the obstacles in our way, and Review of the situation of the inhabitants of Camp Libertythe possible practical solutions to this problem.

We believe that, for obvious political reasons, at the present time there is no will to solve the problem and rescue the inhabitants of Camp Liberty from the disaster they are trapped in. We also believe that we must not adopt a passive role. It is necessary to reveal the oppression going on inside the camp by the leaders of the MEK cult and more importantly to let everyone know that not only does the cult leader Massoud Rajavi not represent the inhabitants, he is the main threat to their safety and security.

Below we initially give a short summary of the main topics and then describe the matter in length:

Concerns:

•The suffering families of the members of the MEK present in Camp Liberty, despite more than three years of sit-in demonstration in Iraq, are still deprived from visiting their loved ones.

•The security, safety, welfare, medication, physical and mental situation of the residents is disastrous due to the prevention and obstacles enforced by the leaders.

•Most members have had severe phobias instilled in them through systematic mind manipulation practices which has continued for many years in their isolated location, and are being kept within the cult contrary to their own will.

Obstacles:

•Access to the residents, even by their relatives, is almost impossible due to prevention by the leaders and their appeasement by the authorities.

•10 years after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the harsh and absolute control over the residents imposed by the leaders is even more severe than ever.

•The UN monitors and the international observers do not have, or they do not wish to have, a clear image of the MEK internal cultic relationships and their methods of mind control practices.

Solutions:

•The families of the members of the Rajavi cult play the key role in rescuing and recovering their loved ones.

•Separation of the leaders from the rank and file of the cult is the most practical solution to start with.

•The international pressure and dissemination of information about the cult leaders by the families and former members can play a valuable role in resolving the situation.

One of the most basic internationally recognized human rights for every individual, even for the most dangerous prisoners, is the right to visit and be in contact with their next of kin. This obvious right has been denied to the members of the cult for many years since the cult leader Massoud Rajavi will not permit it.

The UN authorities and other international organizations do officially recognize this right, but on the other hand they say that the residents of Camp Liberty could not be forced to visit their parents or offspring or siblings when they do not wish to do so. Our question, which is still left unanswered, is what sort of internal atmosphere must be present inside the camp so that the residents who have had no access to the outside world for one, two, or even three decades unanimously have no desire to meet their next of kin of whom they have had no news for so many years.

No international official is willing to answer this question, of course for their own political reasons, but scientifically the answer is very simple. This is exactly a result of the application of destructive mind control techniques which is systematically imposed over the members who have lived in isolated, remote places such as Ashraf garrison and Camp Liberty (and even in the impenetrable collective residential bases in western countries such as in Auvers-sur-Oise, Maryam Rajavi’s base in Paris) for so many years.

The UN authorities in Iraq say that the residents of the camp and their relatives have the right to be in contact with each other, nevertheless the individuals are free to decide whether they wish to have such a relationship or not. This is entirely up to the person and it is the individual’s right to choose.

The problem is that what is described as ‘the right to choose’ does not exist inside the Rajavi cult. We must make sure that a truly free decision has been made and the mental elements, that we all know about and how they work, are not being applied.

UN officials admit that the residents of the camp become surprisingly hysterical when they hear the name of their relatives and react irrationally. It is obvious that since the brainwashing methods are applied they find the term ‘family’ equivalent to ‘Satan’ and react involuntarily and avoid the issue of family in a phobic reaction.

One UNAMI official once said: ‘even those who come to us and ask to leave, if the matter of visiting the family members is mentioned, they become angry and give up and accuse us of trying to link them to Iran’s ministry of intelligence.’

This is a common practice in cults. The minds of the people are filled with the phobia of ‘family’ using destructive mind control techniques. Therefore they immediately reject visiting them (just like refusing to visit Satan) and react irrationally. Rajavi knows full well that meeting with their families and restoring their emotional memories would take the minds of the persons out of the present situation and would overcome the effects of manipulation and their locked minds would find a link with the possibility of freedom.

At the present time, condemnatory and accusing letters are sent from the residents to the UN monitors. According to them, anyone on the other side of the camp’s walls is working for the Iranian regime, and people like the Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Maliki and the Special Representative of the UN General Secretary Martin Kobler and even the German Ambassador to Baghdad are all taking instructions from Tehran and their mission is not to help but rather to capture them and hand them over to Iran where they would be tortured and executed.

We know that any time the UN monitors enter the camp they face the hostile attitude of the residents, spitting at them and chanting “death to Maliki” and “death to Kobler”. This is quite natural and they should not be expected to behave in a normal, rational manner. They have been programmed for such actions in  mind manipulation processes. In such a case a person can just as easily, on receiving the order from the leaders, commit self-immolation for no rational reason.

Behaving like this is to the advantage of Rajavi since it prevents legitimate observers from entering the camp and having free access to the residents. The missile attack on the camp was also beneficial for Rajavi and gave him the excuse he wanted to prevent anyone getting into the camp and helping the residents.

Massoud Rajavi knows full well what sort of tricks must be used to reach his goals. He is like all other cult leaders. Although he is so imprudent in strategy, he is quite a genius in tactics. Illogically the cult has stopped cooperating with UNHCR interviews with the residents claiming lack of security as the reason and insistently demanding to return to Ashraf garrison.

The cult leaders prevent meetings between UN officials and the residents of Camp Liberty using all sorts of excuses. Even the wrong people were sent in place of other people to be interviewed. Such people when meeting with the UN monitors claim that they have no ID card which is not true. They would even present western passports if needed. There have been cases that the MEK used the passports of dead people in Ashraf to relocate other people to Liberty.

The entire population of Liberty was previously officially registered and biometric information taken when the US Department of Defense granted them protected person’s status. Now when UN monitors try to do the same – finger printing or taking photos of the residents – the cult sends its thugs to threaten violent protest in order to prevent them doing so.

According to international norms, the ICRC is responsible for delivering letters from their families to the residents. But there is never any chance to find them without the observation of the MEK officials inside the camp. In some case the residents treat the letters as if they contain anthrax bacteria since they are even afraid to touch them. That is because they fear the aftermath of consequences inside the cult. The reaction of the residents is always a mixture of hatred and fear.

Our problem is that at the present time only a few number of people amongst the international officials are aware of the true nature of this cult, and of course those who do know do not wish to express it for their own reasons. As far as we know, this degree of pacification and appeasement against a cult leader is quite unique.

What is clearly known to everyone is that Rajavi has drawn a red line between the residents of Camp Liberty and the outside world, in particular the family members. This by itself proves that the MEK is a destructive mind control cult which tries to isolate its member in order to systematically manipulate them. It is obvious to everyone that Rajavi’s fear of family members meeting each other is extraordinary. The reason is evident. As all cult experts have stated, this would result in the person leaving the cult and even turning against it; therefore Rajavi prefers to leave his followers under the daily threat of bombing attacks rather than letting them visit their relatives.

Nevertheless this is the basic right of the individuals captured inside camp Liberty to have constant contact with their next of kin; and our goal is to struggle for this right although it seems quite unreachable and although there are so many obstacles, the main one of which is the cult leader Massoud Rajavi who prevents any outsiders from getting in touch with the residents.

Rajavi claims that the families are not genuine and they are all agents of Iran’s ministry of intelligence sent to harm the members. The families present here in Iraq have documents showing their relationship with the inhabitants inside the camp. The residents themselves have all been registered with the UN and some have been Iran-Iraq war POWs registered with the ICRC. At the present time up to 100 family members from all over the world with ID cards and other documents are ready to visit their loved ones in Iraq. In the past ten years since the fall of Saddam Hussein they have been struggling to gain some news of their relatives. What should we do? Should we sit and watch Rajavi let them all die one by one?

We have information in many cases that the residents are deprived from accessing necessary medication. The members have so many illnesses but the MEK officials prevent them from travelling to hospitals in Baghdad. This is done because the cult leader Massoud Rajavi wants to intentionally kill them through negligence and blame the Iraqi government for their deaths and in this way uses them as ransom to blackmail the international political community. Many kinds of violation of basic human rights are practiced daily inside the camp. We have informed the authorities and unfortunately we did not get any response. During our meetings with the Iraqi ministry of human rights they showed their deep concern about the situation inside the camp under the absolute control of Massoud Rajavi, but they cannot work in isolation.

Each former member in the hotel in Baghdad has so many stories of maltreatment by the MEK officials of the camp. They all say that they did not have the slightest idea about the situation in the outside world and found it quite contrary to what they have been told. Some escaped even while accepting the threat of being torture and executed. They all say that every move inside the camp is seriously controlled and all sorts of harsh limitations are imposed over the residents. They say they are systematically subjected to insults and accusations by the MEK officials. According to their descriptions such tight regulations over the members are not practiced in any normal army or garrison. Some even wish God to bring their death sooner to end their misery.

There is a critical concern about the situation of the residents as far as their basic rights are concerned. Most of these people are kept under such circumstances against their will. Although they talk about free choice but the meaning of this inside a cult is different. This fact has been discussed in an article in New York Times titled “The Cult of Rajavi”[1] and also mentioned in the US RAND report titled “The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq, a policy conundrum”[2].

Some people inside the camp did not wish to attend UN interviews in person and instead wrote letters objecting to going to a third country. What does this show? Can anyone give assurances that these people made a free and informed choice? Aren’t these individuals exactly those whom Rajavi fears most and does not wish the UN officials to meet?

When someone is sent to be interviewed by the authorities they are told beforehand what to say and what not to say. These people who are under severe mind manipulation do not dare to say what they actually want to say. Rajavi’s main concern is that more and more people will leave his cult and eventually the MEK be dismantled. Since the missile attack on February 9, 2013, Rajavi has prevented UN monitors from entering the camp and has even organized hostile demonstrations against them. Isn’t this a hint, marking the attack as quite suspiciously to the advantage of Rajavi?

Lately we received reports that Massoud Rajavi, despite his bravado, has lost control over a considerable part of his forces. He has clearly emphasized in his internal audio-conference with the inhabitants of Camp Liberty that he would not allow anyone to leave Iraq. So far he has blocked all possibilities of moving to third countries and this has resulted in more and more dissatisfaction inside the camp.

There are also reports that members of the Rajavi cult in western countries are sent to approach the UN offices as well as the parliaments in the guise of family members. They claim that they are the relatives of those in Camp Liberty and are concerned about their security and in the end they make the demand that they be returned to Ashraf garrison. Would the genuine families demand their relatives be moved out of Iraq for their own safety or would they ask for them to return to Ashraf where they would be at greater risk of further attack?

Several former female members of the cult have spoken out in European communities and revealed the severe mind control practices going on inside the cult. Who can have any doubt that the MEK led by Massoud Rajavi is a destructive mind control cult? Is there any doubt that the most basic human rights are violated inside the cult? Ten years of dealing with the MEK by the UN and other international organizations has certainly exposed the true nature of this cult to these and other authorities.

There have been many cases in which an individual has asked the UN monitors to help them leave but in the next meeting the person has denied making such request and has even become angry over the ‘accusation’ they did such a thing. We know that there have been cases when the UN monitors did not immediately take steps to remove the person from the camp and have left the matter to be dealt with in future. This shows that they either do not have the slightest idea about cults or do not wish the people to leave the camp. Even when Ashraf garrison was protected by American forces we had the same experience. The American military officers would leave the matter for later and send the individual back to the camp thereby placing the person in even greater jeopardy.

The UN monitors know better than anyone else that from the moment they enter the camp to the time they leave it they are escorted by MEK officials and they know full well that the cult leaders do not allow the residents to approach them. In the circumstance that the MEK produces virulent propaganda in western political circles accusing the UN of all kinds of imaginary mistreatment, the UN authorities appear to be satisfied by those residents who say how wonderful it is being with the MEK and how content they are with their situation and how much they hate their mercenary relatives. The minimum study of the practices of destructive mind control cults would show the reasons for such behavior.

The residents of the camp live under strict physical and mental control. Any contact between them is severely limited. They have no access to independent information. Some are kept in solitary confinement as punishment or are watched day and night by one or two appointed persons. The peer pressure meetings known as the “current operations” are held daily to mentally suppress discontented people. In these sessions the person chosen is subjected to every sort of harassment, insult, accusations and humiliation.

