Page 632 – Nejat Society

MKO Has No Base Amongst Iranians

As President Ahmadinejad addressed the UN’s General Assembly in September, New York witnessed a bizarre atmosphere of MKO protestors. The protestors ran a high budget rally, and were addressed by some right wing political figures including Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of New York, and John Bolton, a former US ambassador to the UN and a promoter of a second war project against Iran. [1] The protest also included a fresh faced 22-year old speaker, Sahand Khoshbaten, who calls himself a “human rights activist,” and “Iranian freedom fighter.” No Iranian would agree with the MKO’s motto

Khoshbaten organizes the “No to Ahmadinejad Committee,” a group which sends protestors to push for human rights when the President of Iran appears at the UN. But during the protest speeches it is clear that Khoshbaten is really a messenger from the terrorist cult, Mujahedin eh Khalq Organization. What many Americans don’t know is that the MKO, has no base among Iranians. And it should have no base among the few Americans supporting them anyway because the MKO committed murderous acts of terror against Americans, and are currently listed on the US Department of State Foreign Terrorist Organization List, a fact that most Americans don’t know. This rally was using human rights as a guise to target sentimental Americans—Iranian-born or not.

Cyrus Safdari of *Iran Affairs* suggests the irony that comes out of such American support for a terrorist designated organization like the MKO. He reminds us of a controversial fact that "of various bullshit reasons given for the US invasion of Iraq, the US accused Saddam of aiding foreign terrorist organizations. But the only organization they could tie him to was …..wait for it ….the MEK!"[2]. In another article published by *Newsweek *which highlights Safdari’s punch line, former Clinton administration official Martin Indyk, who served as assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs in 1997, said that “one of the reasons the group was put on the terrorism list in the first place was part of a ‘two-pronged’ strategy that included ratcheting up pressure on Saddam. Like the Bush White House, the Clinton administration was eager to highlight Iraqi ties to terrorism and had collected extensive evidence of Saddam providing logistical support to the MKO in the aftermath of the Iran-Iraq War. (The MKO’s headquarters are located on a heavily guarded street in central Baghdad.) But the United States could find no other hard evidence linking Saddam to terror groups, Indyk said. ‘That was about all we had on [Saddam] when it came to terrorism,’ Indyk told *Newsweek*.” [3]

Even with some American support and Iranian-American support, the MKO is simply not a viable alternative to the current regime. No Iranian would agree with the MKO’s motto that they are “The Voice of Change for a New Iran.” Which Iran is the MKO referring to? The one that has few, if any, supporters? The one full of MKO defectors? One MKO defector, Mr. Dashtestani, who now lives back in his home country of Iran, recently escaped Camp Ashraf, the MKO headquarters, which members operated out of in the war against their home country. Dashtestani explained about the control the MKO cult group has over its members. He recalls, "During the past six months I travelled through half of Iranian territory, [and] I was never asked a question, but in Camp Ashraf if you want to go outside you have to ask at least three people."[4]

The US State Department report on the MKO in 1994 is a clear guideline to those who hesitate about the legitimacy of the group in both Iran and the United States:

"Exploiting Western opprobrium of the behavior of the current government of Iran, the Mojahedin posit themselves as the alternative. To achieve that goal they claim they have the support of a majority of Iranians. This claim is much disputed by academics and other specialists on Iran, who assert that in fact the Mojahedin –e- Khalq have little support among Iranians. They argue that the Mojahedin’s activities since the group’s leadership fled from Iran in 1981 particularly their alliance with Iraq and the group’s internal oppression have discredited them among the Iranian polity." [5]

Patrick Disney of *Foreign Policy* pushes a more sensational description of the MKO—a description that might hit home with Americans who seek to understand just who the MKO are. Disney asserts that "the MEK organization has literally zero support among the Iranian people.

The closest thing to how Iranians feel about the MEK is how Americans feel about Al-Qaeda. It’s not even a subject of debate. Which is why it’s bizarre that members of congress would want to lend US credibility to such an organization."[6]

Mahan Abedin, Director of Research at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism, believes that "both sides in the US debate readily admit the Mojahedin’s isolation both in Iran and amongst the Iranian Diaspora in the West is not fully appreciated.” Abedin contends that this isolation is originated from two reasons, the group’s alliance with Saddam Hussein and its communist philosophy. He writes that, "The organization’s radical and near-communist origins have always alienated large swathes of Iran’s modern middle and upper classes. The MKO’s alliance with Iraq’s former Baathist regime during the Iran-Iraq war was a huge strategic blunder from which they could never hope to recover. The sight of MKO forces aiding the Iraqi turned them into perennial traitors in the eyes of Iranians. This perception of the Mujahedin still persists, more than 15 years after the ending of the war". [7] It seems ridiculous to count on an opposition group with unsubstantiated support among Iranians living in Iran. Western sponsors such as John Bolton, and Rudi Giuliani are on the wrong track by supporting the MKO—who because of their terrorist label, and because they know they have almost no support amongst Iranians—consistently hide behind front organizations such as Khoshbaten’s “No to Ahmadinejad Committee.”

Who are these American supporters who think they know what is best for Iran? By allowing and supporting a known terrorist group (and its front groups) to protest in front of the UN, the Americans are simply perpetuating hypocrisy and bad relations between the two countries. Perhaps the Americans have forgotten the last time they went against the hearts and minds of Iranians when the CIA carried out a coup d’état in 1953 and placed the unpopular Shah in power, only to have it blow back with hatred and distrust towards American foreign policy in the region. Iranians have not forgotten, and Iranians don’t want the MKO. Americans need to know that.

References:

[1] Anti-Ahmadinejad demonstration in New York addressed by dignitaries." *CNN
ireport* 27 September 2010: Web. 1 Nov 2010. <
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-496415?ref=feeds%2Flatest>.
[2] Disney, Patrick. "Disney on the MEK-MKO-PMOI-NCRI-whatever." *Iran
Affairs* (24 September 2010): Web. 1 Nov 2010. <
http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2010/09/
disney-on-the-mek-mko-pmoi-ncri-whatever-.html>.
[3] Iskoff, Michael. "Ashcroft’s Baghdad Connection." *Newsweek* 26
September 2002:. Web. 1 Nov 2010. <
http://www.newsweek.com/2002/09/25/ashcroft-s-baghdad-connection.html>.
[4] Dashtestani, Mahmoud. *Nejat Society*. Interview by Habilian
Association. 09 October 2010. Web. 1 Nov 2010. <
https://www.nejatngo.org/en/posts/3309>.
[5]Katzman, Kenneth. US State Department Report, Library of Congress.
Congressional Research Service. The People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran.
Washington, Nov 1992. Doc. call no.: M-U 42953-1 no.92-824F as posted on the
Iran-interlink.org website:
http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/child%20pages/USstatedept.htm
See also: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
website: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/4ac9c2c52.pdf.
See also: CORI (Country of Origin Research and Information) website:
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/4ac9c2c52.pdf
[6] Disney, Patrick. "The Middle East Channel." *Foreign Policy*. The Slate
Group, 22 September 2010. Web. 1 Nov 2010. <
http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/22/
congressional_backers_look_to_exiled_iranian_group_for_regime_change
[7] Abedin, Mahan. “Mojahedin-e-Khalq: Saddam’s Iranian Allies”
Terrorism Monitor. The Jamestown Foundation, 05 May 2005. Web. 1 Nov 2010. <
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=433>.

By Mazda Parsi

November 4, 2010 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Iran to Pursue Expulsion of MKO after Formation of Iraqi Gov’t

Iran announced on Tuesday that it will pursue expulsion of the anti-Iran terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) from Iraq once Baghdad sees its new government in power.

"We hope that after the popular government is formed and established in Iraq, it will put the issue of Monafeqin (hypocrites as they are called in Iran) on its agenda and consider it as a serious issue and take serious action on its case," Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said at his weekly press conference here in Tehran today.
"Neither our people nor the Iraqi people and government can bear the existence of this terrorist grouplet," Mehman-Parast added.

He also reiterated that the MKO and its presence in Iran’s neighboring country is among the main agendas of the Iranian foreign ministry, and added Iran’s diplomatic apparatus is doing its best to put an end to the terrorist group’s presence in the neighboring Iraq.

The MKO has been in Iraq’s Northern Diyala province since the 1980s.

Iraq’s security forces took control of Camp Ashraf and detained dozens of the members of the terrorist group last year. The Iraqi authority also changed the name of the military center from Camp Ashraf to the Camp of New Iraq.

The MKO, whose main stronghold is in Iraq, is blacklisted by much of the international community, including the United States.

Before an overture by the EU, the MKO was on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. Yet, the MKO puppet leader, Maryam Rajavi, who has residency in France, regularly visited Brussels and despite the ban enjoyed full freedom in Europe.

Some other ranking members of the MKO who have had a role in the assassination of a large number of Iranian citizens and officials are currently living in France.

The group started assassination of Iranian citizens and officials after the Islamic Revolution in a bid to take control of the newly established Islamic Republic. It killed several of Iran’s new leaders in the early years after the Revolution, including the then President, Mohammad Ali Rajayee, Prime Minister, Mohammad Javad Bahonar and the Judiciary Chief, Mohammad Hossein Beheshti who were killed in bomb attacks by MKO members in 1981.

The group fled to Iraq in 1986, where it was protected by Saddam Hussein and where it helped the Iraqi dictator suppress Shiite and Kurd uprisings in the country.

The terrorist group joined Saddam’s army during the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988) and helped Saddam and killed thousands of Iranian civilians and soldiers during the US-backed Iraqi imposed war on Iran.

Since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, the group has been strongly backed by neo-conservatives in the United States, who also argued for the MKO to be taken off the US terror list, but of course to no avail.

Many of the MKO members have abandoned the terrorist organization while most of those still remaining in the camp are said to be willing to quit but are under pressure and torture not to do so.

A May 2005 Human Rights Watch report accused the MKO of running prison camps in Iraq and committing human rights violations.

According to the Human Rights Watch report, the outlawed group puts defectors under torture and jail terms.

Numerous articles and letters posted on the Internet by family members of MKO recruits confirm reports of the horrific abuse that the group inflicts on its own members and the alluring recruitment methods it uses.

November 3, 2010 0 comments

Iraq

Baghdad will host the Black Plague Exhibition

For the first time Baghdad will host the Black Plague Exhibition on November 2, 2010.

A number of members of the House of Representatives and political figures as well as national organizations will attend the Conference and exhibition.

This is a photographic exhibition exposing the crimes and practices of the Mojahedin-e- Khalq Organization in the province of Diyala ,Iraq.

The exhibition comprises 100 large colour photographs (100 × 70) cm.

It is worth mentioning that the exhibition held in Diyala Province on September 2010 and was attended by several members of the House of Representatives, local government officials of Diyala province along with Senate members, academic figures, the media and managers of departments in the district of Khalis as well as Tribes leaders.

November 1, 2010 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Pictorial – MKO former members meet with authorities of Amnesty International

A delegation of MKO former members met with authorities of Amnesty International. During the meeting they described and clarified the situation of picketing families of Rajavis’ Cult hostages at Camp New Iraq (formerly Ashraf ) as well as the condition and situation of captive members of the MKO Cult. They also declared the families’ rightful demands of visiting with their loved ones. They asked the Amnesty international to intervene and force the MKO aka PMOI/MEK/MKO leadership to allow those families to see and meet their loved ones.

A letter also presented to the Amnesty International

MKO former members meet with authorities of Amnesty International

November 1, 2010 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Pictorial- Mr. Dashtestani seperated MKO Cult and joined his family

Dashtestani was a 16-year old teenager when he was captured by Iraqi forces in his way from Abadan to Mahshahr [two towns in SouthWestern part of Iran where Iraq invaded in 1979].in 1988 after ten years of imprisonment in Iraqi prisons when Mujahedin offered him help return to Iran ,he admitted their offer.

He was deceived by MKO due to two reasons .First because he was not informed enough and second was MKO’s dirty recruitment tactics and the mind control system that enhanced and abused that lack of information.

Mr. Mahmoud Dashtestani succeeded to release himself from the bars of Rajavis’ Cult and returned to his homeland and joined his family.

On Monday, January 18, 2010, Nejat Society Shiraz Branch proudly received another defector of Rajavi’s destructive cult.

Mr. Dashtestani seperated MKO Cult and joined his family

November 1, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization members' families

MKO hostages’ Families on Their Ninth Month of Picketing

The Records:
After Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship, the main sponsor of Massoud Rajavi was toppled, a ray of hope lit the hearts of the families of the members of MKO (Rajavi cult). They thought that with Saddam Hussein removed from power in Iraq, the gates of Ashraf garrison would be open to the families and they would be able to see their loved ones after many years of waiting.

This hope soon faded when after a short time the American Forces took the place of Saddam Hussein for the Rajavi cult and gave the cult leaders an open hand to create the same circumstances for their followers. The report published by the American institute RAND for the Defense Department fully exposes the support of some American commanders for the cult’s leaders to be able to keep their followers imprisoned inside Ashraf garrison.

Since the conditions for travelling to Iraq became easier, many suffering families of the members of the destructive, terrorist cult (MKO), from various parts of the world and in different timings, approached Ashraf gates in Iraq and tried their chance to see their loved ones. Some visited several times through the years and got no results.
During this time the families who were attending outside Ashraf gate either returned empty handed or the cult leaders would make the particular member insult the family and complain why they have become the agent of the Iranian regime and why they intend to destroy Ashraf?!

Family Sit-in Starts:
In February 2009 some families of the trapped members of the Rajavi cult, as in previous times during the past few years, approached Ashraf gate and demanded visits with their relatives. The immoral attitude of cult officials and even attempting to beat up the families created great concern in them for the fate of their relatives. Some decided to form a picket line along the main entrance of Ashraf garrison and they announced that they would not be moved until they see their loved ones. Later more families joined them and gradually a movement preceded which has continued until now.

Many hardships such as expiring visas and limitations that the Iraqi government and U.S. forces imposed on the families made life for the families very tough – so that Massoud Rajavi said that the families would not stand for more than 20 days.

Since the families’ move to the front of Ashraf gate was spontaneous and without any previous planning, no precise date was recorded for its start. Regarding the residential hardship, some families returned to Iran but more families took their place and continued the picketing.

The New Round of Sahar Activities:
In June 2010, that is after 4 months had passed, the families’ move created increased motivation amongst the human rights activists in Europe and America, in particular amongst the former members of the MKO who were active in trying to help their former colleagues. This ended in the formation of a seminar in Paris on 19 June 2010. In this seminar Ms. Batul Soltani, a former member of the MKO leadership council and a founder of SFF who is residing in Europe now had a telephone conversation with Ms. Sorayya Abdullahi, a suffering mother of a captive member inside Ashraf garrison and the representative of picketing families. This dialogue was heard by the audience on both sides of the line. This seminar became a milestone for the activities round the demand of the families in Iraq, Europe and America.

The public activities of SFF declined a little since it has been more involved in legal activities on behalf of former members’ complains against the MKO in the Iraqi courts as well as having some officials moving to Europe. It must be said too that we were caught by surprise by the families’ action. But after this seminar and with the new form of Sahar website, our activities found a new pace with regards of informing the public about the families.

From the beginning, the families stationed outside Ashraf garrison approached the MKO officials and demanded to see their relatives, but every time they faced a humiliating attitude. The families decided initially to not seek any publicity over the issue in order to raise their chances of seeing their cherished ones. But the cult leaders started a political confrontation against the families by insulting them and threatening them and also accusing them.

The cult leaders clearly proved that they do not understand logic and they must be forced to respect other people’s rights as well as their own members’ rights by the public opinion and international organizations. Rajavi showed everyone that he finds himself right on all grounds and has no respect for other people’s ideas and emotions. He acts according to his cultic reactionary ideas and ruthlessly makes an old mother suffer and does not recognize any human rights.

Sized members flee from Ashraf:
During the past year, that is since the Iraqi police force managed to establish posts inside the entrances of the Ashraf cult garrison, a substantial number of members attempted to escape from the camp. These members, some of whom have been held captive inside the garrison for more than a quarter of a century, have had a bitter experience. They have no idea about modern science and technology and do not know anything about the outside world. Worse than all, they were in a critical mental situation after so many years of brainwashing and mind manipulation. They were afraid of anyone outside the cult and considered everything out there to be satanic and corrupt. Some of them were even afraid to give their names and they used to think that they are still under the influence of the cult. Some, even one year after leaving Ashraf, still have nightmares about there. But they are all content that they are out now and they only worry about their former colleagues who are still there.

Some of those who attempted to escape did so with the assumption that they might be tortured and then executed either by the Iraqis or by the Iranians. Some after spending one year in a hotel in Baghdad are still not ready to have their names published and do not wish to contact their families. Some say, in particular the women, that they do not have the nerve to see their relatives.

This applies to the families who are picketing outside the Ashraf garrison too. They do not wish to be photographed or for their names to be published. They clearly say that they do not want anyone to know that their relatives – who everyone thought had been missing in the war or has been martyred – have actually been helping Rajavi and Saddam Hussein.
What must be done?

On the one hand the issue of the MKO is a national security problem for the Iraqi government. As they say, this difficulty is a heritage from Saddam Hussein for the people of Iraq. The Iraqis want them out of their country but so far they have not been able to remove them. On the other hand this cult could be used by the U.S. or Israel against Iran. At least some elements in the west think that they might be useful as they are ready to use terrorists on the borders of Iran, so they try to preserve the cultic relationship and keep the members captive inside the garrison. But as far as the families are concerned they only have a legitimate humanitarian demand.

The families have every right to have free access to their relatives inside the garrison which is approved by all international regulations. If we consider the inhabitants of Ashraf as prisoners, still they have the right of free contact with their next of kin.

Apparently these families have no one but God to help them. No one can expect anything from the governments of the US, Iraq, Iran or etc. It is clear that international organizations such as the UN or ICRC have, for some reason, turned their back to this humanitarian problem and have closed their eyes. The families of course have created an extensive example of resistance with their bare hands which moves every human being. At least the families have prevented more people falling into the trap of the Rajavi cult. Rajavi has used the US soldiers to put pressure on the families who have come from very long distances just for a family visit. Rajavi of course has stopped investing in the Iranian people for his goal to reach to power in Iran and tries hard to attract support from the US and from Israel.

Those who really understand the situation of the families are the ones who also have someone in Ashraf garrison. The families and the former members whose relatives or friends are held captive there and have no way out, understand well that a tragic cultic ending the same as the cults of Jim Jones and David Koresh, or becoming like gladiators in modern slavery who must kill until they get killed, could threaten their loved ones.

In whatever county that you are, anywhere that you work and live, any thoughts or ideas that you have, any political stances that you might hold, it is necessary to let the world know about this human rights issue and act in any way you can. Rajavi and his international backers must be put under the pressure of public opinion. He is not prepared to recognize the rights of the families and his own followers and under the present political circumstances does whatever he desires.

We in the SFF who are facing the problem directly know that we have not done enough and we had to do much more than this. We do need help from those who understand our situation. Please don’t let the resistance of the families not reach the desired results. The sit-in by the families is a humanitarian move. Let’s share their cause by helping them.
Please let us know your opinion.

October 30, 2010 0 comments

Nejat Publications

Pars Brief – Issue No.55

1. Black Plague – Photos expose the MEK organized crime in Diyala

2. Mr. Einakian;another MKO Cult defector escaped Camp Ashraf

3. U.S. Official Casts Doubt On Iran Opposition Group’s Nuclear Claim

4. Mojahedin Khalq holds penitent members hostage

5. State Department amused by MKO so called Revelations

6. Ashraf Resident Escape from the Cult

7. Iraq ‘urged to fire MKO members’

8. MKO Remains in US Blacklist

9. Israel’s Secret Relationship with MKO

Download Pars Brief – Issue No.55
Download Pars Brief – Issue No.55

October 28, 2010 0 comments

Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

The disarmament and consequences for Rajavi’s Cult

The disarmament of MKO forces by coalition forces in Iraqi Freedom Operation was one of the most problematic phases in the organization’s history.

After the fall of Saddam Hussein and the arrival of US military to Ashraf garrison, MKO leaders Mahmoud Dashtestani - MKO former member made significant changes in their policy in order to maintain their garrison. To be able to prolong their stay in Iraq, they shifted their agenda to get close to "Enemy", because they needed to maintain Ashraf at any cost even the cost of violating the principals of the organization! The only way left to keep Ashraf was to get along with the American’s policy. MKO was classified as a foreign terrorist group so admitting the relationship with MKO by US was seriously doubted.

Although Iraqi people seriously opposed the existence of MKO in their territory, neither MKO nor US paid attention to them.

The huge turn in MKO’s policy regarding US was not acceptable to a large number of ranks who were not aware of the group’s equations with the world. The leaders of the group thought of making some excuses to repair the minds of those who had hesitated to obey the new policies, so they started holding daily political meetings. During the meetings they had to answer a lot of questions crossed members’ minds like:"what does an army without arm mean?" "Why don’t we give up?" "What are we hopeful for?" or "You said and you are still saying that struggling without arm is meaningless, so what happened to those slogans?" and etc.

Meanwhile, the argument on "family" was brought about. The leaders were sure that if the notion of family had been revived in the minds of members, they could have no longer stayed in the camp. This fact terrified the leaders who had to encounters various problems in the camp.

Thus the disarmament of Mujahedin Khalq Organization became the key factor to break the spell of the members’ minds. They started thinking about their past and future which seemed catastrophic to the leaders. It was just like an enzyme called family that affects all political, strategic and organizational lines in MKO. Eight years past that time, the leaders of cult are still incapable of controlling those minds that are seeking family and future.

Today the families who are on strike at Ashraf gates are not allowed to visit their children but their presence is like an encouragement for Ashraf captives who see them near to themselves. They see a number of people thinking of them. They find out that family and love are not dead, although Rajavi wants to kill them.

The Rajavis may be able to penetrate Iraqi political parties and members of its parliament; they may succeed in buying the votes of Iraqi tribe leaders spending large amounts; they may be able to destabilize the political scene of Iraq in their own favor by working with US intelligence, to maintain Ashraf Garrison for a few more days but they never succeed to bar members’ emotions and love. A day will come when the emotions will be so powerful that will cope with the whole money and deception the Rajavis spend. That day is not far away.

The disarmament was the turning point that made the members think of the outside world. They thought of the life they had wasted in MKO. They thought of the trap they had been taken in.

If they are defenders of human right, why they keep elderly parents and young children out of the camp and prevent them from visiting their loved ones?

I remember they told us:"we delivered the arms to take care of the arm owners" but I know the fact was something else. Rajavi never concerns about the lives of people. The fact was that Rajavi knew that his absolute power over his organization system would disappear if he didn’t deliver the arms. He didn’t think of his ranks at all. He just chanted these slogans to deceive our minds, the minds of me and my comrades who used to adore him but his lies worked for only two years then everything broke down in our minds…

By: Mahmoud Dashtestani – MKO former member

October 28, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Lord Corbett deceives House of Lords over MKO in Camp Ashraf

Below is the text of a House of Lords debate on Camp Ashraf tabled by Lord Corbett of Castle Vale on 25 October 2010.

Lord Corbett has been the MEK’s chief advocate in the Houses of Parliament for nearly three decades. If a politician does not receive financial or other incentives to support a dangerous, Robin Corbett, promoted terrorism in Iraq for the past 25 years!! destructive mind control cult which has been designated as a terrorist entity in the USA since 1997, the only other reasonable explanation is that they have succumbed to the influence of the cult and been subjected to the same mind control techniques which have enslaved the members of the MEK.

Either way, Lord Corbett’s continued insistence on calling a debate based on an entirely false premise – that the MEK at Camp Ashraf are somehow victims of threatened Iraqi violence – displays a wicked culpability in prolonging the genuine suffering of the residents of Camp Ashraf.

No one directly involved in the situation at Camp Ashraf has any doubt about the facts. Massoud Rajavi, leader of the MEK (aka MKO,NCRI, Rajavi cult, NLS etc.) is holding the 3500+ MEK members as hostages to protect his own future. They are prevented from leaving the cult both by physical barriers – barbed wire fences, beatings and incarceration – and by debilitating psychological manipulation which leaves them believing that they will be killed if they leave the camp.
An indication of the real condition of MEK members inside Camp Ashraf comes from the testimonies of recent escapees – people who simply ran to the Iraqi checkpoints and begged to be taken away. They each admitted that they believed the Iraqis would kill them once they escaped, but that this was actually preferable to remaining even one more day in the desperately inhuman conditions of the cult.

Members of the cult who have serious and sometimes life-threatening illnesses are not able to travel to the specialist hospitals of Baghdad. The Iraqi authorities have repeatedly offered to move them, but the cult leaders refuse to allow them to leave the camp.

Since 2003, successive Iraqi governments have demanded that the MEK leave Iraq because it is a foreign terrorist group which was part of Saddam Hussein’s repressive apparatus and is responsible for the deaths of over 25,000 Iraqi civilians. (The MEK has never had refugee status in Iraq and its illegally designated protected persons’ status under the Fourth Geneva Convention lapsed in 2006)

In 2008, the MEK was removed from the UK list of terrorist entities. In 2009, the MEK was removed from the EU list of terrorist entities. Since then, the Government of Iraq has repeatedly made reasonable representations to the governments of the countries involved to put their weasel words of concern into practice and accept the MEK individuals from Camp Ashraf as refugees in their countries – especially those who already have residence rights in those countries.

Yes, the British embassy in Baghdad must continue to visit Camp Ashraf. This is because there are several Iranian born British citizens and former refugees living there who remain trapped and unable to leave. The British embassy has a duty to try to help these individuals in whatever way it can; so too the ambassadorial representatives of other countries whose citizens are trapped in the camp.

Lord Corbett knows better than anyone the position of the Government of Iraq toward the MEK. He knows that they are slowly but surely dismantling this dangerous destructive cult in ways that preserve and protect the lives of the residents. He knows that Rajavi has threatened a Jonestown-style mass suicide if anyone tries to challenge his control of the group. Witnesses to the self-immolations of June 2003 in London and Paris can be in no doubt about the veracity of this threat.

It is therefore incumbent on western politicians to acknowledge their ignorance and to dispel the clouds of misinformation disseminated by the cult’s known advocates and discover the real horrors at Camp Ashraf – that the residents are denied every basic human right by their leaders. It is this fact which deserves their time and attention, not a debate based on lies and deception.

Anne Singleton, Middle East Strategy Consultants Ltd.
Text:

[ Iraq: Camp Ashraf — Question
House of Lords debates, 25 October 2010, 2:44 pm
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2010-10-25a.1029.0&s=ashraf#g1031.4

Tabled By Lord Corbett of Castle Vale
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to Iraq regarding its undertakings to ensure the safety and security of Iranian refugees at Camp Ashraf.

Lord Archer of Sandwell (Labour)
In the absence of my noble friend Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, and at his request, I beg leave to ask the Question in his name on the Order Paper.

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
My Lords, we have discussed the situation at Camp Ashraf with the Iraqi Prime Minister, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, the Iraqi Human Rights Minister, the Iraqi Minister of Internal Affairs and the Iraqi Government’s Ashraf committee. The United Kingdom has underlined the need for the Iraqi authorities to deal with the residents of Camp Ashraf in a way that meets international humanitarian standards. Officials from the British embassy in Baghdad have visited Camp Ashraf four times in the past year and remain in contact with the United Nations Assistance Mission and the United States. We continue to follow developments.

Lord Archer of Sandwell (Labour)
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that account of energetic activity, but does he agree that, since the occupying forces of the Americans and British delivered the residents of Ashraf to the mercies of the Iraqi military, they retain some obligation for their welfare and protection from repeated murderous attacks and the interruption of food and medical supplies? Does he agree that, if we could discharge an obligation simply by saying that we had transferred it to someone else, we could all get rid of our debts instantly and painlessly? Do the Government agree that they retain a responsibility to protect?

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
We certainly retain a humanitarian concern, but we have to remember, as I am sure the noble and learned Lord will be the first to recognise, that Iraq is now a sovereign state with its own responsibilities and it is within the Iraqi sovereign concern to address this matter in the proper way. That does not mean that we will ignore it. As I indicated, we have constant contact with the Iraqi Government; the United Nations Assistance Mission visits the site once a week, although for the moment it has removed its continuous monitoring; and there is international pressure. However, the facts are the facts: Iraq is a sovereign country now and it lies within that country’s sovereign area to address the problem and solve it in a sensible way.

Lord Waddington (Conservative)
Does my noble friend not agree that even if the residents in Ashraf are, as some argue, no longer entitled to protection under the fourth Geneva convention, we as partners of America in the Iraqi war have a clear moral responsibility to try to stop any violence or intimidation of the people in Ashraf? I am grateful for what he has said about the representations that have already been made, but perhaps the time has come when we should be urging a permanent UN presence in Ashraf until things are really sorted out there.

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
I recognise my noble friend’s continuous concern on this issue. It is the concern of all of us that we do not want to see suffering, violence or worse. However, as has been acknowledged by the United Nations, the people of Camp Ashraf do not have refugee status under the fourth Geneva convention, nor are they prisoners of war under any other part of the Geneva convention. Our concern must be the concern of any civilised nation-that this matter can be handled properly. The UN does not find the idea of a permanent military force there acceptable but, as I said, it is keeping the matter under constant monitoring and we shall continue to press it strongly.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean (Labour)
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that, irrespective of our legal obligations, we have an enduring obligation to the people in Camp Ashraf, as the noble Lord, Lord Waddington, indicated? After all, we do not hand anyone over to any sovereign power if we think that they would be tortured or in any other way mistreated. Does the Minister believe that there is any truth in the allegations that United States officials are not allowed into Camp Ashraf for inspections? I am pleased to hear that our officials have been allowed in, but will he assure us that they will continue to visit the camp? Is there any hope that in the future there will be UN inspectors in Camp Ashraf, as the noble Lord, Lord Waddington, rightly requested?

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
I can give hopes and intentions rather than assurances because, as the noble Baroness knows well from her own experience, this is a difficult area. Obviously, we intend to continue having access and monitoring. We intend to continue pressing the UN, which appears to be ready to visit and maintain a close eye on the situation. The overall pattern, however, is governed by the fact that this is Iraqi sovereign territory and Iraq is a sovereign state, although the Iraqis will be watched carefully by the world and will be expected to police and manage this matter in a civilised way.

Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne (Liberal Democrat)
Does the Minister agree that, since the residents of Camp Ashraf have no refugee status, they are in fact there by choice? Is it not ironic that no member state of the European Union, including the UK, or North America will accept these residents of Camp Ashraf because of the activities of some of them in earlier times? Is it not therefore time for us to move on and leave this issue to the sovereign nation of Iraq?

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
My noble friend speaks on this matter with a great deal of wisdom and experience. She is right that there is some baggage from the past to carry, which makes it additionally difficult to deal with the status of these people. Nevertheless, having been involved in Iraq for many years, until it restored its full sovereignty, we have a moral concern and must keep the issue alive. I am very grateful that noble Lords keep raising it. We do not want to see it deteriorate into hideous bloodshed in the future.

Lord Clarke of Hampstead (Labour)
My Lords, we will all be pleased to hear about the activities that the Government are pursuing through the various bodies that are in control of Iraq, but when we talk about the normal procedures for these things, there is something that we must bear in mind. Does the Minister agree that we should pay tribute to those people-the women-who stood up to the chains with which they were being beaten when the Iraqi people went into the camp? Does he agree that these people deserve more than words? There should be good, sound advice from this House about what goes on when young people are beaten up there. As I have seen on the DVD, chains are being used to hit women who are protesting. Will the Minister, who I know is doing the best that he can, now go to the United Nations and say, "Normal procedures are one thing, but let’s get on and get these people some security"?

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
The noble Lord is right: all such methods and activities, where they take place, should be deeply deplored. These are not the kind of things that we expect to see in the modern Iraq, which is trying to take its place in the world and the comity of nations as a responsible power. We should never cease to put pressure on Iraq to maintain the highest possible standards and we should not cease to deplore anything of the kind that the noble Lord has described.

Lord Desai (Labour)
My Lords, am I right in thinking that, if these people were in the UK, we would not send them to Iraq, knowing full well that they would be tortured?

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
That is a hypothesis with which I would have to agree if that were so but, unfortunately, it is not. We are dealing with a much more complex situation, with Iraq seeking to get a new Government and to be a sovereign power. […]

Lord Dholakia (Liberal Democrat)
My Lords, one area of concern is the treatment of residents in Camp Ashraf, particularly those who suffer from cancer et cetera. They have no or very restricted access to hospitals in Baghdad. Will the Minister consider, on humanitarian grounds, ensuring that the United Nations Assisted Mission in Iraq is able to assist in such cases?

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
Yes, I am assured-I have checked this carefully-that all basic and medical supplies are getting in. There is a hospital facility in the camp. Although some items-bicycles and beds, oddly enough-have been prevented from entering the camp, all basic material and food supplies, and the basic essentials of life, are getting into the camp and will continue to do so. The UN is very concerned to see that this situation is maintained.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton (Labour)
My Lords, can the Minister assure us that visits on behalf of Britain are unannounced and that there is an insistence on meeting people without security guards being present? We all know that there is a danger that a prepared route is available and that prisoners are often too frightened to speak out.

Lord Howell of Guildford (Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Conservative)
I have not had any clear information about there being a difficulty on that front so far. The visits have been regular and occasionally irregular and therefore unannounced and unplanned for. I do not think that there has been any difficulty, but I will watch out for that carefully in the future to see that these are genuine visits, where evidence is presented and not covered up. ]

October 27, 2010 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts