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; A proxy force

Iranian terrorist group now freedom fighters, in U.S. eyes

Hillary Clinton announces anti-Tehran group People’s Mujahedeen of Iran is no longer on State Department’s list of terror organizations
Iranian terrorist group now freedom fighters, in U.S. eyes
In Washington, it seems, the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is a multimillion-dollar public relations campaign.

Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the anti-Tehran group People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (MEK) will no longer be designated a terrorist group after having been placed on the American list 15 years ago for killing U.S. servicemen.

The administration’s change of heart comes after the MEK said it renounced violence in 2003 and recently got the backing of a U.S. Federal Court, which said it has seen no evidence the group is still involved in terrorist activities.

But Clinton’s decision, in part a response to the court’s finding, also comes after a multimillion-dollar campaign on behalf of MEK that has seen a long list of former senior officials and current members of Congress paid lavish fees to make speeches or appearances at MEK functions promoting an end to its terrorist status.

Among those who have been paid to speak on behalf of the MEK’s cause are former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, former U.S. attorney-general Michael Mukasey, former White House chief of staff Andrew Card, and former U.S. home-land security chief Tom Ridge.

Among those from the U.S. military who have put in appearances are former chair-man of the Joint Chiefs Peter Pace, former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe Wesley Clark, and President Barack Obama’s former national security adviser James Jones.

Former Central Intelligence Agency chiefs James Woolsey, Porter Goss and Michael Hayden have also been paid to speak on MEK platforms.

This, along with unresolved questions about whether MEK has indeed renounced violence – and if so, how recently? – raises the spectre that the Obama administration may be so keen to back Iranian groups opposed to the Tehran regime of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that it is not looking too carefully at their credentials or records.

Still fresh in Washington memories is the part Ahmed Chalabi played in feeding false or distorted information about his Iraqi homeland to the receptive audience within the administration of President George W. Bush. As the United States found out after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction, and the invading troops were not welcomed as liberators.

It seems unlikely that the Obama administration would fall for the same kind of blarney from the somewhat sinister husband-and-wife team of Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, who, if several U.S. government reports are to be believed, run MEK as a personality cult complete with brainwashing, brutal internal discipline, and the indoctrination of children.

If Obama is not about to be stampeded into war with Iran by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – with the aim of stopping the Tehran regime acquiring the ability to make nuclear weapons – he is unlikely to be impressed by the Rajavis.

Indeed, the history and record of the MEK is so tainted that taking it off the list of terrorist groups will likely do the reputation of the Obama administration no good among the main-stream reformist movement in Iran.

MEK was founded in 1965 by a group of university students as a Marxist Muslim opposition to the Shah of Iran.

Its first terrorist attacks were in 1971, and MEK made special targets of Americans, who were instrumental in keeping the Shah in power.

In 1973, U.S. army Col. Louis Lee Hawkins was shot and killed outside his home in Tehran. In 1975, two U.S. air force officers were killed in an attack on their car. And in 1976, three employees of Rockwell Inter-national were also shot and killed.

MEK joined enthusiastically in the 1979 revolution that ousted the Shah and brought the Islamic Republic to power. The group actively sup-ported the takeover of the U.S. embassy after the coup and the keeping of American diplomats as hostages.

But MEK quickly fell out with the new leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, and killed several of his senior officials in bomb attacks.

In 1986, MEK moved its headquarters to Iraq, where it came under the patronage of Saddam Hussein, fighting for him in his war against Iran and playing a lead role in his murderous campaigns against the Iraqi Kurds.

About 3,000 of the remaining MEK members in Iraq are now in a former American camp outside Baghdad awaiting placement in third countries.

MEK’s attempts to rehabilitate its image started in 2002, when it says it gave the U.S. and its allies the first information about Iran’s nuclear development program.

However, New Yorker magazine journalist Seymour Hersh says that the then-head of the United Nations’ nuclear watch-dog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, told him that the information about Iran’s nuclear program came from the Israeli government and was only channelled through MEK. Much of the evidence of MEK’s continued involvement in violence is circumstantial at best, but one persistent story is that the group’s operatives are working for the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad inside Iran.

In particular, there are many claims that the five Iranian nuclear scientists assassinated since 2007 and the destruction of a missile research centre were operations conducted by MEK for Mossad.

By Jonathan Manthorpe

October 4, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Powerful DC figures enlisted in Iranian group’s bid to get removed from US terrorist list

The US State Department is running up against a court-imposed deadline to make a decision on whether to remove the Mujahadin-e Khalq or MEK from the US terrorist list.

In a statement, the National Council of Resistance of Iran called the expected delisting a “victory for justice and the rule of law.”

The MEK carried out bombings and assassinations in the 1970s that targeted and killed US citizens and military members, according to the State Department. In the ‘80s, the group killed dozens of Iranian officials and its members fought with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. Attacks continued during the 1990s and after the US invasion of Iraq, the US detained thousands of MEK members at Camp Ashraf. In 2001, the group says it renounced violence.
..
To read more of Justin Elliot’s reporting on the MEK’s lobbying efforts click here

By Free Speech Radio News
Download Powerful DC figures enlisted in Iranian group’s bid to get removed from US terrorist list

October 3, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

The MEK Is Bad News, But Delisting Them Was A Good Decision

Members of the Iranian dissident group known as the Mujahedin e-Khalq, or MEK, really don’t like me. I don’t trust them, either. I’ve been reporting on the MEK for the Huffington Post since last The MEK Is Bad News, But Delisting Them Was A Good Decisionsummer, and members of the group have threatened my house and hacked my email.

Still, I believe the State Department’s decision Friday to remove the MEK from the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations was a good one.

Like many people who’ve researched how the MEK actually works, I don’t believe that they’re freedom fighters in exile as they claim to be. Nor do I believe their values are democratic, as they claim they are.

I believe the MEK is a militant cult of personality, whose leaders, Maryam and Massoud Rajavi, figured out in the 1980’s that they could survive by doing mercenary work on behalf of governments that hate Iran. Saddam Hussein was their first patron, and he granted them land in Iraq to build a walled, military compound, Camp Ashraf, where until a few months ago, more than 3,000 members lived.

There, they would wake up every day and worship images of Maryam Rajavi before commencing with the day’s Army base-type tasks. The MEK claims to subsist on foreign contributions, but that’s only partly true.

In America, their well-paid U.S. advocates, men like former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell and former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, wax on about how the MEK renounced violence a decade ago and just needs U.S. backing in order to topple the Iranian regime and seize power. I’ve watched these guys earn $40,000 for an eight-minute speech.

But the debate over whether or not the MEK is a terrorist group doesn’t matter. It never really did. After dozens of conversations and background briefings over the past year, I don’t believe Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided to delist the MEK how and when she did because the secretary suddenly changed her mind on the question of whether or not they are terrorists.

I think the reason the MEK was delisted on Friday is, more importantly, because Clinton understands that they’re a dangerous cult, and that all the other potential outcomes of the 30-year standoff between the MEK and the outside world would have likely been much, much worse.

Near the top of that list was mass suicide, a possibility that kept more than a few U.S. diplomats up at night. After that, it was that the MEK’s leaders would deliberately provoke a confrontation with Iraqi security forces, many of whom would be happy to avenge the ethnic cleansing raids MEK soldiers carried out for Hussein back in the day. In France, where Maryam Rajavi lives, officials considered the unwelcome possibility of public self-immolations — a tactic the MEK has used there before.

Truth is, most of the world doesn’t really care what happens to the 3,200 people who used to live at Camp Ashraf.

But Secretary Clinton cares, despite years of daily MEK protests outside her office on C Street, N.W., where I’ve watched the same dozen or so people, all dressed in identical Maryam Rajavi t-shirts, banging drums and accusing Clinton of violating human rights, breaking international law, and callously leaving them to die at the hands of Iraqi soldiers.

Ironically, while they cursed the secretary from the sidewalk, inside the State Department, Clinton and her aides were quietly working on a plan to save thousands of brainwashed MEK foot soldiers in Camp Ashraf from their own leaders and from the Iraqi military.

The only way to do this is to split the 3,200 into small groups and transfer them out of Iraq a few at a time, as refugees. This being a cult, however, the leaders initially refused to let anyone leave Ashraf unless they all left as a group. But as one former U.S. diplomat said to me, "What the hell kind of country is going to agree to take in 3,000 militant cult members?"

Clinton only had one major bargaining chip. In exchange for leaving Camp Ashraf, the secretary agreed to delist the group from the U.S. list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, which she officially did on Friday. That afternoon, State Department officials presented us reporters with three reasons they said the decision was merited. None of the official reasons holds up to scrutiny, but the eventual outcome, the delisting, does.

Therein lies the difference between politics and diplomacy. The "reasons" given here didn’t win anybody over. They were more of a gesture meant to placate people like me, who have reported what everyone at the State Department already accepts, namely, that the MEK is dangerous and untrustworthy and capable of future violence.

But the question facing Secretary Clinton wasn’t whether the MEK could be trusted. Or even if the MEK’s members were still dangerous. Privately, U.S. officials don’t pretend to know the answer to either one.

The question at the heart of the MEK decision was whether Clinton would be willing to quietly save 3,200 lives. She was.

I may not trust the MEK or their tactics, but the year-long negotiation that culminated on Friday represents a bright point for U.S. diplomacy and humanitarianism.

By Christina Wilkie

October 3, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

NY Times: MKO bribed US politicians to get off terror list

The anti-Iranian Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) paid immense bribes to top American politicians to gain their support for delisting the group from the US terror watch list, a New York Times report says.

According to the NY Times report, former CIA and FBI officials as well as retired generals and well-known members of both political parties in the US were among those supporting the terror group.

The revelation comes as US State Secretary Hillary Clinton on September 21 sent the Congress a classified communication about delisting the MKO from the US terror watch list.

This comes as the group has been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iranian civilians and officials.

The terror group has also been involved in the suppression of Iraqi Kurds and assisted former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

Furthermore, the group had for the last 15 years been formally described by the US State Department as a "foreign terrorist organization.”

The Bush administration had claimed that one of its reasons for attacking Iraq in 2003 was Saddam Hussein’s support of "international terrorism," for which he mentioned Iraq’s "sheltering" of the MKO as a major example.

Nonetheless, conservative politicians in the US seek to portray the MKO terror group as a Democratic option for Iran’s future, the report noted.

Two officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in advance of an official announcement, said that Clinton’s decision to drop the group’s terror label was partly based on the group’s recent cooperation in moving more than 3,000 of its members from its longtime Iraq location, Camp Ashraf.

The MKO fled to Iraq in 1986, where it enjoyed the support of Iraq’s executed dictator Saddam Hussein, and set up its Camp Ashraf near the Iranian border.

On Sunday a final convoy of 680 MKO members from Camp Ashraf arrived at the former site of Camp Liberty, located near the Baghdad airport.

The NY Times article reaffirms that the support of prominent American politicians for the MKO organization will undoubtedly play a role in the de-listing of the MKO organization as a terrorist group.

The long list of high-ranking US politicians supporting the MKO includes: former CIA Directors, R. James Woolsey and Porter J. Goss; former FBI director Louis J. Freeh; former US President George W. Bush’s homeland security secretary, Tom Ridge; Attorney General, Michael B. Mukasey; and President Barack Obama’s first national security adviser, Gen. James L. Jones.

Many of MKO’s American supporters, yet not all, are said to have received fees of up to 15,000 to 30,000 USD to give speeches to the group, in addition to travel expenses to attend MKO rallies in Paris.

The former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, admitted in March that he had received a total of 150,000 to 160,000 USD.

According to an American official, for the time being, about 100 of the group’s members are expected to stay at Camp Ashraf, with permission of the Iraqi government to oversee the group’s property there.

In the meantime, MKO members at the Camp Liberty site are being interviewed by United Nations officials who have granted refugee status to several hundred of them and are now looking for countries that are ready to accept them.

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Iran says it can prosecute U.S.

The Iranian judiciary said Monday that by removing a group from its list of terrorist organizations, the United States opens itself up to lawsuits.

A judiciary spokesman said the U.S. Department of State violated international standards by removing the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization from the list of terrorist organizations that can be legally prosecuted, the Iranian state-run Fars News Agency reported Monday.

The MKO was taken off the list Friday, having its assets under U.S. jurisdiction unfrozen and allowed to do business with American entities, a State Department statement said.

Tehran claims the MKO is behind numerous assassinations and bombings within the country because of its alleged role in helping Iraq in its 1980-1988 war with Iran, the news agency said.

The de-listing was called a "violation of America’s legal and international obligations" that "will bring U.S. responsibility for past, present and future terrorist operations by this group," a statement from the Iranian Foreign Ministry said Saturday.

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Iran condemns US for ‘double standards’ over MEK terror de-listing

Iranian state TV claims Washington is using the group – which the US removed from its terrorism list – to work against Tehran
Iran condemns US for'double standards' over MEK terror de-listing
Iran condemned on Saturday the Obama administration for taking an Iranian militant group formerly allied with Saddam Hussein off the US terrorism list, saying it shows Washington’s "double standards."

The People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), which began as a guerrilla movement fighting Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last shah of Iran, helped overthrow Pahlavi in 1979 then quickly fell out with Iran’s first leader, Ayatollah Khomeini. The MEK fought in the 1980s alongside Saddam’s forces in the eight-year Iran-Iraq war but disarmed after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The state department de-listed the group on Friday, meaning that any assets the MEK has in the United States are unblocked and Americans can do business with the organization.

Iranian state TV criticized the decision, saying that the US considered the MEK "good terrorists" and claims Washington is using the group to work against Tehran. State radio said the move highlights President Barack Obama’s anti-Iranian sentiments.

"There are numerous evidence of the group being involved in terrorist activities. De-listing them shows America’s double standard policy on terrorism," state TV said. The US distinguishes between "good and bad terrorists" and the MEK are now "good terrorists because the US is using them against Iran," the report also said, adding that Washington and Israel use the group to spy on Iran’s nuclear program.

The US and its allies accuse Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the claims, saying its nuclear program is peaceful and is intended for electricity generation and scientific research.

The state department said the MEK hasn’t committed terror for more than a decade. The group has also complied with demands that more than 3,000 of its once-armed members abandon their base in Iraq near the Iranian border for a camp outside Baghdad, an essential step to ending their decades-long presence in Iraq.

The group claims it is seeking regime change in Iran through peaceful means with an aim to replace the clerical rule in Tehran with a secular government.

However, a senior state department official suggested that removing MEK from the US terrorist list does not translate into a shared common front against Iran. The official said Washington does not view MEK as an opposition movement that can promote democratic values in Iran. The official on Friday briefed reporters on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

Iran says MEK is responsible for the deaths of more than 12,000 Iranians over the past three decades, including senior government officials.

The MEK spent huge sums of money over years lobbying for removal from the US terror list, holding rallies in European capitals and elsewhere that featured luminaries like former homeland security secretary Tom Ridge from the Bush administration. Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was among those recently welcomed by the MEK to Paris.

The group was protected in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, but its members are disliked by the new Iraqi government, dominated by Shia Muslims like those in Iran.

The United States had insisted the MEK’s members leave Camp Ashraf, their home in Iraq, as a condition for removal from the terrorist list. All but several hundred militants are now located in Camp Liberty, a former US base outside Baghdad, looking for placement in third countries.

The MEK was removed from the European Union’s terrorist list in 2009.
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 29 September 2012

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Delisting MKO: U.S. shooting the last bolt

In an attempt which can be seen as the newest effort to put pressure on Iran and push it toward isolation, the United States removed the name of exiled anti-Iranian group Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MKO) from its list of foreign terrorist organizations.

The move which astounded the world and came as a great surprise to many Iranians is apparently one of the last cards which the U.S. has decided to play in order to isolate Iran, derail its international position and undermine its growing power in the Middle East.

MKO is said to be responsible for the killing of more than 40,000 Iranians following the Islamic Revolution of 1979. They have assassinated several high-ranking Iranian officials including former President Mohammad Ali Rajaei, Prime Minister Mohammad Javad Bahonar and judiciary chief Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti. In the recent years, they have also cooperated with Mossad and CIA in assassinating Iran’s nuclear scientists in a bid to thwart Iran’s scientific progress and ruin its peaceful nuclear program.

American investigative journalists Seymour Hersh and Glenn Greenwald have revealed in some of their articles that MKO has received training, funding and military equipment from the United States, Israel and even Saudi Arabia.

Some of the defected members of MKO such as Qorban Ali Husseini Nezhad and Maryam Sanjabi who fled Camp Ashraf since last year revealed the underground ties between MKO and Saddam Hussein, and the U.S. government after the occupation of Iraq in 2003.

MKO is extremely unpopular among the Iranians, even among those who live abroad. The atrocities this group has committed seem to be unforgivable, and although the Iranian government has always demanded that the members of MKO return to the country to be put on a fair trial and even enjoy Islamic clemency, they refused to leave their horrendous cult.

Being headed by the Paris-based Maryam Rajavi, this group has not only killed hundreds of Iranians during the 8 years of war which Saddam Hussein imposed on Iran, but has also spilled the bloods of many Iraqis and even high-ranking U.S. military officials such as Lieutenant Colonel Louis Lee Hawkins, Colonel Paul Shaffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner.

The terrorist operations carried out by this Western-funded organization have been widely discussed even by the U.S. mainstream media, but it’s not clear that how the American government will justify its controversial and bizarre decision in delisting MKO.

MKO has demonstrated that it does not show mercy even to its own members, and reports have leaked to the media on how the high-ranking MKO officials have mistreated and threatened the low-level members of the organization so as to dissuade them from escaping or giving up their mission.

According to the American journalist Tony Cartalucci, former MKO members have revealed that the organization bans marriage, use of radios, internet and holds many members against their will with the threat of death if ever they are caught attempting to escape. It also uses dangerous psychological methods to brainwash the members and make them committed to "martyrdom" for the sake of the group’s objectives, holding them obedient and compliant to the orders of their major commanders.

In the recent years, MKO spent millions of dollars in order to persuade the neo-conservative members of the Congress to lobby for the delisting of the organization. Some of the prominent figures in the U.S. who have voiced their support to this organization simply because of its opposition to the Iranian government include the New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, retired General Wesley Clark, former Obama National Security Adviser General James Jones and American Jewish lawyer Alan Dershowitz.

The removal of MKO’s name from the list of foreign terrorist organizations allows this organization to follow its anti-Iranian policies under the umbrella of a peaceful civilian group. The senior figures in the group have constantly announced that their ultimate goal is a regime change in Iran, and from now on, they will have the official and unrestricted backing and support of the U.S. government toward this end.

Although nothing about the nature and reality of MKO changes by removing its name from the U.S. Department of State’s list of foreign terrorist organizations, it is now clear that the United States has never been sincere in its claims of being opposed to terrorism.

The U.S. politicians divide the terrorists into two groups: friendly terrorists and bad terrorists. Of course MKO falls under the first category and the recent decision made by the U.S. government is a testimony that it’s not terrorism and violence which the White House is truly concerned about. MKO will be exempted from accountability before the international community because of the felonies it has committed in the past three decades, simply because it strides on a path which the White House likes. This is nothing but a flagrant parade of double standards.

Kourosh Ziabari

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Who is Whose Terrorist?

Have you ever thought of the term ‘terrorist’ or the meaning of ‘democracy’? Thanks to the Internet, it may be easy to search and try to find the meanings of these words. Just compare their definitions with what is in practice these days. Whoever is against US or Israeli regime is considered to be a ‘terrorist’, ‘supporter of terrorism’, or ‘undemocratic’. Even if they are fighting for basic human rights, their life, honor, dignity, land or even if they were elected by a majority of their people.

Ironically, the most well-known terrorist groups are hand cooked by western intelligence services. Even drug cartels are controlled by their intelligence agencies. If you follow up any kind of black activity in the world from smuggling drugs, weapons, human beings (women, children), and human body parts to money laundering, killings and bombings all around the world, it is impossible not to find Israelis or Americans involved in them. Only those who are not in the circle are arrested and punished.

Watching American mafia movies could take you into a sphere of what is happening in the world. Those bands have developed into terrorist groups all around the world. When it was needed, Al-Qaeda was established to carry out terrorist acts against innocent people in Afghanistan. You never heard about their crimes when Al-Qaeda and Taliban were playing into the hands of Americans. Then an attack on innocent Americans is planned to justify America’s invasion of Afghanistan. Later, we see that drug production in this country goes up more than ten-fold.
Same thing happens around the world. In Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and Syria Al-Qaeda is back in the America’s circle. It receives tax payers’ money and weapons to implement American policies around the world. Likewise, the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) terrorist sect is a copycat of Al-Qaeda. When it was formed, the UK, US, Israel, France and Iraq helped it against the shah’s regime which was considered to be their ally.

By Emad Abshenass Chief Editor of Iran Daily

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Now Focus Attention Back On Rajavi’s Hostages In Camp Liberty

Among humanitarian organisations and the estranged families of MEK members there is a sense of relief now that the US sideshow of speculation over MEK terrorist listing and who the MEK’s financial backers are has blown over. It means that attention can now properly be returned to the situation of the MEK in Iraq where the urgent problem is how to restore basic human rights to the former MEK fighters trapped in Camp Liberty. Because although UN inspectors and Diplomatic representatives have attested to the more than acceptable living conditions in the temporary transit camp, the residents continue to be denied their basic human rights by the MEK leadership. Since 2003 the Americans have been complicit in allowing the MEK to mistreat the membership. Unfortunately this situation has continued at Camp Liberty to where all but a handful of the former Camp Ashraf residents have been relocated.

Massoud and Maryam Rajavi run a personality cult which dictates to the members that only they should be worshipped and adored. There is no room for other relations, even friendships. In the MEK, members are not even permitted to maintain a relationship with other family members inside the group, such as siblings, parents, aunts, uncles, cousins. Relations between individuals is severely restricted and constantly monitored for infringements. This state of affairs is maintained through a harsh, unremitting regime of daily confessions with infringements – or sins – punished by an escalating system of public humiliation, beatings and isolation. In Camp Liberty residents are billeted six to a bungalow even though enough space has been allocated to allow for two per housing unit. The cult leaders insist on more than two people sharing as a means to prevent dissenting views from being discussed behind closed doors.

In Iraq the estranged families of MEK members have maintained a vigil outside both Camp Ashraf – and now Camp Liberty – for nearly three years. These families have travelled to Iraq to try and get news of and contact with their loved ones who are being held hostage by the Rajavi cult. Massoud and Maryam Rajavi have imposed cruel conditions on their followers in which nobody is allowed to have contact with their families outside the cult without the permission of the leaders.

The Americans in Iraq have done nothing to help these families reach their loved ones. Instead they have apparently done everything possible to prevent the dissolution of the MEK as a single entity, in spite of being informed of the cult nature of the group.

However, because the US terrorism list has no relevance in Iraq, the Government of Iraq will not change its stance because of this action. Indeed, no government of any colour would be able or willing to keep any MEK in Iraq because of its history of violence against Iraqi citizens.

Since the US government no longer regards the MEK as terrorists the Americans should now make a real effort to remove them from Iraq for their own wellbeing. The State Department claims that the MEK has publicly renounced violence – even though there is no evidence that the MEK leader Massoud Rajavi has made any verbal or documented declaration to this effect. (Who do the State Department thinks actually runs the MEK? Lawyers?) As such the MEK should be expected to fully decommission its military personnel and reconfigure its internal structure to allow it to pursue exclusively peaceful and democratic opposition activities against the governments of Iran and Iraq, and possibly Syria.

The burning question then is what the MEK will do with its redundant former fighters in Camp Liberty in Iraq? As avowed enemies of the Iranian government they must presumably take refuge in the West. To qualify as refugees they must renounce their membership of the MEK as a political entity. Logically this should not present any difficulty as they are no longer needed as fighters. (Because the MEK is now a peaceful organisation with no need for any personnel trained in violence or military/terrorist style activity.)

The first step is to open up Camp Liberty to the outside world, to the families and humanitarian NGOs which are waiting to offer help to the residents. The residents must be given access to external information sources, internet, television, telephones, print media, etc. Conditions must prevail such that each resident is able to enjoy freedom of movement in the camp, freedom of association in the camp, including between the genders, and freedom to contact their families. This would represent a first, yet vital, step toward solving the problem of the MEK in Iraq.

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

Background Briefing on an Announcement Regarding the MEK

Special Briefing Background Briefing on an Announcement Regarding the Mujahedin-e Khalq
Senior State Department Officials
Via Teleconference

MODERATOR: Thank you, Gwen. Welcome, and thanks to all of you for calling in on a Friday afternoon. I know it’s been a long week for many of you who’ve been at UNGA.

Let me just begin by reading a short statement on background, one that you already should have in your Blackberries or on your computers, and then we’ll open it up to your questions.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL THREE: The Secretary of State has decided, consistent with the law, to revoke the designation of the Mujahedin-e Khalq, better known by the acronym the MEK and its aliases, as a foreign terrorist organization under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The Secretary of State has also decided to de-list the MEK as a specially designated global terrorist under the Executive Order 13224. These actions are effective today. Property and interest in property in the United States or within the possession or control of U.S. persons will no longer be blocked, and U.S. entities may engage in transactions with the MEK without obtaining a license. These actions will be published in the Federal Register.

With today’s actions, the Department does not overlook or forget the MEK’s past acts of terrorism, including its involvement in the killing of U.S. citizens in Iran in the 1970s and an attack on U.S. soil in 1992. The Department also has serious concerns about the MEK as an organization, particularly with regard to allegations of abuse committed against its own members. The Secretary’s decision today took into account the MEK’s public renunciation of violence, the absence of confirmed acts of terrorism by the MEK for more than a decade, and their cooperation in the peaceful closure of Camp Ashraf, their historic paramilitary base.

The United States has consistently maintained a humanitarian interest in seeking the safe, secure, and humane resolution of the situation at Camp Ashraf, as well as in supporting the United Nations-led effort to relocate eligible former Ashraf residents outside of Iraq.

MODERATOR: Again, that statement’s on background from a Senior State Department Official. And I’d now like to move on to the Q&A portion of our call. We do have with us today to answer your questions, two additional Senior State Department Officials, [Senior State Department Official One] and [Senior State Department Official Two] . From now on, they’ll be referred to as Senior State Department Officials Number One and Number Two respectively.

And just a reminder again of the ground rules, this is an on background call. So with that, Gwen, we’ll go ahead and take journalists’ questions.

OPERATOR: Thank you. And if you do have a question, please press * then 1. You’ll hear a tone indicating you have been placed in queue, and you may remove yourself from queue at any time by pressing the # key. If you’re using a speaker phone, please pick up the handset before pressing the numbers. Once again, if you do have a question, please press * then 1 at this time. And one moment please for our first question.

And we have a question from (inaudible), BBC, please go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Just if I could get a sense of how the State Department came to this conclusion that they have not acted as a terrorist group or violated U.S. laws as far as terrorism is concerned, because the laws are very clear – it’s both about intent and also the act itself. How did you come to the conclusion that they do not have the intent to commit another violent act in the future? We know that NBC has reported back in February that a U.S. Government official had said that MEK was involved in killing the scientist – nuclear scientist – in Iran as a (inaudible) for Israel.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Right, number one here. The judgment – and it is a judgment – was made on the basis of those criteria that are enunciated by the Secretary: the public renunciation of violence, the absence of confirmed acts of terrorism over more than a decade, and cooperation in the peaceful closure of Camp Ashraf, their military base. And I should add that the United States Government has not claimed that the MEK was involved in the assassination of scientists in Iran. And that’s really all we’re going to have to say on that.

MODERATOR: Next question, please.

OPERATOR: Thank you. Our next question comes from Ashish Sen, Washington Times. Please, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much for doing this. Just to follow up on that question. The review that was done of the MEK’s intents and actions, did that also include the group’s activities in Iran? I know you talked about there was no sign that it’s been involved in terrorist activities, but does that also include the group’s activities within Iran? And the second question is, do you anticipate any kind of change in provision of – are the countries now to accept members of the MEK now that the U.S. has delisted the group?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Well, why don’t I take the first question and then I’ll hand it to Senior Official Number Two for the second one.

Our decision is based on an evaluation – a global evaluation – of the group’s activities. There are no exceptions. We believe that terrorism is terrorism no matter what country on earth it may be practiced in or against any party that it may be practiced against. So we do not distinguish between actions in or against Iran or in or against any other country.

And let me then turn it over to my colleague.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: Number Two here. I can’t speak with authority as to how foreign governments will react, but it is certainly plausible to assume that this action will assist in our efforts to support the UNHCR in its efforts to find homes for these people outside of Iraq.

Certainly, now with Camp Ashraf effectively closed, only a residual group remaining, and with over 3,000 of its – Camp Ashraf’s former residents peacefully relocated to Camp Hurriya, the major task in our humanitarian efforts with respect to this organization’s members is their peaceful, orderly resettlement outside of Iraq. If this decision assists in those efforts, so much the better. I will be working intensely in the days and weeks to come with European Governments and other governments bilaterally and with the UNHCR to advance this process.

MODERATOR: Next question, please.

OPERATOR: Thank you. Once again, if you do have a question, please press * then 1 at this time. And our next question comes from Spencer Ackerman, Wired Magazine. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi, thanks. Can you talk about the timing of this episode for the de-listing? I’m having a hard time understanding why only now it would seem to be appropriate to deal with the MEK. Are you concerned about the appearance that a designated terrorist group can engage in a high-profile lobbying campaign and then get off the State Department’s terrorist designation list?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Spencer, can you repeat the first part of your question? Because I couldn’t really hear it.

QUESTION: Sure. I’m wondering about the timing. Can you explain the timing? Because it seems like there was a high profile lobbying campaign for de-listing, and then they’re delisted. Are you at all worried about that appearance of setting a precedent?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Well, let’s be clear. The timing of the de-listing has to do with the deadline given by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. That court had set this deadline of October 1 as a date when there had to be a decision on the MEK’s petition to have its FTO status revoked. That was the condition that led to this timing and this decision was taken on the merits for the reasons that I explained before and not for any other reasons.

MODERATOR: Great. Do we have any additional questions, Gwen?

OPERATOR: And we’ll (inaudible). Once more, if you have a question, please press * then 1. Yes, and at this time, we have a question from Jim Lobe, Inter Press Service. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, I – just to follow up on one of the questions that was presented earlier. Does the U.S. Government have a position with respect to whether the assassination of scientists in Iran constitutes terrorism?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: If we had information on that and could pursue it, we would, but as I said, we have never said that this group was involved in those assassinations.

QUESTION: No, I understand, but if I could just follow up, I just wanted to find out whether the USG considered that the assassination, regardless of who it is by, of Iranian scientists, would constitute an act of terrorism.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Well, that would be my understanding, but I think you’d have to have the lawyers take a look at that.

QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.

OPERATOR: Thank you. And our next question comes from Indira Lakshmanan, Bloomberg News. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Can you hear me?

PARTICIPANT: Yep.

QUESTION: Okay, this is Indira. Thanks for taking the question. I just wanted to understand; in your statement, you say that the Department is not overlooking or forgetting the MEK’s past acts of terrorism. But it doesn’t specifically say, other than saying that you’re taking into account their public renunciation of violence, whether you believe that they have completely given up any current terrorism. So can you clarify that? Do you believe – does the U.S. Government believe that they are no longer involved in any kind of terrorism?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: I think that the phrase, “the absence of confirmed acts of terrorism by the MEK for more than a decade” is meant to indicate that we consider that public renunciation to be credible.

QUESTION: Okay. And just following up on Spencer’s earlier question, the high-priced lobbying campaign that they’ve engaged in for several years now, which has been widely written about, did that not play any role in the decision making process or the pressure involved?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: I can tell you that these decisions are made on the merits. They’re not made to appease any group of lobbyists, no matter how famous they are. The United States Government is not going to take anyone off the list if it genuinely believes that they pose an imminent threat, that they are going to commit terrorist acts again, or that they are somehow wedded to violence. I think that that is the key desideratum, and that’s how we do this.

QUESTION: Thanks so much, and just last follow-up: What is the actual impact of this now? Does this mean that U.S. citizens can support them through groups that are registered in the United States, support groups, they can financially or in other way give them material support now?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: Yes, it does.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Ros – or, thanks, Indira. I think we have probably time for just one more question. I think [Senior State Department Official One] has to go, so go ahead, operator.

OPERATOR: Okay. And that comes from Rosiland Jordan, Al Jazeera English TV. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi, thanks for taking the call. In terms of the relationship now between the U.S. Government and the MEK, can either of you speak to what kind of engagement there might be, what kind of discussions, does the U.S. now look at the MEK as a party to what happens or what doesn’t happen with the Iranian Government from this point on?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: I’ll take a first shot at that, and then Number Two can take it on, and he may have things to say regarding the issue of resettlement. But I want to be very clear about this. We do not see the MEK as a viable opposition or democratic opposition movement. We have no evidence and we have no confidence that the MEK is an organization that could promote the democratic values that we would like to see in Iran.

There is nothing in the way they govern themselves that would suggest they’re interested in adopting democratic principles, and there is a long and fairly rich set of documentation on how they treat their own personnel that really does suggest to the contrary. So we continue to have serious concerns about the group with regard to allegations of abuse that’s committed against its own members. They are not part of our picture in terms of the future of Iran.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: This is Number Two. The U.S. Government has had and will continue to have contacts with the MEK with respect to their movement from Camp Ashraf to Camp Hurriya, which is largely complete. We have had and will continue to have contacts with them with respect to their resettlement abroad. Limited to that, we have had direct contacts usually by telephone and email. Those, as I said, will continue. On these issues, those contacts have been constructive and have – and I believe have contributed to the peaceful relocation of these people out of Camp Ashraf and to Camp Hurriya. Those contacts are irrespective of any of the issues that Number One has raised. We’re obviously mindful of the organization’s history, but because we have an overriding humanitarian interest in a peaceful and orderly and humane relocation effort, we have been in contact with them, and we will continue to be to this end.

MODERATOR: Thanks. Gwen, I think we do have time for just one final question, short question, so thank you.

OPERATOR: One moment please. Okay. And that question comes from Scott Shane, New York Times. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi. I got in a little bit late, and I hope this hasn’t been asked and answered, but previously it was reported by some of the supporters of the MEK that their speaker’s bureaus had been contacted, had received subpoenas in fact as part of a Treasury Department investigation, presumably for material support of a designated terrorist group. Can either of you say anything about what became of that or at least whether there is any such continuing investigation going on now of people who supported the MEK?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE: I think you’ll have to ask Treasury, if they wish.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: I agree. I have – I can’t say. Not aware of it.

MODERATOR: All right. Thank you very much and thanks to all of you for joining us on a Friday afternoon, especially to our two Senior State Department Officials, but also to the many journalists as well. I hope you all have a good weekend. This concludes our background call.

October 2, 2012 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Posts

  • Testimonies of Participants in the MEK’s Staged Propaganda Stunt in Karaj

    October 7, 2026
  • Giuliani’s MEK ties have dogged him for years

    October 6, 2026
  • The Tragic Impact of MEK Isolation on Yazdan Teimorian and His Family

    October 5, 2026
  • How the MEK tried to sell a stage stunt as grassroots support?

    October 4, 2026
  • Why Mike Pompeo’s Embrace of the MEK Ignores Its Lack of Popular Base

    October 3, 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