UN officials admit that those who come for interviews are obviously under psychological pressure and are by no means relaxed. It is obvious that they talk and act as they are told and nearly all use the same clichéd phrases (cult jargon). In some cases, after receiving a letter from their relatives, the person will become happy after reading it, but afterwards when they return to the camp they write condemnation letters and complain why the UN tried to give the letters of the spies of the Iranian regime to them.

One common mistake made is the illusion that the Rajavi cult has a defined belief system and that members adhere to a certain ideology. However, cult experts are clear that cults do not have any ideology except the cruel and slave like relationship between the leader and the followers. Members are enthralled, or rather enslaved, through mind manipulation techniques and physical and mental methods used to isolate them from the outside world.

A victim of a cult loses all their normal former relationships with family and friends once becoming a member and adopts the special cultic relationship with the leader. It is truly what is called “the new slavery”. Therefore once their former emotions and relationships are restored, the effects of brainwashing begin to fade away and the victim can eventually decide rationally. That is why all cult leaders wish to separate their followers from their loved ones. That is why Rajavi calls the family the “nest of corruption” and the “worst enemy” and “devastating bomb”. Family emotions would certainly disturb the reactionary cultic relationship he has imposed. So Rajavi, by no means and under no circumstances, will allow his followers to get even near to their family members.

Unfortunately the UN officials ignore the inhabitants’ total unawareness about the outside would. Most of them have been in absolute isolation for so many years and have had no access to the news of what is happening outside the cult. Their information has always passed through the cult’s filters. Many have been away from free thinking for so long that they are incapable of analyzing their surroundings and made sensible decisions. They are made to believe that they are superior to the others and they are the chosen ones in having the benefit of Rajavi as their leader and they should always be thankful of him. These and similar thoughts are cultivated in the minds of the followers in daily routines.

We have always said and we will always repeat that neither the UN nor the government of Iraq can make any progress in dealing with the MEK unless the families of the victims are given an active role as the key figures. We will also emphasize that the victims should be brought out from the control of the leaders and be placed in a situation in which they can truly decide for themselves. This solution was mentioned at length in the US RAND report. The report clearly emphasizes that the only solution to this conundrum is to separate the leaders from the rank and file. (This is, of course, if there is a will to solve the problem).

Anyway, at the present time there are many family members stationed in Iraq who wish to visit their loved ones no matter what the cost might be. They insist that they must be allowed to enter the camp and search for their loved ones for themselves. So far, for security reasons, the Iraqi authorities have not allowed this. They say that they cannot guarantee the safety of the families once they enter the camp. The families insist on their right to enter the camp voluntarily while accepting full responsibility for their actions in order to rescue their loved ones.

As far as we are concerned there is no other peaceful solution. It is quite obvious that Rajavi wants to drag the matter into violence and provoke further clashes in order to gain political advantages. We believe that the way everyone has tried to tiptoe around or hammer on this locked gate so far will not work at all. If there is any intention to resolve this severe humanitarian problem there should be a change of policy now; put the families first.

May 8, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The Political Uses of the Word “Terror”. Terrorized by “Terror”

“TERROR” is a word that terrorizes us. To pronounce it is to evoke fear and dread. Americans experience all the nightmarish sensations of 9/11. The visible horror of the Boston marathon bombings was intensified by the The Political Uses of the Word “Terror”. Terrorized by “Terror”event’s association with “terror” – an abstract distillation of all that is alien and evil. The mainstream media had a field day with all this. They are expert at fanning diffuse emotion; not so good at illuminating matters. Was it an act of “terrorism?” The country waited breathlessly for the word from Homeland Security, the White House, the FBI. As if the designation per se actually changed anything real. The name works like a potent drug that speeds the adrenaline flow. Acute anxiety, though, does little to clarify the danger or to sharpen our wits in The Political Uses of the Word “Terror”. Terrorized by “Terror”trying to figure out what to do.

Hence, it is important to separate the multiple strands of meaning bound together in the notion of “terror” so as better to explain the phenomenon and to interpret its implications. One aspect of “terror” pertains to a strategy for achieving political ends. Such a strategy can take either of two forms: that of an insurgent group trying to displace an existing government; that of a government or occupier trying to suppress an opposition movement. They share a key trait: targeting civilians with violent means. That tactic has a dual purpose. First, to sow fear among the populace so that they will take actions to accommodate the attacker. Those actions range from joining the insurgency, abetting it, and/or withdrawing loyalty from the existing government. The desired ancillary effect is to erode the populace’s confidence that the authorities can provide security and stability. This has been the logic behind terrorism as strategy in many places: inter alia Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Somalia, Iran, Kashmir, Sri Lanka. From the other angle, the authority in power can use violence to punish civilians who are seen as accommodating the insurgents. It aims to intimidate – to drive home the message that if the insurgents shelter with civilians (including their kin), those civilians are liable to become victims. This latter pattern has been evident in the conduct of American occupations and counter-insurgencies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia as well as massively in Vietnam. The United States, in this sense, has engaged in terror in all of those places.

The definitions of terror currently employed by Washington are far more ambiguous. The United States government has passed laws (e.g. The Patriot Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that are grounded on broad formulations of what constitutes terrorist acts. They include an encompassing category of aiding and abetting terrorism. These statutes are so loosely drawn that, as a practical matter, a terrorist is anyone the authorities want to declare a terrorist. It should be noted that the US government’s charge against the Boston bomber includes “the use of weapons of mass destruction.” Anyone want to define WMD in this context? For scholarly and analytical purposes, therefore, the term “terrorism” as widely employed has no value – unless the subject of study is its several uses and abuses. For the purpose of making ethical judgments, these broad formulations are equally pointless since they do not frame the questions of standards, responsibility and accountability in any instructive way. In the vocabulary of American officials, and most commentators, “terrorism” is used for hortatory purposes alone.

Placed against this background, the common assumption that terrorism is the characteristic asymmetric instrument of insurgents, qualitatively different from the uses of violent force by established governments/occupiers, does not hold up. Certainly, it needs significant qualification. It is true that today at the declaratory level all states denounce terrorism and condemn attacks on civilians. There is no disagreement on that score. Consensual prohibitions against launching or supporting terrorist acts, though, are of little significance absent an agreed, explicit definition – something that does not exist nor will it be forthcoming. Both terrorist acts by non-state actors, and those connected to state actions, pose daunting analytical challenges – ones that stem in part from the interest of the parties involved in avoiding crisp definitions.

The first hurdle is the dilemma encapsulated in the commonplace saying that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. That is to say, the cause in whose name the act is committed influences how we judge it. Few if any government leaders candidly state that. The record is clear, however. One example: the United States has just rehabilitated the Mujahedeen-e Khalq -MEK, the radical Iranian organization whose extreme acts of violence got it placed on everyone’s list of terrorist organizations some years ago. Why the turnaround? Other than MEK’s aggressive public relations campaign that involved MEK spreading around millions in speakers fees to a host of American public figures, the organization is a bitter opponent of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Washington also backs rebels in the Iranian province of Baluchistan who periodically attack both military and civilian targets. Then there are the “death squads” that the United States encouraged and, in some cases, trained which wreaked havoc in several Latin American countries in the 1980s and 1990s. A number of other states behave similarly.

A second hurdle can be posed as a question: does it matter who precisely pulls the trigger? That raises subtle issues concerning public ethics. Let it be said that it makes no difference from the perspective of the victim. Furthermore, if the agent could act thanks to someone else creating permissive or necessary conditions, then the latter shares culpability. Apportioning blame under these circumstances becomes a political exercise more than it is an analytical one. Certainly, it cannot pass as an exercise in law enforcement.

Consider drone strikes. The United States government knows full well that it is routinely killing innocent civilians. It may not target them per se, but it accepts those casualties as unavoidable trade-offs for achieving the desired objectives of the drone strikes, e.g. killing bad guys. That decision is both a practical one and a moral one. Practical in a sense that the US pays a political price on the ground, and diplomatically, which it is prepared to accept. Moral in the sense that it is advancing a crude ends/means justification in defense of its actions. Moreover, even the question of intent is not crystal clear. Why? Civilian casualties are not always just an unintentional cost – as noted above; they also can figure as a gain where there is a desired effect of discouraging civilians from sheltering bad guys – and of discouraging bad guys from putting relatives or friends at risk.

There are further delineations to be made. In ascribing responsibility for a terrorist act, should we separate planners from organizers from executants? This is an issue that often arises in more mundane criminal matters. That is why the law refers to accessories, to conspiracies, etc. The ethical issue is a variant of that which arises in cases of state sponsorship – as discussed above. The practical policy issue centers on the methods for defeating a group that employs terror, i.e. do you concentrate on decapitating it (going after the planners and instigators) or disrupting its operational capacity (going after logistics and skilled operators) or preventing individual acts. One thing can be said with confidence; if the focus of a counter-insurgency campaign flits from one to the other, failure is assured. That is part of the reason for our dismal performance in Afghanistan.

In South Vietnam, we tried all three (except for assassinating the Communist leadership in Hanoi), doing everything but incinerating the entire countryside and still failed. As for countervailing a strategy of violent intimidation by a government or occupier, the options for an insurgency are far more limited. It comes down to perseverance in wearing down the opponent – an approach that nearly always succeeds when the brunt of the counter-insurgency is being borne by foreigners. They inevitably estrange the locals and themselves get too fatigued to carry on. So they quit.

Motivation, too, varies. To start with, we should make a distinction between individual andstructural factors. Personality and personal experiences (actual or vicarious) count – although in particular cases there is considerable variations of the terrorist psychology profile. Events ‘out there’ that provoke anger and hostility can be refracted through personality in numerous ways. The activating or catalyzing factor that prompts the jump from feeling to act can be either something very personal or a particular occurrence somewhere in the world. In the case of the Boston bombers, there does not seem to have been a single, immediate proximate catalyst. Rather, Tamerlan the leader was impelled toward the brink by a combination of the two, i.e. acute life disappointments and reiterated, violent American actions in the Islamic world.

What intrigues us is the ease with which some of these people make the transition to action. The normal psychological constraints of instinctive inhibition about killing innocents/strangers, socialized norms, etc. seem unnaturally weak. The old European anarchists were loners, living in cellars, and out of touch with everyday society. They also usually targeted leaders. These two do not fit that pattern. One of course was married to an American and had a young child. That is why I wonder as to whether, to some degree, the easy resort to radical violence is not facilitated by a culture wherein so much of life is lived episodically – each event and situation only loosely connected to an established pattern of existence. Another extreme version of same is the phenomenon of people “re-inventing” themselves. Atavistic passion meets post-Modernism.

Multiple grievances against the United States are felt by millions of Muslims; they create a free-floating angst. It is an underlay of emotion and attitude conducive to acts of terrorism. That in itself tells us little about an individual’s readiness to commit a terrorist act – something that remains very rare measured against the populace of angry disaffected. To firm up our grip on this complex psychology, we would have to examine whether there are additional differences between individuals who carry out terrorist acts and those who plan insurgencies that rely on elements of terror. Furthermore, in the first category there may be a difference between suicide bombers and others who commit terrorist acts.

One last distinction: to place in a single category the Iraq or Afghan insurgencies, on the one hand, and isolated acts of terrorism, on the other, makes no sense. Primary motivation is simpler. It’s not very difficult to understand why Iraqi Sunnis took up arms against the US and the government we put in place. That the al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia faction conducted more acts of ‘terror’ is probably correct, but the main point is that they and other insurgent groups there shared a logical political calculus that incorporated violence against civilians into a strategy.

Any systematic attempt to parse the meanings of the term “terrorism” is likely to be frustrated, however earnest the effort. It is a laudable aim to clarify policy choices as a prelude to making more informed decisions more candidly explained to the public. But that is politically unrealistic in today’s climate. Our leaders thrive in obscurity. That allows ulterior motives to be concealed, contradictions to be masked, measures of succeed blurred, responsibility for failure eluded, careers to be advanced, pet ideas to be protected, ratings to rise, reputations to be burnished, elections to be won, and memoirs to appear credible. So, cries of havoc are almost certain to signal the reaction to any act of violence that they can pronounce “terrorism.”

Agitated by their leaders, the frightened pack will howl in the night.

By MICHAEL BRENNER, Counterpunch

Michael Brenner is a Professor of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh

May 7, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

MKO Fuels Warmongering Propaganda

MKO grasps at every available opportunity of serious aggression against Iran

Ideologically a violence-oriented group, MKO appreciates any military option against Iran and has kept at MKO grasps at every available opportunity of serious aggression against Iranfuelling anti-Iranian, warmongering propaganda warfare. But the group intensifies the struggle whenever it grasps at every available opportunity that seems a foretaste of serious aggression against Iran by any foreign power antagonizing Iranian regime. MKO calls such a power that adopts or pursues an aggressive approach an ‘alien element’, a most suitable power to depend on and to cooperate with. The ousted Saddam’s regime was the most apt ‘alien element’ at the time that it collaborated with fierce loyalty.

The fall of Saddam advanced Iraq’s political transition and the new government showed no signs of seeking to compromise with other frustrated political factions and mercenary terrorist groups. So MKO had to seek for a new external supporter and ‘alien element’ to form another parasitic alliance. The only elements at the time being and are those countries that are engaged in an ongoing strife over Iran’s nuclear activities and America in particular. The group took the first step to be the main source of intelligence on Iranian nuclear sites and exposing what was believed to be hidden nuclear sites in Iran for alleged military nuclear activities. However, it is said that MKO disclosed the information it had been provided by the United States and Israel. Michael Mukasey, the American advocate of MKO, in providing reasons for removing the group from FTO list stated, “… there are many reasons, including MEK’s close cooperation with the United States in exposing Iran’s nuclear program for removing MEK from that list”.

Since then, Iran has been facing a challenge from America and its Western allies, and Israel as the closest ally; all have been moving on a deadlock negotiation that has further deepened the crisis.

Following a different policy to confront Iran’s nuclear activities, Israel, widely believed to possess an ever-growing nuclear arsenal, has grown impatient with protracted talks and has threatened preemptive war against Iran if it deemed diplomacy ultimately futile. Announcing a full support for Israel, Secretary of State John Kerry has stressed that Obama is determined Iran will not succeed in acquiring a nuclear weapon and noted that his administration is working closely with Israel: “We are deeply engaged with our Israeli allies, friends, comparing on a regular basis. I think we’re on the same page”.

Not only in words but in action is the United States arming and supporting Israel for any possible military option against Iran. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in his first visit to Israel pushed a new arms deal to help preserve Israel’s military edge in the region saying that the arms deal would be “another very clear signal to Iran” that the United States allies in the region were prepared to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons.

No doubt, MKO is the only opposition that supports and beats drums of a military option against Iran and is ready to walk on any front that might take the lead, be it America, Israel, or any Western ally. However, Israel seems a better option for MKO as an ‘alien element’ since the existing differences between Iran and Israel is far beyond the nuclear issue and is rooted in ideological, political and historical arguments. The United States in contrast has shown eagerness in reaching an agreement through negotiations. Israel, however, risks a loss of credibility over both its “red line” for Iran’s nuclear program and its threat of military action, and its room for unilateral maneuver is shrinking. Patrick Clawson, the head of the Iran Security Initiative at The Washington Institute, in his political analysis entitled Preventing an Iranian Nuclear Breakout  states: “The United States and Israel agree that Iran should not have nuclear weapons, but they may not see eye-to-eye about how to proceed regarding the impasse with Iran. High-profile disagreements surfaced in September 2012 about setting a “redline,” or deadline, for termination of Iran’s program …”

MKO hopes that the old allies develop a unanimous consensus over the military option against Iranian regime. It would make both allies a perfect united ‘alien element’ for a total dependence. What MKO has achieved so far has been an unfortunate outcome; its desperate struggle to achieve the reproachful, anti-national and ambitious goal has brought the group into disrepute among all struggling oppositions. It is not amazing to see MKO, sticking to what is regarded a flagrant example of national betrayal, namely demonizing Iran’s peaceful nuclear activity, spending lavishly to be accepted by any ‘alien element’ that might move on a decisive path of materializing consequent threats.

May 7, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Sadrist MP urges the expedition of MKO expulsion

An Iraqi Sadrist MP has urged the Iraq’s government to speed up the expulsion of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK, Sadrist MP urges the expedition of MKO expulsiona.k.a. MKO and PMOI) members from the Arab country.

Reiterating the impossibility of further presence of MKO terrorists in Iraq, the Iraqi parliamentarian said the return of the MKO members to Camp Ashraf is impossible, Habilian Association reported.

Al-Mansouri was quoted by Ashraf News as saying that the MKO terrorist group constitutes a threat to the Iraq’s security, adding, the only option for the group is their immediate expulsion from Iraq.

Hussein al-Mansouri also pointed out that some members of the MKO group are wanted by the police in connection with their crimes under Saddam Hussein.

The Iraqi officials have repeatedly emphasized that the members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq organization, armed and supported by the Iraqi executed dictator Saddam Hussein, pose a real threat to Iraq’s territorial integrity. Hence, the Iraqi government has signed an agreement with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and head of the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) Martin Kobler to relocate the residents of Camp Ashraf to a temporary transit location where the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) will start a process of refugee status determination, a necessary first step for their expulsion outside Iraq.

May 6, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran Interlink Weekly Digest

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest – 1

++ Ebrahim Khodabandeh’s article published by Nejat Association is titled: ‘Rajavi: from anti-Imperialism struggle to hanging onto America’s apron strings. He says the only use of the MEK’s new Washington office near the White House is to keep the members trapped a bit longer. But that doesn’t seem to be working because they continue to run away whenever possible. He gives himself as an example of a typical member saying that he joined when the MEK believed in anti-Imperialism struggle. When they killed post-revolution government officials on 7th Tir, 1360 with a bomb, the MEK said it was ‘destroying America’s nest in Iran’ and Massoud Rajavi announced ‘we have rendered the regime without future and destroyed their contact with Imperialism by bombing this building and killing the people in it’.

The article says Rajavi lost his future when he turned his back on the people of Iran and sided with their enemy in Iraq, eventually changing sides completely and becoming a mercenary for the Americans. Khodabandeh says Rajavi will not survive by doing that. He concludes by saying that he worked for the MEK for 23 years and when he looks back now, anything else at all that he had done except that would have made him more proud.

++ Javad Firozmand in Paris published an article about the 1st of May, or May Day. He starts by describing the current situation for workers in Iran and how they are coping. He goes on to show pictures published by the MEK which show MEK activists adding themselves to workers’ May Day demonstrations in Western cities. He specifically notes that there is not a single MEK placard with a slogan about workers; instead they are all propaganda slogans for the MEK and yet they are photographed as if to show that the crowd are following the MEK and not, as is the case, that the MEK have inserted their propaganda into genuine workers’ demonstrations.

The MEK placards this year read ‘do not vote in Iran’s upcoming election’. Firouzmand reminds us that in 1388 Maryam Rajavi and Mohaddessin told AFP that more than 95% of Iranians had boycotted the election and the MEK had the correct numbers. Yet a few months later Iranians suspecting the election had been fraudulent and their votes had been stolen, poured into the street under the slogan ‘where is my vote’. The article points to the hollow rhetoric of the MEK as this year they sent activists out on May Day under the banner ‘overthrow’ (or sarnegooni) which is the same slogan they used to attach themselves to Saddam Hussien in 1365.

++ Edvard Termado in Germany gave his reaction to the bombing outside Camp Liberty which took place on 30 April. There were no casualties but the MEK immediately attacked the UN forces and asked to be rearmed. Termado points out that the MEK are making such a big deal out of this that everyone will begin to have doubts and ask is it not the MEK doing it themselves? This is especially because the MEK has asked to have their military equipment restored and to be taken back to Camp Ashraf. More than this, the MEK are asking the Americans to do this for them while at the same time swearing at and vilifying the UN, Iraqi government and etc. The article ends with the hope that Rajavi’s captives in Camp Liberty will soon be freed and be able to decide where to live.

++ A. Minoo-Sepher compares Massoud Rajavi’s National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) with Reza Pahlavi’s new National Council, which held its inaugural meeting in Paris and elected Pahlavi as its spokesman. Minoo-Sepher describes how Rajavi created his Council using made-up, one man band entities to pretend a range of different participants; all of which are now defunct. He gives the example of the National Democratic Front. Even ten years after the Hedayat and Maryam Matin Daftary abandoned the NDF and Rajavi, the MEK still claims it as part of the NCRI.

Minoo-Sepher then talks about about Pahlavi and the monarchists saying that their agenda is vague and it is not clear who is in it and that the vote to elect Pahlavi as spokesman is not verifiable. He points to Pahlavi’s connection to all kinds of dodgy places in the US and Israel, but then points out that as a rival to Rajavi he doesn’t have a big job to do since Rajavi is now such a loser. But He draws on similarities between the Councils. Both believe foreign forces should undertake the violence to bring them to power. Both have absolutely no support inside Iran, as they don’t have any support among Iranians outside Iran either. They both want to be taken up as the favourite group of the Western powers. The only difference between them is that Iranians hate and despise Rajavi because of his past and present crimes, but they regard Pahlavi with indifference as he is irrelevant.

++ Many people including Maryam Sanjabi, Batool Soltani, Nasrin Ebrahimi and Mehdi Khoshhal have written in response to Maryam Rajavi’s new book. They all point to the fact that clearly someone else written it for her in Farsi and has translated it into French since she is incapable of such a feat as writing a book. Khoshhal title is ‘when a parrot writes a book. He reminds us of the fact that one of Maryam Rajavi’s mantras is that ‘my best quality is that I don’t have anything from myself, I just repeat the message of Massoud’. Yeah, like a parrot.

Soltani specifically reminds Maryam Rajavi, whose book is about women’s rights, that she has forgotten to mention how they killed Mehri Moussavi, because she refused to join with the Freedom dance and dancing naked in front of the Rajavis, Soltani also calls to mind Mahsumeh Gheibipour and many others whose graves can now be found in the cemetery at Camp Ashraf.

++ Nasrin Ebrahimi headed a meeting in Geneva, Switzerland this week to announce a new association. The website is www.Iran-Setarehgan.com

++ Many articles have been asking the supporters of the MEK in the US and EU to use their position of influence to stop Rajavi from keeping the hostages in Camp Liberty and Camp Ashraf. They acknowledge that lobbyists want to take their money and do their work to promote the MEK in the West but are in a position to help get these people freed.

++ Shir Ahmadi Rouz Rokh has escaped from Camp Liberty. Nejat Association issued congratulations to him and his family on his escape after 26 years of his being in the MEK.

++ Ghorban Ali Hossein Nejad writes in his blog his memories of the time of the Shah, particularly the memories he has with Dr Ali Shariati. He explains how the MEK saw Shariati as a rival and instead of pursuing their own work they attacked him instead.

++ Iran Interlink published news of two MEK fighters killed in Syria after they went there from Sweden and Denmark and say it is vital to establish the true identities of any MEK before they are transferred from Iraq to third countries.

++ Several articles criticise the Rajavis and question why so many people are dying inside the camp and not allowed to go to hospital.

++ Mohammad Razaghi in Paris challenges Rajavi directly in his weblog: ‘why is it that when we were in Ashraf and later in TIPF your wives, specifically Zohreh Akhiani, could be taken to US army hospitals by US helicopters for simply having flu, but Reza Nasiri had to die this week of kidney problems because he was denied dialysis treatment?’ The MEK blamed the UN for his death but Razaghi remembers that right up to the time he became their so-called martyr and was used for propaganda purposes, they would humiliate him every day for not being able to do things. Razaghi remembers that Mahvash Sepheri used to tell everyone in the meetings (neshats) that ‘this guy is taking energy from us instead of giving and now expects us to cook special food for him as well!’ He rebukes Maryam Rajavi for spending millions of Euros in Paris gathering lobbyists and posing in clothes for cameras, but couldn’t send even a dollar for a sick member to get medicine.

++ Iran’s Fars News reports from Arabic papers that Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been directed by the Americans to use the MEK alongside other activities to meddle in Iran’s upcoming elections.

++ National Iranian American Council (NIAC) denounces Congressman Dana Rohrabacher’s efforts to introduce a new resolution to promote ethnic separatism in Iran as a means to destabilize the country. Rohrabacher is also one of the top supporters of the MEK, and detractor of the Green Movement. He was a major driver of the effort to remove the Mojahedin from the [US] terror list, while acknowledging their use of violence to achieve political goals.

++ Reuters – Germany will exercise great care in correctly determining the identity of any MEK who come to the country as refugees. Their refugee status will depend on their already having former residency or other links with the country.

May 5, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Terrorist groups and the MEK

MKO terrorists active in Syria under guise of medics

A defected member of the terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) has revealed that the MKO terrorists are active in Syria under the cover of emergency and medical service providers.MKO terrorists active in Syria under guise of medics

According to the ex-MKO member, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the members of the terrorist group are stationed at a base called “Hanif,” which is disguised as a hospital, Mehr news agency reported.

The people working alongside the MKO members at the base do not know Persian and Arabic, and only speak English, the defected MKO member said.

Two members of the terrorist group, who were dispatched from the Turkish city of Istanbul to Syria to participate in the clashes in the Arab country, have recently been killed, the former MKO member said.

The two MKO members were the citizens of Denmark and Sweden.

The MKO previously cooperated with the foreign-backed militants in Syria through the Jordanian borders, but the terrorist group has now shifted to the Turkish border to infiltrate into the Syrian territory, the Mehr news agency report said.

In August 2012, a number of MKO terrorists detained by the Syrian government confessed that the MKO is training the militants on Turkish soil near the border with Syria, while certain Arab and Western states are providing necessary support for their activities.

In the summer of 2012, Iraqi and Syrian security officials announced that a large number of MKO members had entered Syria.

The unrest in Syria began in March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of army and security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

Damascus says the West and its regional allies, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are supporting the armed groups.

May 5, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Camp Liberty

Shir Ahmad Rouzrokh Fled Camp Liberty

Another resident of Temporary Transit Location (Camp Liberty) left the Mojahedin Khalq Organization in the early days of Iranian New Year. Mr. Shir Ahamd Rouzrokh escaped TTL after 25 years of imprisonment in the Cult of Rajavi.

Having heard the news of his defectors, the family of Mr. Rouzrokh got very happy. They hoped for the release of other Rajavi’s hostages and happiness for other families.

Nejat Society Golestan Office congratulates Mr. Rouzrokh for his salvation from the cruelty imposed on him in the cult of Rajavi. We pray for the release of other hostages held in the terrorist Cult of Rajavi.

May 4, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization

Desperate Struggle to Stop Dispersion

MKO fabricates to stop any final solution for resettlement out of Iraq (aka Mojahedin Khalq MEK Rajavi cult)

When Albanian Prime Minister, Sali Berisha, made the humanitarian offer to take about 210 members of MKO residing in a transit camp near Baghdad, many began to consider it a promising sign that could be the beginning of an end to the residents’ sufferings and torments and a miraculous escape from the thralldom of the Rajavis cult. It could be the beginning to promote cooperation of other countries and to pave the way to take more refugees. Alas! No soon had it been announced than was rejected by the Rajavies. In an attempt to provide compelling justification, the group announced it could not accept an offer of asylum for only a small portion of the group. A direct rejection would seem more acceptable than such flimsy excuse as such a transfer is more a mirage than near to reality. The rejection well indicates that MKO never aims to leave Iraq nor is looking for a final solution for resettlement of the members long enslaved physically and psychologically. It seems more a tactic to buy time to impede the gradual dissociation of the organization.

Taken as a typical of MKO, the group did not hesitate to put the blame of a deliberate rejection on others. In a statement issued by MKO in March under ‘Martin Kobler’s disgraceful lies in Security Council’, MKO accused Martin Kobler of deflecting attentions from the main issue, the security of the residents to say, and brazenly claimed to have been the first to come up with the transfer of its members to Albania more than a year ago:

“Kobler misused the humanitarian act of the Albanian government in accepting 210 of the residents for his own propaganda purposes in order to avoid the urgent security crisis and to divert attention from his own destructive role in forcefully evicting the residents and transferring them from Ashraf to the Liberty killing field. This is while the issue of residents’ transfer to Albania has been on the table for more than a year, and the government of Albania had agreed on the transfer of 210 residents in November 2012. At that time, the residents gave the government, the UNHCR and the United States a number 1 priority list of patients and residents who should be transferred first, and have been waiting and are still waiting for their rapid transfer. On March 21, on yet another occasion, the residents’ representative sent the same number 1 priority list to the UNHCR for transfer to Albania. In January, envoys of the Iranian resistance met with senior officials of Albania in Tirana, accepted all the expenses and urged their government to increase the number of residents going to Albania.”

However, it did not take long to see MKO’s lies being exposed. After ending his trip to Iraq, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, made remarks concerning the outright refusal of MKO to accept the offer of resettlement in Albania:

“We had worked out an arrangement with the Albanians to take about 250 people, but then the people in the camp themselves declined to go. So we’re trapped in a kind of round robin.”

However, MKO waged a total media blackout on such disclosures when covering John Kerry’s trip. MKO’s duplicitous behavior is not unknown to those familiar with the rooted hypocrisy in the group. The conduction of disinformation campaign, even if it works on the insiders, undermines public trust in its truthfulness of claiming a democratic resistance. Although it has abused freedom, democracy and its insiders’ devotion for a total organizational hegemony, it will have no other way but to submit under a universal pressure and when it feels it has failed to shape public opinion in its own favor.

May 4, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Memoirs of Nasrin Ebrahimi, MKO EX-member_ Part 6

Nasrin Ebrahimi is a former member of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization, who fled the group in 2006. She was Nasrin Ebrahimione of the first survivors of the Cult-like MKO who dared to reveal the corruption of the leaders of the group. She was the first person to speak of the “Summit Operation” which was a cult jargon through which a large number of female members of the group became infertile by Hysterectomy surgery.
Nim Negah Website is publishing series of interviews with Ms. Ebrahimi. Nejat society translated excerpts of her memoirs of the sufferings of living in the MKO cult.

As I said, Massoud Rajavi exploited women against men. In fact, women were Rajavi’s slaves who were misused to fight men this way he grew hatred between men and women in Ashraf.

Rajavi hides his true face behind women. He manipulates them to humiliate men; to make them work as hard as slaves…

Men couldn’t clearly see Rajavi’s role in the story, they could only see some rude savage women who treated them madly. Thus the men hated the women and sometimes they came near their base to harm them.

For instance, once we had gone to a camp near Baghdad called “Parsian” to attend certain meetings. A number of women had remained in Ashraf. At night a woman who had gone to the yard of the dormitory was attacked by a man. The man had wounded her face and hand by a cutter. It was really horrible. I have no idea if she was raped but I remember the wounds on her face and hands.

Rajavi made efforts to grow hate and animosity between men and women and in general among all members. He thought that growing hatred among members will lead all love and affection toward him.

Regarding sexual suppression in Camp Ashraf, I’d like to note that some individuals in the Camp committed suicide because of the psychological diseases that originated in hormonal problems.

I recall a young girl who was about 22 years old. She was constantly suppressed during brainwashing sessions because she spoke of the heavy sexual pressure and deprivation she suffered in the cult. I used to drive in the camp giving ride to women who wanted to commute in different parts of the camp so I often used to see that girl taking her to Ashraf hospital. Once, she told me about the stress and difficulty she suffered. She said,” I’d like to fall asleep at night and not to wake up in the morning.” She wished to die. She wanted to get released of the life in the cult. I hardly tried to calm her because I feared that she would report what I said in the self-criticizing session we were supposed to attend at night. I didn’t let her feel free to open up her heart. By the way, she said that she wished that a bullet has come out to kill her! Exactly three days later she shot herself. Fortunately she survived the suicide. When I asked her why she committed such an act, she replied:”I’m tortured to death here, I wanted to finish it,”

You see Maryam Rajavi chanting slogans about “Mujahed” women. This is just propaganda. You should live with these women for only three days to know the suffering  they go through…

Rajavi knows that sexual problems such as masturbation is the result of forced divorces and suppression of sexual desires but as we know Rajavi is very egocentric, totalitarian and an illusioned person who thinks that he is able to change people’s nature the way he likes. He thinks that he can turn people into what he wants by using manipulation techniques. He wants to swim against the current.

He is aware that he is not and will not be successful in this illogical process but he never admits his fault. If he admits this mistake then he is not more “Rajavi”. He considers himself the absolute leader who never goes wrong! Thus, in the meetings the solution presented to such problems was actually putting accusation on members. Maryam Rajavi never admitted that Massoud had run an inhumane project that ended in such big troubles instead she found all faults with the women who according to her had to resist such problems. The cult-like atmosphere was somehow that no one could let herself to criticize the system or the headers. Everyone just wondered why she was not able to cope with her sexual issues. If a woman confessed that she had difficulty to control her sexual desires, she was humiliated in public. She was labeled as “anti Maryam’s revolution”. She was told, "you don’t want to resolve your sexual problems otherwise you can!”

[..] Maryam Rajavi used to say,” You should be like me; you should follow my steps! You should pass through sexual issues so that you can take a serious responsibility in the organization like me! “ Therefore certain question come across our minds: How Maryam Rajavi dares to say such words while she is married and wearing a wedding ring and how she compares herself with the women who have been separated from their husbands?!

After sometime, when the Rajavis got to know that the nonsense they want to push as the solution for sexual problem is not helpful, Maryam began speaking of sharing Massoud with other women in the group. “Massoud does not belong to Maryam Rajavi", Maryam said. "He belongs to all women. All of them have the right to imagine themselves with Massoud but if they think of any other man they cheat on Rajavi .You have the best husband in the world!”

At that time I thought she meant that we should mentally cope with our sexual shortages with Massoud but after I fled the group, I found out that the suggested solution was not a mental practice but in some layers of the Elite Council!, it was practically carried out. [Refer to Batoul Soltani’s memoirs of sexual relationship between Massoud Rajavi and women of the “Elite Council”]

[…] In the system of the Cult of Rajavi, you must only praise Rajavi and criticize yourself. If you verbally abuse yourself ,you will be treated nicely but if you dare to say something against Rajavi’s will, in the brainwashing meetings, you should just listen to Maryam Rajavi  and say,” Yes ,Sister Maryam .You are right. We made mistake. We will solve our sexual problems…”

No women dared to speak out. You could not realize what was really going on in their minds. Everything was repeated like a cliché! "Yes you are right, we are wrong”, we repeated every day.

As we say, the MKO is a cult. I mean that it is a closed establishment where friendly relationships hardly ever take place because everyone is under control all the time. It is not simply believable but believe me that even prisoners are not treated the way the MKO members are treated. In very few cases, certain members who were seriously under sexual pressure, spoke of their masturbation habit in a Daily Cleansing session (Daily Cleansing is a cult jargon in which members have to confess their sexual thoughts and memoirs of their ex-husbands and any other man). I remember a girl talking of her masturbation habit. She feared that she would have other disease because of such a habit. The outcome of such a confession was that she was boycotted for a long time; she was so terribly treated that no one else would dare to repeat what she did. She was attacked, verbally abused in any meeting

To Be Continued…

May 2, 2013 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Posts

  • National Pride of Iranians: Reject the Rajavis and their Patrons

    July 22, 2026
  • Italian legislators fooled by MEK’s polished presentations

    July 18, 2026
  • The Rhetorical Style and Polemical Language of the MEK

    July 15, 2026
  • Death of Lindsey Graham, notorious hardliner against Iran

    July 13, 2026
  • Nejat Society Albania’s 2026 Peace Delegation

    July 11, 2026
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Youtube

© 2003 - 2025 NEJAT Society . All Rights Reserved. NejatNGO.org


Back To Top
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip