Page 577 – Nejat Society

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Mojahedin-e Khalq after 46 years

The ridiculous show of holding a party congress and choosing the general secretary of the Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, Rajavi cult)

According to information received from inside the Ashraf cultic garrison, the leaders of the MEK

Massoud Rajavi, the totalitarian self-imposed life-long leader of the MEK

had made a huge investment on being removed from the US list of foreign terrorist organizations (FTO) and believed this would be their guarantee for survival as long as their internal crisis are concerned. In this regard the Rajavi cult had spent enormous amount of money on this campaign.

The latest internal news informs us that the officials of the MEK inside Ashraf garrison clearly said among themselves that the MEK’s base in Iraq can no longer survive since an internal revolt is inevitable.

They suggested that the only way to get out of this adversity is to divert attention away from inside problems and concentrate on the US list of FTOs to come out of it and show it as a great victory.

The MEK leaders know full well that contrary to their claim, to be or not to be in the list does not strategically make much difference in their destiny since they are already in a fatal deadlock and they have no way out of it. The use of propaganda and publicity over the list of FTO is to retain the disappointed members both inside Ashraf garrison and those in the western countries, and to keep them busy. The struggle to be removed from the FTO list has no strategic value and is only a pastime for the members.

After not succeeding in being de-proscribed in the USA, which the MEK badly needed in order to impose control over the unhappy members, a new wave of discontentment arose among the members and supporters. The result which the organization hoped to gain after spending huge amounts of money and manpower turned out to be the opposite. According to the information received, the members particularly those in Ashraf garrison are increasingly discontented and protesting.

Since the Rajavi cult always thinks of organizing a demonstration or show whenever they are in a deadlock in order to keep the minds of the members busy and diverted from the main subject, this time they thought of forming a sham party congress and internal elections to choose the so-called general secretary of the MEK. The organization also decided to publicize the matter by paid propaganda in order to cover up the defeat in the campaign of being removed from the FTO list.

The MEK has made up a lot of fabricated lies in this regards and therefore we, the former members and the families of the present members of the Rajavi cult, feel obliged to clarify a few matters in order to counter the misinformation circulated by the MEK leaders.

1. The Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization is a destructive mind control cult (which fits exactly with the definitions expressed by the experts) and has never had a democratic structure within which to have a party congress and inside elections. Holding a party congress and choosing a general secretary has always been purely formalistic in order to deceive public opinion and the politicians.

2. The totalitarian self-imposed life-long leader of the cult is Massoud Rajavi who has appointed his wife as his successor. All decisions small and large are made by him personally and he considers himself the absolute owner of the cult and its members. Therefore the title of general secretary for any other person is nothing but a disgusting deception.

3. Inside the MEK, titles such as political bureau, central committee, central council, executive board, and leadership council are totally formalities and such bodies either do not exist or have no role in decision making.

September 11, 2011 0 comments

Pols take paid speaking engagements in support of Iranian terror group

An Iranian political group designated by the State Department as a terrorist organization is offering large payments to orators willing to speak at events on their behalf. Among those with connections to the organization, Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), are Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s chief foreign policy adviser and liberal politician Howard Dean.

MEK and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, were discovered by Salon to be soliciting speakers for an event in Geneva.

The State Department summary of MEK’s activities claims that the group "uses propaganda and terrorism to achieve its objectives" against the Iranian government, with a worldwide membership between 5,000 and 10,000 and a decades-long history of attempted coups, bombings and terrorist attacks.

Because the MEK holds official designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, it is illegal to provide "material support" to it, such as by contributing directly or by speaking on its behalf. Pennsylvania’s 21st Century Speakers Inc. would be breaking the law with the $10,000 speaking engagement on the MEK’s behalf it is currently floating to its clients.

"This is clearly an invitation to provide a service to a designated group. This would be a clear violation of the law," Georgetown Law School professor David Cole told Salon. He added that the director of the speaker’s bureau, Lourdes Swarts, was already breaking the law by merely attempting to arrange a speaker.

The September 22 event focuses on the MEK members in Iraq’s Camp Ashraf and is scheduled to coincide with the United Nations Human Rights Council meeting.

Both Dean and the Romney adviser, Washington College President Mitchell Reiss, have been paid to give speeches as part of the effort to strip the MEK of its terrorist designation.

Dean told Politico that he gave the speech because he sympathized with the underdog and believed that the MEK had helped the U.S. in Iraq.

"I said to myself, ‘These are obviously not terrorists," Dean said. "The former chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff will obviously not be consorting with terrorists."

By Kase Wickman

September 10, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization

US grows a tree of tension with Iran

A full-fledged tree of tension with Iran has been nurtured by Washington, firmly rooted in a comprehensive regime of sanctions, military encirclement, propaganda and psychological warfare, and a low-intensity proxy war through ethnic terrorist groups. It is now spiraling toward yet another confrontation in the Middle East.

Instead of focusing on how to reduce tensions with Tehran, United States policymakers seem intent on ratcheting up the pressure and leveling every conceivable accusation against Iran – chiefly nuclear proliferation, regional subversion and terrorism – delivered in rapid succession.

The US has now formally linked Tehran’s regime with al-Qaeda in an escalation of anti-Iran rhetoric that is officially justified in Washington in terms of proving that the White House is "in control" of Middle East developments and not swamped by the domestic turmoil over the US national debt. Yet this is a lame excuse and raises the question of who really is in control of the US’s Iran policy?

From Tehran’s vantage point, the answer is straightforward. According to a Tehran University political science professor, who spoke with the author on the condition of anonymity, "A select group of Jewish policymakers in the White House, State Department and Treasury have hijacked President Obama’s policy on Iran and Obama may wake up one day and find the web of conflict with Iran so tightly wrapped around him that he has no choice but to lock horns with us."

In other words, very few people in Iran still subscribe to the earlier hope that Obama was seeking a new Iran policy, or that sanctions were an alternative to war, since they are slowly but surely proving to be a prelude to it. America’s problem is, however, that it is financially drained as a result of costly wars and a conflict with Iran could have potentially disastrous implications for the global economic recovery by triggering skyrocketing energy prices, not to mention complicating the cauldron of multiple crises in the Middle East.
The political upheaval in the Middle East represents a major challenge to the US, which sees its traditional authority in various parts of the Arab world, including Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain, enveloped by serious question marks – this while there is very little the US can do to stop the momentum for Palestinian statehood now building up at the United Nations without further sullying its image in the Arab and Muslim world.

This has led some Tehran pundits to speculate that the US and Israel intend to artificially inflate the Iran nuclear crisis this autumn to deflect attention from the Palestinian issue. A problem with this approach is that it may diminish or even completely erase the areas of shared interests between the US and Iran, above all in Iraq and Afghanistan, where both Washington and Tehran back the same political horses.

Iran is disquieted by reports that indicate the US is seeking to extend its military presence in Iraq and build permanent bases, a move that has rattled the nationalist Iraqis, including those wearing the garb of militant Shi’ism, all the more reason for Tehran and Washington to consider security dialogues on Iraq, since Iran is a stakeholder in Iraq’s security. Nor should the US bracket Iran from future meetings on Afghanistan, threatened by the Taliban and their al-Qaeda supporters, both anti-Shi’ite fundamentalists.

As expected, Tehran has shrugged off Washington’s latest accusation regarding its complicity with al-Qaeda, with some Tehran political analysts dismissing it as "an old habit that is hard to kick", referring to the US’s pretext of attacking Iraq partly by claiming a link between Baghdad and al-Qaeda. Is history repeating itself? If so, it will be as tragic as the 2003 fiasco.

Washington and Tehran could turn the current crisis in their relations into an opportunity for detente and perhaps even rapprochement, indeed so much was hinted recently by Iran’s former president, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani; a US nod to the recent Russian "step by step" proposal to resolve the Iran nuclear crisis is also called for (see US rebuffs Russian ingenuity on Iran Asia Times Online, July 20 ).

A timely catalyst may come in the form of the release of the two American hikers in Iran’s custody, in which case a measure of good would be generated on the eve of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s United Nations visit in September. In that case, the US may be forced to dangle carrots instead of sticks and thus show that goodwill begets goodwill.

For now, however, there is virtually no sign of any American goodwill toward Iran, only animosity. Another clue to the tone of engagement is the delisting of the Iranian group, Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), from the US list of terrorist groups, which will be decided on in the next few weeks. This is bound to heighten tensions as Tehran abhors the US protection of the MEK’s Camp Ashraf inside Iraq.

The MEK’s delisting is a particularly sensitive issue for Iran’s leaders, who blame the group for the murder of many of the regime’s top officials and as a result this will have a disproportionate impact in sowing the seeds of distrust between the two sides.

By Kaveh L Afrasiabi

Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran’s Foreign Policy (Westview Press) . For his Wikipedia entry, click here. He is author of Reading In Iran Foreign Policy After September 11 (BookSurge Publishing , October 23, 2008) and his latest book, Looking for rights at Harvard, is now available.

September 8, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Speakers bureau works for Iranian terror group MEK

A Pennsylvania speakers bureau is sending out invitations for a lucrative speaking opportunity on behalf of an officially designated terrorist organization, the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) of Iran, Speakers bureau works for Iranian terror group MEK according to an email obtained by Salon.

Last week, a person at a Washington think tank was emailed the $10,000-plus-expenses offer to speak at a Geneva event by Lourdes Swarts, managing director of 21st Century Speakers Inc., "on behalf of our client, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, Foreign Affairs Committee."

The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) is listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the State Department, and is described as the "political front" of the MEK.
The language of the contract indicates Swarts — as well as anyone who agrees to the speaking offer — is breaking the law that bars material support for terrorism, according to Georgetown Law School professor David Cole.

"This is clearly an invitation to provide a service to a designated group. This would be a clear violation of the law," says Cole, who last year argued a major material support case before the Supreme Court. The material support law bars providing not only money and weapons to a foreign terrorist organization, but also "service," defined by the government as anything of benefit to the group performed in coordination with or at the direction of the group.

Cole adds that Swarts is "committing a crime because she’s providing a service to NCRI by arranging for this."

Reached by phone Tuesday evening, Swarts told Salon that the speaking request is "a private communication between me and my customer," then hung up. She did not respond to a follow-up email seeking comment.

The Geneva event, to focus on the situation of MEK members at Camp Ashraf in Iraq, is scheduled for Sept. 22 to coincide with a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council, according to the email, which you can read here.

The offer by 21st Century Speakers comes amid a sustained campaign by the MEK and its supporters to convince the Obama administration to remove the group from the list of foreign terrorist organizations. Derided as cult-like by critics, the MEK killed Americans in the 1970s and attacked Iranian targets as recently as a decade ago, but has since claimed to renounce violence. It fiercely opposes the current Iranian regime, a stance that has attracted support from neoconservatives in the U.S.

The group’s P.R. pus has enlisted former officials of all political stripes, from liberal former presidential candidate Howard Dean to Republican Rudy Giuliani. Some officials have acknowledged receiving fees as high as $20,000 for a 10-minute speech. But one of the hallmarks of the campaign is that third-party groups have taken the lead in sponsoring conferences and pro-MEK demonstrations — presumably because it would be illegal for anyone to take part if the MEK itself was the organizer.

Conferences to advocate for the MEK have been organized by émigré groups that seem to have no other purpose than to push the MEK’s agenda, including, for example, the Iranian American Community of Northern California. Huffington Post reported last month that "most of the groups are run by ordinary, middle-class Iranian Americans working out of their homes — people who seem unlikely to have an extra few hundred thousand dollars laying around to pay speaker fees and book five-star hotels to bolster the MEK’s cause."

The issue of direct sponsorship by the MEK is a sensitive one. Last month, for example, a pro-MEK column by Dean on Huffington Post was edited after observers on Twitter pointed out that Dean’s bio line said he "has delivered paid speeches for the MEK." That was changed to read, "he has delivered paid speeches for Iranian-American communities."

The website for 21st Century Speakers, which is based in Covington in rural northeastern Pennsylvania, purports to offer clients access to a long list of "the world’s foremost speakers and celebrities," including First Lady Michelle Obama, George H.W. Bush, and pastor Rick Warren. But just a handful of the scores of names are marked with the tag "exclusive representation." One of those, former congressman Tom Tancredo, has been one of the loudest voices in favor of delisting the MEK over the last decade (though he told Salon Tuesday he had not been paid for any of the work).

Another of the company’s "exclusive" speakers is former Pennsylvania congressman Curt Weldon. In 2005, Weldon penned "Countdown to Terror: The Top-Secret Information that Could Prevent the Next Terrorist Attack on America — and How the CIA Has Ignored It." The book, which warned of Iranian terrorism against the U.S., was reportedly based on information from a discredited Iranian expatriate in Paris who was said to to get "intelligence" material from the MEK.

Still, how exactly 21st Century Speakers came to have the National Council of Resistance of Iran as a client is not clear. I’ve reached out to NCRI and will update this post if I hear back. It’s also not clear whether any Americans have accepted the $10,000 speaker offer.

My colleague Glenn Greenwald argued recently that because of the MEK’s support in elite political circles, it is functionally immune from prosecution.

While Cole, the Georgetown professor, has argued that the material support statute is too broad, he says he is troubled by the selective application on the law: Prosecutions have been made against supporters of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party in Turkey and, just last week, a young Virginia man who made a YouTube video in support of the Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, a Pakistani jihadist group, but not against any MEK supporters.

"These are powerful defendants with lots of friends," Cole says. "The group itself already has wide support in Congress. It’s the kind of case that’s not going to get brought."

Justin Elliott, Salon.com

September 8, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Bused Into MEK Rally, Attendees Don’t Really Understand What The MEK Is

A large crowd gathered outside the State Department to protest the designation of the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) as a “foreign terror organization.” Police at the scene told Attendees Bused Into MEK Rally, Some Of Whom ‘Don’t Really Understand What The MEK Is’ThinkProgress the groups organizing the demonstration said at least two thousand people were there, though the estimate seemed high.

The MEK’s profile has risen as stateside supporters — including former government officials — have launched a massive, coordinated, and multi-million dollar campaign to have them removed from the terror rolls. Critics argue that the group may still have designs on committing violent acts and that their public support in Iran is virtually non-existant.

Among Iranians, who dominated the crowd, many said they rallied for the MEK because they supported democracy in Iran and opposed the post-revolutionary Islamic regime.

But many apparent non-Iranians came out as well, most wearing flags, headbands, and even yellow vests with images of the group’s leaders — Maryam and Massoud Rajavi — on the chest. Of this group, few seemed to have many details about the MEK, and instead pledged vague notions of support for human rights and democracy, often even getting the name of the MEK wrong.

Some of the attendees had been bused and flown in at no personal cost, receiving transportation and in some cases lodging and meals.

One attendee who spoke with ThinkProgress, Melvin Santiago, 23, a homeless man living in shelters in Staten Island, New York, said he’d found out about the protest from a friend he’d come with. They made the trip along with about 100 other people in four rented coach buses.

“He saw [a flier] yesterday passing by the church,” said Santiago of his friend. “He usually goes there for the food pantry.”

On a day’s notice, Santiago said he hadn’t had a chance to learn too much about the MEK — he thought the group was called “Ashraff,” which is the name of the camp in Iraq where 3,400 members currently live.

Some of the other attendees knew little about the MEK’s history. The State Department designated the group in 1997 and made allegations of decades of terrorism, including against Americans when the U.S. had good relations with the Shah before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Two attendees from Arkansas, who’d come up with an Iranian friend who lives nearby, said that they suspected collusion — “hanky panky” — between the State Department and the Islamic Republic.

Others had an interest in Iran. One attendee said he lived in Iran and played professional basketball there. He said he supported human rights in Iran. He said the reverend at his church informed him about the rally, though he admitted that “to be honest, I don’t really understand what the MEK is.”

By Zaid Jilani

Download Attendees Don’t Really Understand What The MEK Is

September 7, 2011 0 comments

Lord Corbett

Iran Fanous open letter to Lord Robin Corbett

Regarding to your recent and formal interview , we would like to inform you, as a representative of English people in the oldest Parliament which is known as the symbol of democracy for more than 500 years , of some important points.

Lord Corbett ! In this interview which had been implemented and carried out by the Persian section of the BBC, without contemplating of the news broadcasting and journalism prestige, you as pmoi lobby had reversed and censored all the realities which are existing inside the pmoi organization . your interview reminds us of the interviews of some characters of the eastern part of the world.

You are saying in this interview that you do not have any desire to know anything about the internal structure and problems of pmoi! And the only thing which is important for you is that pmoi is trying its best to finish and terminate the breach of human rights which is happening in Iran! But you do not answer why is not important for you the internal problems and structure of such organization? And it is more interesting that you do not want to know or hear anything about their internal problems and structure consequently it is very questionable.
Lord Corbett , you should know that we are the people who had lived more than you inside this organization, and our question is ,do you know that what is waiting for the people who have a chance to escape and leave the pmoi organization after 10 or 20 years?

Is it important in your culture the life of the people? and how do they live?

Where have you read or heard as a supporter and advocate of the human rights that the condition for supporting of an organization or a government , is just by supporting their slogans? Is not true that the first condition for supporting an organization or a government or ……etc is to survey and scrutinize the internal relations of such organization or government? Because slogans can be fake and unreal!

While the families of the pmoi members have been waiting behind the gates of Ashraf garrison for more than a year to see their loved ones and their request has been rejected up to now by the pmoi operatives and instead they have been slandered and insulted by the pmoi operatives, how can the leaders of such organization claim the democracy and human rights in their slogans?

Lord Corbett , the essence of fact finding should be existing in any person who claims supporting and advocating for freedom ,the human rights and democracy . This essence of fact finding begets more responsibilities and double your responsibility as a member of House of Lords and House of Representatives and we believe that your first priority as a member of House of Lords should be the fact finding .

Lord Corbett , what are you going to lose if you decide to have a conversation and exchanging views with the separated members of pmoi preferably in front of media? But please listen to our request one more time which is saying that you have judged unilaterally in your interview, but we as the victims of such organization who have inherited many pains and miseries of this organization ,pmoi, and we would like to share all those experiences with you and at the end we would like to hear your respond and opinion ,as a defender of human rights and democracy ,for all those miseries and painful moments that each one of us had experienced in that organization.

According to your speech , you do not receive any money from this passer , consequently you respect to the fact finding , so if in your country and in your capital , London, is not possible to have such meeting with you ,our association , Iran Lantern( Iran Fanoos) is inviting you to have this meeting with the separated members of pmoi in Germany.
Any endeavors and transparency in advancing and deepening the democracy and the freedom slogan has its own impacts and effects.

There is no need to be worried , you are doing your best for freedom and democracy and you can continue your admirable and holy duties after all! But we should say and emphasize that in the world of communication the fact finding will come to the reality much faster and the facts will be revealed at last .

Respectfully

Iran Fanous, Germany

September 7, 2011 0 comments

USA

Why the US State Department doesn’t trust the MEK

A clearer picture of what US leaders really think of the MEK can be found in earlier assessments of the group by the US government—at a time when MEK’s connections in Western governments weren’t as extensively developed. Today the MEK propaganda efforts mentioned in this report are showing their effects.

Excerpts from 1992 report by Congressional Research Service addressed to Lee H. Hammilton, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives (1993–1995). (Note: in this report NCR=PMOI=MKO=MEK=…)

1. We want to be clear that our conclusions about the Mojahedin do not in any way imply support for the behavior of the current regime in Iran.

2. Despite Mojahedin assertions that the group has abandoned its revolutionary ideology and now favors a liberal democracy, there is no written or public record of discussion or debate about the dramatic reversals in the Mojahedin’s stated positions. Moreover, the Mojahedin’s…record of behavior does not substantiate its capability or intention to be democratic.

3. The intellectual contradictions between Shi’a Islam and Marxism… caused the Mojahedin to split in 1975. The organization broke drown into Marxist and Muslim factions. But the religious disagreement between the secular and Islamic factions of the MKO did not undermine their fundamental agreement on the issue of imperialism, nor their strategy of armed struggle against …American interests in Iran.

4. Like their dedication to armed struggle, the Mojahedin’s emphasis on propaganda reflects the influence of other revolutionaries, who sought both adherents and supporters through indoctrination, since its inception, the group has made drafting and disseminating propaganda a priority.

5. … it [MEK 1979 manifesto] recommended that Iran cancel all agreements with "racist" state of Israel.

6. The Mojahedin are known to have assassinated the following Americans in Iran during the 1970s:
Lt. Colonel Lewis L. Hawkins Killed: June 2, 1973
Air Force Colonel Paul Schaeffer Killed: May 21, 1975
Air Force Lt. Colonel Jack Turner Killed: May 21, 1975
Donald G. Smith, Rockwell International Killed: August 28, 1976
Robert R. Krongrad, Rockwell International Killed: August 28, 1976
William C. Cottrell, Rockwell International Killed: August 28, 1976.
7. The very day that 400 university students overtook the U.S. embassy, the Mojahedin issued a proclamation headlined, "After the Shah, it’s America’s turn."

8. [After release of US embassy hostages] the next issue of "Mojahed" [MEK publication] reminded readers that "the Mojahedin-e Khalq were the first force who rose unequivocally to the support of the occupation of the American spy center," and further noted that Mojahedin members spent "days and weeks," "in heat and cold," in front of the embassy in an effort to ensure that the occupied embassy was "an active and zealous anti-imperialist center." It described the release of the nostages as a "retreat" and "surrender" and warned that resumption of diplomatic relations with the United States would be "treason to the people and to the blood of our martyrs."

9. …in radio broadcasts of the "Voice of Mojahed," [circa 1990s] which are transmitted into Iran from Mojahedin bases in Iraq, the MKO has claimed responsibility for internal violence throughout Iran…A number of these self-described operations included attacks against clearly civilian targets, such as automobiles, highways, government buildings open to the public, businesses.

10. After the flight of the Mojahedin leadership from Iran in 1981, the group internationalized its propaganda to gain new adherents and attract Western supporters…Rajavi commenced a campaign of public relations that developed into the formidable Mojahedin outreach program currently operating.

11. The NCR also solicits the support of prominent public figures, and practices a determined lobbying effort among Western parliamentarians.

12. To conduct its propaganda campaign, the group has established offices throughout Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and the Middle East. These offices are responsible for coordinating the public relations effort and through their activities have established the Mojahedin as the best organized Iranian opposition group. They sponsor public demonstrations and marches. Other types of publicity measures include television programming and musical concerts that feature prominent Iranian musicians. The Mojahedin claim the audiences for these performances are indicative of MKO support.

13. The organization also transmits unsolicited faxes and mail of its publications to various U.S. government offices, including the State Department, on a regular basis.

14. The Mojahedin focus their public relations efforts on the objectionable activities of the Iranian government…After the war, the Mojahedin stepped up its campaign to publicize the Iranian regime’s dismal record on human rights.

15. Another common practice of the group is to collect statements issued by prominent individuals. Western governments, the E.U and the U.N condemning Iranian government abuses and to reissue them as a package under the Mojahedin name — although the Mojahedin are not a factor in the Western condemnations. Likewise, the Mojahedin collect Western press reports that describe objectionable behavior by the Iranian government and re-publish them in Mojahedin documents.

16. Mojahedin publications tend to mirror concurrent Western public diplomacy…Through such efforts, the Mojahedin attempt to transform Western opprobrium For the government of Iran into expressions of support for themselves.

17. "By keeping on good terms with enough journalists, they hope to transform their public image in America from terrorists to Freedom fighters." The major objective of the MKO’s public relations campaign is to posit the Mojahedin as the alternative to the current Iranian government, or in their words, the "face of Iran to be," and in so doing gain both new adherents and Western political and financial support. To achieve these objectives, they must ensure their organization and its espoused principles appeal to Western audiences and Iranian expatriates.

18. Current Mojahedin publications assert the group’s advocacy of specific guidelines for a future provisional government, including: "democracy," "peace," "love, friendship, and unity," "separation of church and state," and "recognition of private ownership and a market economy…"

19. [but] These claims present a revolutionary departure from the substantial written record of Mojahedin ideology. Examples of such reversals include the switch from revolutionary Islam to separation of church and state and from nationalization to private ownership. Yet the changes in MKO ideology occurred without any public debate, and there is no public record of discussion or review of Mojahedin principles. It is also unclear when each change in policy occurred, and what internal factors motivated each shift. The absence of dialogue about this critical issue of ideology contrasts markedly with the group’s earlier history of discourse.

20. Nor are these new claims substantiated by the record of the Mojahedin’s activities throughout… Mojahedin organizations do not follow the principles outlined in their revised propaganda. In particular, the Mojahedin have never practiced democracy within their own organization…

21. The Mojahedin’s own publications further suggest the insincerity of their ideological alteration…the Mojahedin have begun to appropriate Iranian national symbols for use in their publications. One…journal is named "The Lion and the Sun" in reference to two symbols used by the monarchy throughout Iranian history. Yet the Mojahedin worked to overthrow the Shah’s monarchy and today refuse to work with monarchist oppositionists…. Similarly, the Mojahedin have abandoned their original flag, whose symbols include a Quranic verse, sickle, and Kalashnikov, in favor of the royal flag used during the Sah’s rule.

22. The Mojahedin have also begun incorporating the "Mossadeq" name into their publications. "The Lion and Sun" journal, for example, contains report on "The Rising that Restored Mossadeq." In fact, the Mojahedin rejects the nonviolent, constitutional opposition exemplified by Mossadeq. The political party that was the heir to Mossadeq’s policies, the National Front, refused in 1981 to work with the NCR because of the Mojahedin’s revolutionary Islamic ideology. These cosmetic modifications appear to be aimed at expatriate Iranian audiences, among whom these symbols would resonate.

23. the Mojahedin’s credibility is also undermined by the fact that they deny or distort sections of their history… It is difficult to accept at face value promises of future conduct when an organization fails to acknowledge its past.

by Ari Siletz

September 6, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Who are the MKO demonstrators?

On Friday, August 26th, 2011, the streets surrounding the US State Department featured a motley crowd of protesters wearing yellow hats and t-shirts, chanting slogans, and pleading for the removal of Mujahedin Khalq (MKO/MEK) from the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The crowd was mixed in race, and top-heavy with African Americans. An unusually large number of the protesters had scruffy hair and tattered clothes. And surprisingly, only a small number were actually Iranian-Americans. As the crowd was addressed by US politicians who supported the group’s cause, oddly, many in the crowd were not aware of what exactly it was they were protesting—this is because the majority of protesters did not really *have* a cause. They were merely following the assignment of the organizers, who paid them, fed them, and lodged them so they would commit to demonstrate that day. Protestors at the scene told one reporter that the Mujahedin Khalq organizers had told them that there were at least two thousand demonstrators present that day, but the estimate seemed high. [1]

The MKO is a terrorist group and has been blacklisted by the Department of State since the list was first created in 1997. Since then the MKO has persisted with a campaign to get itself removed from that list. And this time they have stooped to new lows: hiring the needy and desperate to do their dirty work, enlisting what seems like a busload of homeless to turn out in grand numbers for a spurious representation of support. It was purely a show of spectacular exploitation—the latest and greatest example of the MKO’s multi-million dollar effort to build support among Washington political elite, according to *The Cable*. [2] And if the false demonstration wasn’t bad enough, it has been reported in *The Christian Science Monitor* and *The Huffington Post* that many of the so-called MKO advocates had been paid large amounts of speaking fees. [3][4] According to Zaid Jilani of *thinkprogress.org* the rally included well-paid speakers and also paid demonstrators “who, it is probable fair to say, know even less about the MEK than the big-money speakers” and “were bused in from as far as New York city.” [5]

The group’s purchased advocacy was also confirmed by *Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, The National Interest, and The Cable*.

Golnaz Esfandiari and Hossein Aryan of *Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty*report that “rally participants also included a number of non-Iranian-Americans. Several of them told Esfandiari and Aryan that they had little or no knowledge about the MKO.” One African-American who was asked whether he and his female companion received money to attend the rally—his companion admitted they had, but then retracted her statement at the man’s behest. [6]

Many non-Iranian rally attendees claimed that they were there in the name of Iranian human rights but were actually confused by the term MEK. Zaid Jilani writes that “of this group [of demonstrators], few seemed to have many details about the MEK, and instead pledged vague notions of support for human rights and democracy, often even getting the name of the MEK wrong.” [7] He revealed that in fact “some of the attendees had been bused and flown in at no personal cost, receiving transportation and in some cases lodging and meals.” [8]
Paul R. Pillar of *The National Interest* writes that one of the participants, a 23-year-old man from Staten Island named Melvin Santiago, said he learned about the demonstration from a friend who in turn got word of it through a flyer distributed in front of a church where the friend said that Santiago “usually goes for the food pantry”. [9]

Another attendee told Zaid Jilani that he supported human rights in Iran and he was informed about the rally at his church and admitted, “to be honest, I don’t really understand what the MEK is.” [10]

It is this latest rally that one can see the effort that the MKO has put in to changing their public persona as they push for being de-listed. According to a RAND report, the MKO are “skilled manipulators of public opinion.” [11] Paul R. Pillar, a professor, and a retired person who served over two decades in the US Intelligence Community asserts that “those who have sold their advocacy for big bucks deserve shame; those who have done so for a meal or two may be deserve our pity.” [12] What is truly appalling is that the MKO is actually a cult who abuses its own members, and now they are exploiting the public—a public who seems to have a weak moral code. Group supporters need to come forward and admit what’s going on, and the general public needs to question more deeply the legitimacy of this atrocious group, and especially those who are paid speaking fees to help the MKO.

The US needs to be aware of that the MKO’s past is beset with crimes and bloodshed. They not only have a history of terrorism against Iran, but against the US and its allies—in fact in the 1970’s, the MKO murdered several US citizens. The MKO has little support in the West, but in effect no viable support inside Iran (because they are a cult, but mostly due to their treasonous relations with Saddam Hussein). In short, US citizens, like Iranian citizens, should not trust the MKO. Pillar suggests that Hillary Clinton “should pay no heed to what Melvin Santiago and the other hungry homeless outside her office window are saying, or to what the high-paid hired guns are saying, about the MEK. Nor does she need to pay any attention to what people like me are saying about the group. She should keep the windows closed and just pay attention to the terms of the law and to what officials in the departments and agencies involved say about whether the terms of the law still apply in this case”.[13]

By Mazda Parsi

References:

[1]Jilani, Zaid, Attendees bused into MEK Rally, Some of Whom Don’t Really
Understand What the MEK Is, ThinkProgress, August 26,2011
[2]Rogin, Josh, MEK rally planned for Friday at the State Department, the Cable/ Foreign Policy, August 25, 2011
[3]Peterson, Scott ,Iranian group’s big-money push to get off US terrorist list, The Christian Science Monitor, August 8, 2011
[4]Wilkie, Christina, Mujahideen-e Khalq: Former U.S. Officials Make Millions Advocating For Terrorist Organization,The Huffingtonpost, August 9,2011
[5] Jilani, Zaid, Attendees bused into MEK Rally, Some of Whom Don’t Really
Understand What the MEK Is, ThinkProgress, August 26,2011
[6]Esfandiari, Golnaz, &Aryan, Hossein, MKO Supporters Rally To Call For
U.S. Delisting, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, August 26, 2011
[7] Jilani, Zaid, Attendees bused into MEK Rally, Some of Whom Don’t Really Understand What the MEK Is, ThinkProgress, August 26, 2011
[8]ibid
[9]R. Pillar, Paul, The Lobbying that Shouldn’t be Happening, The National Interest, august 27,2011
[10]Jilani, Zaid, Attendees bused into MEK Rally, Some of Whom Don’t Really Understand What the MEK Is, ThinkProgress, August 26,2011
[11]Goulka, Jeremiah &Hansell, Lydia &Wilke, Elizabeth &Larson, Judith, The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq; A Policy Conundrum, RAND Corporation, August 2009.
[12] R. Pillar, Paul, The Lobbying that Shouldn’t be Happening, The National Interest, August 27,2011
[13]ibid

September 5, 2011 0 comments

Maryam Rajavi

Interview with Maryam Rajavi

A few years ago, one of the producers of CBS’s 60 Minutes asked me to arrange for the networks interview with Maryam Rajavi, a leader of Iran’s Mujahidin Khalq Organization (MKO). I told him then that I thought it was not possible to do this, to which he replied, “If the interview is going to be with a non-Iranian network, the response will certainly be different.”

I then recruited the assistance of a person affiliated with the MKO. A few days later he provided me with an email address to contact. When I did, I was given a telephone number to contact, which in all honesty made me feel embarrassed for my initial assumption which was based on hear say. Subsequent events however proved me right.

When I made the first call, I was given another telephone number to call. This was repeated several times in the course of a few months that followed, until the American producer called me and said the issue was over and that there was no need to follow-up.

I concluded that 60 Minutes must have decided to call off the pursuit because of how long it had taken to arrange for the interview. He surprised me when he said that a representative of the MKO had made arrangements with the program’s senior producer and had made a condition for the interview and had written up the questions to be asked….

This was pathetic, something that still continues.

These days, as media reports on MKO’s efforts to be delisted from the US State Department’s terrorist list, reactions and responses have been published too which speak of a contradiction of this possibility with supporting the Iranian drive and movement for freedom and rights. So as a journalist, I once again see it as my duty to request for an interview with Maryam Rajavi to get responses to some basic questions. Here are some:

• In the first years of the 1979 revolution, young members of the MKO had instructions not to engage with members and affiliates of other political groups. Was this true and is there a similar policy today?

• If delisted, does the MKO plan to change its structure and make it similar to other political organizations and be subject to the regulations governing such parties?

• Does the MKO see itself responsible to respond to questions such as its cooperation with Saddam Hossein in attacking and invading Iran?

• Under what strategy and goal were inexperienced youth asked to respond to the Mersad Operation inside Iran?

• Is internal criticism allowed within MKO and can it be reflected outside the organization?

• Is it true that some MKO members have left the organization on the basis of such instructions by the group to take up the responsibility of attacking other opponents of the Islamic republic?

• On what perspective does the MKO pursue the policy of attacking Khatami (carried out since 1997) and Mousavi and Karoubi (since 2009) while at the same time claiming to be supporting the Green Movement?

And finally,

• From where does the belief “Stay away from the Mujahidin, they are dangerous” come? Is there a consequence on criticizing the MKO? Even asking questions?

As a journalist, I would like to have answers to these questions. Others however tell me otherwise.

– Don’t write, they are dangerous. Instead of a response, you and your family will be attacked with insults. You will be presented as an agent.

They tell me:

– When a young web blogger wrote a few lines in criticism of Mrs. Rajavi, he was attacked in such a manner that his mother, herself a former member of the MKO in Tehran, warned him to stay away from the group as its members were “notorious.”

There is more they tell me.

Yet, I have written my questions to Mrs. Rajavi to see whether we all change in time or …

By Nooshabeh Amiri, Roos online

September 5, 2011 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts