Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Protest over UK de-proscription of MEK

Following the de-proscription of MEK from the UK’s terrorist list and open support of that country for MEK terrorists, more than 10 thousands citizens of Shiraz signed a letter for British Embassy, Tehran. The text of the statement includes:

British Embassy – Tehran

The Terrorist Hypocrites group (Muajhedin Khalq) was removed from the list of terrorist organizations by British government although it has had a long history of a thousand crimes, treasons, terrors ,assassinations and cooperation with the enemy of Iran during the “ Imposed War” ,spying and even torture against its own members forcing them to commit suicide operations and self – immolation …

It is obvious that the traitor leaders of the terrorist cult are the main criminals who killed the best educated people of Iran and also the innocent civilians, declaring the armed struggle.

These traitor mercenaries who were Saddam Hussein’s accomplice during the eight years of Iran – Iraq war, launched dozens of operations along Iran- Iraq borders killing hundreds of our countrymen with the weapons donated by the enemy.

The criminal grouplet of hypocrites plans and operates suicide operations and self-immolations causing its own members to be killed. They also torture the dissidents physically and mentally. They even have no pity for their old mercenaries.

The terrorist are removed from the list and the British parliament members have become their spokesmen but the terrorists still maintain the strategy of armed struggle in their agenda and cry the slogan of “war against war” everyday, keeping the organization of their army in Iraq.

The below –named signatories who have witnessed the terrorist acts of MKO and bloodshed against our compatriots for three decades, announce our betrayal against the anti- human and illegal decision made by the British Government that de-proscribed the notorious cult of Rajavi and condemn this decision since it violates the international laws.

We are sure that the group that has done a thousand crimes against people (those same people’s of Muajhedin of Iran) in its black file. It has no sympathy for its own members or supporters. It will become a trouble for you someday.

The act done by your government will have no influence on Iranians’ will. The terrorists have no place in our country . De-proscription of the group by British government added another black page to the long history of hostility against Iranians.

   

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The lies of Hiroshima live on

The lies of Hiroshima live on, props in the war crimes of the 20th century

the lies of Hiroshima live onThe 1945 attack was murder on an epic scale. In its victims’ names, we must not allow a nuclear repeat in the Middle East

When I first went to Hiroshima in 1967, the shadow on the steps was still there. It was an almost perfect impression of a human being at ease: legs splayed, back bent, one hand by her side as she sat waiting for a bank to open. At a quarter past eight on the morning of August 6, 1945, she and her silhouette were burned into the granite. I stared at the shadow for an hour or more, then walked down to the river and met a man called Yukio, whose chest was still etched with the pattern of the shirt he was wearing when the atomic bomb was dropped.

He and his family still lived in a shack thrown up in the dust of an atomic desert. He described a huge flash over the city, "a bluish light, something like an electrical short", after which wind blew like a tornado and black rain fell. "I was thrown on the ground and noticed only the stalks of my flowers were left. Everything was still and quiet, and when I got up, there were people naked, not saying anything. Some of them had no skin or hair. I was certain I was dead." Nine years later, when I returned to look for him, he was dead from leukaemia.

In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb’s blast. It was the first big lie. "No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin" said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. "I write this as a warning to the world," reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called "an atomic plague". For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared – and vindicated.

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate "good war", whose "ethical bath", as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.

The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. "Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that … Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including "capitulation even if the terms were hard". Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was "fearful" that the US air force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon would not be able "to show its strength". He later admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb". His foreign policy colleagues were eager "to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip". General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: "There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis." The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the "overwhelming success" of "the experiment".

Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus "war on terror", the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make "pre-emptive" nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current "threat". But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK – just as the lies about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington.

The role of western journalism in erecting this straw man is critical. That America’s Defence Intelligence Estimate says "with high confidence" that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has been consigned to the memory hole. That Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never threatened to "wipe Israel off the map" is of no interest. But such has been the mantra of this media "fact" that in his recent, obsequious performance before the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown alluded to it as he threatened Iran, yet again.

This progression of lies has brought us to one of the most dangerous nuclear crises since 1945, because the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. The heroic Mordechai Vanunu tried to warn the world in 1986 when he smuggled out evidence that Israel was building as many as 200 nuclear warheads. In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, fearful that a new American administration might, just might, conduct genuine negotiations with a nation the west has defiled since Britain and America overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953.

In the New York Times on July 18, the Israeli historian Benny Morris, once considered a liberal and now a consultant to his country’s political and military establishment, threatened "an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland". This would be mass murder. For a Jew, the irony cries out.

The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that "we did not know"? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called "a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence"? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer.

John Pilger The Guardian

www.johnpilger.com

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

CIA actively supporting Mojahedin Khalq Terrorists

The saber rattling aimed at Iran seems to be in one of its lulls right now. But lots of us remain concerned that the Bush-Cheney administration still wants to go out with one more bang-an attack on the nuclear facilities in Iran. Which would, of course, be an act of war, and a war of aggression at that. Once upon another time, a war of aggression was considered a war crime.

These worrisome days seem eerily familiar. We’re being told that a country in the Middle East is a threat to us and its neighbors, that its government is fruitcake nutty, and that it has diabolical plans to use weapons of mass destruction against us or our friends at the first opportunity. Where have we run into this script before? Oh, yes. It’s the same flawed set of arguments used to justify our invasion and occupation of Iraq. Now we’re being told similar things about Iran.

We’ve routinely been assured that Iran is smuggling weapons into Iraq to support the insurgency there, and that the weapons are being used to kill Americans. Nobody’s been able to provide any evidence beyond the allegations themselves. A couple of months ago, reporters in Iraq were alerted to a news conference where Iranian weapons captured in Iraq were to be displayed. The news conference was abruptly called off when the military admitted it could not positively identify the weapons as coming from Iran. Despite the lack of evidence, we’re still being told that Iran is helping kill Americans in Iraq.

Meanwhile, it appears we ourselves are guilty of meddling inside Iran.

Readers may recall the name of Scott Ritter. He’s an ex-Marine who was a weapons inspector for the United Nations. In the days before the 2003 invasion, he warned that American assumptions about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were wrong. For that, he was ridiculed and all but called a traitor. But it turned out that he was right.

He’s still around. And he’s done a lot of reporting on Iran and the administration’s inclination to start a fight with Teheran. Last week, Scott Ritter published a long article for an online magazine in which he claimed that the CIA has been actively involved in supporting an Iranian resistance group that’s responsible for repeated acts of sabotage-with all too deadly consequences-inside Iran. Oddly enough, the group, the Mujahadeen-e Khalk, is listed as a terrorist organization by our own State Department. The MEK worked with Saddam Hussein and even fought as his ally in the war against their own countrymen. But the MEK shares the same goal as the Bush-Cheney administration: regime change in Teheran. So they’re useful for American purposes. When’s a terrorist not a terrorist? When he’s on your side.

Scott Ritter goes further than accusing the MEK of being our surrogate in a secret war inside Iran. He claims the group was involved in the discovery of a laptop computer that’s supposed to contain evidence of a nuclear weapons program inside Iran. The computer’s innards have been the backbone of the allegations that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon. But the acquisition of the computer through the MEK raises serious questions about the information supposedly contained in the computer. The way the computer fell into American hands through the MEK is reminiscent of the way false intelligence was fed to the United States in the runup to the invasion of Iraq by an Iraqi opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress.

Despite the seeming lull in the saber-rattling toward Iran, events are moving on their own timetable. Iran has consistently said its nuclear program is not aimed at developing weapons, a claim supported by our own intelligence agencies. But a deadline for Iran to suspend its nuclear program has just passed. And we’ve warned that if Iran doesn’t comply with our demands we will impose further economic sanctions and perhaps other, unspecified measures. Right now, Congress is considering legislation that might lead to an air, land and sea blockade of Iran. Such a blockade would be considered an act of war.

Scott Ritter concluded his article with these words:”One day, in the not-so-distant future, Americans will awake to the reality that American military forces are engaged in a shooting war with Iran. Many will scratch their heads and wonder, `How did that happen?’ The answer is simple: We all let it happen. We are at war with Iran right now. We just don’t have the moral courage to admit it.”In the ancient myths about the Trojan War, Cassandra was a Trojan princess who had the ability to foretell the future. But she was also cursed with the inability to make anybody believe her. Scott Ritter has already played the role of a modern Cassandra in the invasion of Iraq. The next few months will tell if he’s reprising that role with Iran.

George Arnold is opinion editor of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s northwest edition.

The Arkansans Democrat Gazette,

Editorial
COLUMNISTS American Cassandra
George Arnold
5 August 2008
The Arkansas Democrat Gazette

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Raymond Tanter

MKO Terrorists Driving American Foreign Policy

(Raymond Tanter, Mojahedin khalq and Terrorists, Maryam Rajavi and the Iran Policy committee exposed)

Constance Andresen Tanter, Washington DC, Aug 05, 2008

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27515&page=2#c1

Constance Andresen Tanter exposes Mojahedin Khalq (Rajavi cult) Terrorists and it’s agent Raymond Tanter commenting on their lobbying article in humanevents.com

… I BELIEVE THAT MADAME RAJAVI AND THE GROUP DO NOT SUPPORT WOMENS RIGHTS SINCE THEY KEEP PAYING AND FUNDING RAYMOND TANTER AND SINCE I WAS THE WIFE AND AM ON APPEAL THAT ALL THEIR INTERNAL AUDITS WILL BE BROUGHT FORTH……HE FOOLED ME AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS….HE HAS THREATENED MY LIFE IF I SPEAK OUT OR EVEN HAVE AN ATTORNEY TO DEFEND MYSELF. I WONDER WHY HE HAS HIDDEN ALL OF THIS AND IN THE DIVORCE ALL DOCUMENTATION OF AL OF THE EMAILS AND UNDO INFLUENCE IS DOCUMENTED FROM THE MEK CAUSING A US STATES DISTRICT COURT IN WAHSINGTON DC TO NOT GRANT DISCOVERY OR EVEN DUE PROCESS…..I AM SEEKING AN ATTORNEY ON APPEAL AND ALSO I WONDER IF I MAY NEED TO SUE THE MEK FOR WHAT IT HAS DONE TO A UNITED STATES CITIZEN I HAVE LIVED IN FEAR OF MY LIFE …

…..

One might wish to investigate the divorce of Raymond Tanter v. Constance Andresen Tanter , myself who was Raymond Tanter’s main support system and his Research assistant who he sent to Paris France to interview Madame Rajavi, who worked so very hard for womens rights, and now…..well Raymond Tanter made me homeless evicted illegally from Alban Towers where he and Alireza and others worked in our Tanter Apartments. That if you read the entire divorce case Tanter v, Tanter 07-DRB 102 you will see how abuse was used, how the MEK AND HEADS OF THE MEK NCRI INTERFERED IN THE DIVORCE INSISTING I SIGN OFF ALL MY RIGHTS, KEEPING ME WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY A HOME AND ANY MEANS OF SUPPORTING MYSELF. Now please understand I am also missing over $300,000 of my Deceased husband’s life insurance…The issue is Does Madame Rajavi support this abuse of women….after all my work for womens issues speaking in London Paris and introducing even DICK ARMEY in Paris france when did I become such a problem…..The month my Mother died in Sepember 2006 Raymond Tanter began his campaign to have me SIGN OFF ALL MY RIGHTS TO GET RENT PAID ON ONE OF THE THREE ABLAN TOWERS APARTMENTS WHEN I REFUSED HE AND ALIREZA MADE ME HOMELESS ALONG WITH THE MEK MEMBERS…..I WELCOME INTERVIEWS SINCE RAYMOND TANTER IS NOW IN DEFAULT OF THE SEPTEMBER 2, 2007 AGREMEENT HE HAND WROTE AT THE DIRECTION OF MADAME RAJAVI TO PAY HIS WIFE BUT THEY ALSO ALLOWED HIM TO DEFAULT AND NOT RETURN MY APARTMENT , $300000 OF MY DEAD HUSBANDS PREMARITAL LIFE INSURANCE AND PAY ME FOR MY WORK FOR THE IPC FOR TWO YEARS AS HIS RESEARCH ASSISTANT…NOW CHUCK NASH AND BRUCE MCCOLM ALL KNEW OF THIS AND THE HOMELESSNESS BUT TOOK THEIR WIVES ON EXPENSIVE TRIPS TO PARIS FRANCE…..IS THE IPC A LOBBYIST FOR THE MEK ONE ONLY NEEDS TO LOOK AT HOW THE TANTER DIVORCE HAS BEEN BLOCKED WITH NO DISCOVERY NO FINANCIAL INVESTIGATION AND DEATH THREATS TO ME SHOULD I SPEAK OUT…..I BELIEVE THAT MADAME RAJAVI AND THE GROUP DO NOT SUPPORT WOMENS RIGHTS SINCE THEY KEEP PAYING AND FUNDING RAYMOND TANTER AND SINCE I WAS THE WIFE AND AM ON APPEAL THAT ALL THEIR INTERNAL AUDITS WILL BE BROUGHT FORTH……HE FOOLED ME AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS….HE HAS THREATENED MY LIFE IF I SPEAK OUT OR EVEN HAVE AN ATTORNEY TO DEFEND MYSELF. I WONDER WHY HE HAS HIDDEN ALL OF THIS AND IN THE DIVORCE ALL DOCUMENTATION OF AL OF THE EMAILS AND UNDO INFLUENCE IS DOCUMENTED FROM THE MEK CAUSING A US STATES DISTRICT COURT IN WAHSINGTON DC TO NOT GRANT DISCOVERY OR EVEN DUE PROCESS…..I AM SEEKING AN ATTORNEY ON APPEAL AND ALSO I WONDER IF I MAY NEED TO SUE THE MEK FOR WHAT IT HAS DONE TO A UNITED STATES CITIZEN I HAVE LIVED IN FEAR OF MY LIFE. BEEN THREATENED IF I SPEAK OUT BUT IN LIFE ONE MUST AND BEFORE ANY COMMENTS ARE MADE READ THE DOCKET FILE OF TANTER V. TANTER 07 -DRB 102 AT 500 INDIANA AVENUE NW WASHINGTON DC IT HOLDS EVEN HANDWRITTEN THREATS FROM RAYMOND TANTER $40 DOLLARS UNDER THE DOOR OF ONE OF OUR APARTMENTS FOR FOOD AND THREATS SIGN OFF SIGN OFF ALL YOU RIGHTS AND CONDO RIGHTS IN ORDER TO GET THE RENT PAID ON APARTMENT 336 HE HAD ME ILLEGALLY EVICTED NOW DISMISSED BY ARSCHSTONE SMITH THIS ALL DOING THE LARGEST PRIVATE BUYOUT IN US HISTORY…$22 BILLION DOLLARS..HE AND ALIREZA USED MY MARITAL APARTMENT 507 IN ALBAN TOWERS SO RAYMOMD AND BOTH WERE TENANTS SINCE JUNE 2001 AND RAYMOND WANTED TO APPLY ALL CONDO RIGHTS TO THE PURCHASE. IF YOU GO FURTHER BACK INTO HOUSING COURT YOU WILL SEE HIS PLAN WAS TO MAKE ME HOMELESSS AND STEAL THE CONDO RIGHTS IN ADDITION L-34 IN ALBAN TOWERS LISTS AS ADDITIONAL TO 507 AS THE IPC OFFICE EVERYWHERE BUT HOW CAN THAT BE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONED BUIDING…RAYMODN TANTER EVEN USED THE POLICE TO TRY AND SAY THERE WAS A BAR NOTICE OF ME FROM THE BUILDING THAT WAS FALSE AND THE POLICE VERIFIED THAT…I AM USHER AT NATIONAL CATHEDRAL AND AM VERY REAL…HE BEAT ME IN THE END OF THIS TRYING TO FORCE ME TO SIGN OFF……I WAS SUMMONED TO PARIS FRANCE IN FEAR AND THEY KEPT ME THERE TO SIGN

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
MEK Camp Ashraf

Human beings or means of leverage

Ashraf Residents; human beings or means of leverage Once benefiting the grandeur of being Saddam’s favorite base housing the leaders and members of an opposition struggling to overthrow Iran’s cleric regime, now Camp Ashraf, after the leaders dislocated the group’s headquarters to Auvers-Sur-Oise in France and left the members to suffer forlorn of any hope to survive, is nearing its last days. Nobody seems to be worry about the destiny of about 3,500 human beings victimized under the totalistic rule of a cult of personality.

There has been suggested a number of options to decide future of these members even by the groups own advocates like Raymond Tanter who in a recent article published by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy states:

Options regarding Iraqi-based MEK members are limited, but include the following: sending them to the United States; allowing them to stay in Iraq under Iraqi control; dispersing them to surrounding countries, including Iran; or maintaining the status quo with the continued protection of the U.S. military. Since each option is problematic, finding a solution is neither easy nor simple.

He calls the options problematic because he, and other people following his line of thought, are never thinking of these Ashraf residents as individuals who as the human beings have the right of thinking and deciding for their own destiny and where to settle. They are not the properties of the cult to be transferred en masse as they are thought to:

Assuming a transfer of MEK members were possible, many questions remain regarding their destination. There are many reasons why it would be difficult for the European and U.S. governments, or Iraq’s Kurdish regional bloc, to accept the MEK en masse to their territories.

Moving the group’s members to the United States, for instance, is currently impossible because of MEK’s status as a foreign terrorist organization. This status could change, however, if the designation is lifted in October 2008 when the Department of State performs a regular review process. This appears to be a viable possibility given recent developments in the United Kingdom, where the British government was forced to remove the group from its terrorist list after an independent judicial commission — one ratified by a British appeals court — determined that such a designation was no longer appropriate.

If Ashraf’s security responsibilities were transferred to Iraqi security forces, as demanded by the Iranian regime, it would be a flagrant violation of international laws and conventions. Since it is widely reported that the Iranian regime has infiltrated Iraqi military and security forces, and wields significant influence within the government, such a move would certainly invite a humanitarian catastrophe. No U.S. president would want to leave such a legacy.

Moreover, dispersing the MEK, in addition to being illegal, is likely to decrease the international community’s leverage over the Iranian regime. Because the regime pays more attention to the opposition in Iraq than all other opposition groups combined, a case could be made to rely on the MEK as leverage to encourage Tehran to give up its quest for nuclear weapons capability.

The last lines clearly delineate the intention of what he refers to as ‘the international community’. Nobody is the least interested in the life and destiny of these enslaved people in Camp Ashraf as human beings. The Europeans and Americans have reached a consensus to manipulate these members as means of leverage to be used against the Iranian regime to fulfill their own ambitious interests rather than respecting humanitarian issues they fervently publicize to be advocating.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

US to concede the MKO responsibility to Baghdad

US to concede the MKO responsibility to Baghdad. Iraqi govenment willing to take charge of the terrorist group

TEHRAN, Aug. 09 (ISNA)-An official close to Tehran rejected the rumors that Iranian high-ranking officials have met with a U.S. delegation in Ankara, Turkey.

Iranian ambassador to Baghdad Hassan Kazemi Qomi and the chief of Iran’s foreign policy strategic council Kamal Kharazi have not held any talks with a U.S. delegation in Ankara, this official said.

Meanwhile regarding a committee founded in Iraqi defense ministry to pursue the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) case the official said that Iraqi government is willing to take charge of the MKO terrorist group and make a decision about them.

According to this official the U.S. is also willing to concede the MKO responsibility to Baghdad.

End Item

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

The Cultic Change Enforced Through Letters

As discussed, the initiated change within MKO following the internal ideological revolution in 1985 aimed mainly on securing Rajavi’s permanent leadership and transforming the members into his absolute devotees and, in general, crystallizing the whole organization into a cult of personality. Of course, it was not so easy a task to compel members to surrender to the Rajavi’s selfish ambitious on their own will and to dissolve in a leader whom many believed to be inadequate to assume the status.

Since MKO is heavily built on a hierarchical structure, the members are controlled and organized under the command of higher ranks who in turn receive orders from higher command echelon. It made it much easier for the The Cultic change enforced through lettersorganization to impose the change on the members through such a forced stratum either through persuasion or designed processes of penalization. As the members would be provoked by persuasive heroic deeds of the responsible ranks, the statements of submission had to be first made by them.

In this way, the rational thinking power of the rank and file would be paralyzed under the impact of the impressive expressions of emotional parodies. Consequently, in a systematic fashion of letter writing, they began to write open letters of congratulation to the newly wed Rajavis, and Massoud Rajavi himself in particular, for the heroic move and the initiated new phase in MKO.

A look at the countless volume of these letters, known as the letters of ideological revolution, with identical themes of expressing total devotion to the leadership and his novel ideological revolution well indicates the organization’s resort to crafts to subjugate its own insiders regardless of its hypocritical wearing in the political scene. Let’s go through a number of these letters all published in the organization’s official gazette Mojahed soon after the unconventional marriage of Massoud Rajavi and Maryam Azodanloo. Writing of her unconditional dedication to ideological revolution, Mina Khyabani, Mahdi Abrishamchi’s second wife and sister of Musa Khyabani, in her letter addressed to Rajavi stated:

I hope to be close behind you now attaching to your emancipating revolution with my soul. To be liable to follow the path, I need to be cleaned of whatever evil and element of filth. I bow to you to the extreme of my comprehension of your high status, and appreciate your miraculous move of self-sacrifice, that is far above the martyrdom of many thousands, that has guaranteed a history. Now I believe to be all blameworthy before this revolution. I hope this revolution will act as a motivation to reinforce iota of values within me to make me capable of being under your command as once I was. *

Mohammad Seyyedi Kashani is one of the oldest, experienced veterans whose organizational activities even exceed that of Rajavi. He, too, addressing Rajavi has stated:

Dear Massoud, Iwill call you brother no more. You are my sage. Dear to my heart. You are my teacher…. many things have undergone a change in the organization and the world within us. I am sure that the last rusted layers of the old world would be eliminated from within the forces and sympathizers. Obviously, in our most favourite organization the real Mojahed is the one who is more unselfish and capable and also most cherished before God.

In another letter from Mohammad Hayati, another member of MKO, we read:

I congratulate the blessed marriage of my ideological leader Massoud and Maryam. Definitely and knowingly I recant for failing to understand the grandeur of this leadership.

In the letter of Hussein Abrishamchi, Mahdi Abrishamchi’s junior brother and a commander in chief of the organization, addressed to the Rajavis it is stated:

I wish I could kneel before you [Maryam] and Massoud as the forerunners of this great revolution and take my oath of allegiance.

Mohsen Rezai a member of central cadre in his testament of allegiance to Rajavi earnestly supplicated salvation from him:

Great men have marvellous power of draw and repulsion. Now I see it in you and you can influence all. Anybody endowed with an iota of humanism and nobility falls in your love and you repel whoever walks in the wrong path. I am sure that you will be among those closest to God in the Day of Judgment and I am also sure that you will take my hand for my salvation.

Mahdi Abrishamchi, playing his own influential role in the ideological revolution, was one of the most enthusiastic espouses of the move started by his ex-wife and Rajavi:

This ideological move shed light on all of us. We were purged of our filth and dirt by passing through the kiln Rajavi indicated. Now our ideology is shining and we are not the ones we were in the past. We have the honour of surpassing all those that ceased to follow the path. Now I dare say, after this revolution, that we are true members of Mojahedin, aren’t we? We pride ourselves on being his [Rajavi] followers and disciples; he is our instructor who has trained us and we hope he will do in future, and he will. We praise God for leading us to the right path through Massoud and Maryam, otherwise we would have gone astray.

As seen, in all these letters the ranking members insist to state that the crystallized ideological revolution has led to great changes within them and the structure of the organization as well. According to many assertions made by Rajavi, Mojahedin are engaged in a never-lasting change until all intended objectives of leadership have been accomplished.

*The quotes are all from Mojahed issues 241, 242, 247 published in 1985.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Terrorism and British hypocrisy

On 22 June, British lawmakers removed the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO) from the UK’s list of banned terror groups, after a seven-year campaign by the organization.

Legislators approved the decision of the Court of Appeal, which ruled in May that the MKO, which has been guilty of many bloody terrorist attacks in Iran for 30 years, should no longer be listed as a proscribed group.

It killed several of Iran’s new leaders in the early years after the 1979 revolution and backed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the 1980-1988 war with Iran.

According to a recent speech by Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, the group has killed over 16,000 people in and outside Iran, including one president, one prime minister, four ministers and dozens of parliamentarians. Its terrorist activities are being carried out even today.

Recently, Iranian authorities arrested a group of MKO operatives for the assassination of Sheikh Hashem Samiri, a Friday prayers leader in the city of Ahvaz. Many of its members are wanted by the International Criminal Police Organization, Interpol.

The decision gives the group more freedom to organize and raise money in Britain. “After so many years of waiting, so many years of campaigning, so many setbacks and frustrations, at last our government has seen the light,” said Baroness Angela Harris, a House of Lords peer who backed the move.

British Home Office minister Tony McNulty said that the government had unsuccessfully appealed against the Court of Appeal’s decision because of the group’s violent past.

“The MKO admitted responsibility for a number of horrendous crimes carried out against the Iranian people, both civilian and military targets,” McNulty said.

The MKO is considered a terrorist organization by the US and the European Union so it is subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. However, its supporters say they now expect the EU to review the MKO’s status following the decision by the British court and lawmakers.

“I think it would be strange if they did not follow our lead,” Lord Steven Bassam said.

It is noteworthy to point out that a 2007 German intelligence report from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution called the MKO a “repressive, sect-like and Stalinist authoritarian organization which centers around the personality cult of Maryam and Masoud Rajavi”.

For its part, Iran condemned as a “disgrace” the decision by Britain to lift a ban on the MKO.

“The British government’s action regarding the group of munafiqin is a disgrace and utterly condemned,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said in a statement.

Iranian officials always refers to the MKO, which carried out a bloody wave of assassinations in Tehran in the early 1980s, as the “munafiqin,” meaning hypocrites.

“This action … is in line with London’s new policy to play with the card of terrorists to put pressure on the region’s nations and governments,” Hosseini said.

“This group is resented by Iran, Iraq and the world because of many terrorist operations it has done in these two countries,” he added.

The British decision comes at the same time as Iraq has just prohibited any contact with that group and is supporting the deportation of its members.

Dr. Ali al-Dabbagh, the Iraqi government’s spokesperson, said in a statement the Iraqi cabinet, in its regular session, deliberated MKO’s presence on Iraqi soil, its interference in Iraq’s local issues, its provocative participation against the elected Iraqi government and institutions, and its encouragement of terror against the Iraqi people”.

The remotion of the MKO from UK’s list of banned terror groups reveals the hypocrisy of the British authorities, who claim to be partners in the “war against the terror” but are willing to protect or even use terrorists in order to promote their interests in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The bloody background of the MKO is not apparently enough to persuade a British court and the Parliament that it is a terrorist organization.

It would be interesting to know if British authorities would have reached the same conclusion if the victims of the MKO ‘s actions had been British or Americans.

Press TV

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Implication of Change in MKO

As stated, a cult to form a totalitarian society needs to bring about a profound change in members for achieving oneness with cult. Depending on the cult’s sphere of activity, the change is programmed under a variety of identified values to create receptivity to a new ideology.

There are countless ways and different avenues, and usually no single motivation, that drives people with different predispositions into cults. Many go to cults through their heads and some other go through their heart and emotions. However, what is of worth notification is that when a person melts in a cult, his/her whole strategy of attribution undergoes a total change and comes to believe that the new adopted ideology is the truest one in the world. There are also those who pretend to be followers because of the fearsome atmosphere of the cult and the employed measures of castigation. As Hoffer describes the converts of a cult:

Both they who convert and they who are converted by coercion need the fervent conviction that the faith they impose or are forced to adopt is the only true one. With- Jut this conviction, the proselytizing terrorist, if he is not vicious to begin with, is likely to feel a criminal, and the coerced convert see himself as a coward who prostituted his soul to live. 1

It can well be argued that as the recruits are involved in a group over a longer period of time, through the structure of the group, through new disciplines, through new behaviors and so forth, they shape a new personhood. So, it has a lot to do with when they are evaluated, and how far they’ve come from where they were before. It is the value system of the cults that attracts people to choose the gate opening to the most desired and optimal option; being it an avenue to salvation or terrestrial utopia.

Being recognized a cult of personality after its recognition as a terrorist group, Mojahedin Khalq Organization, MKO/MEK/PMOI, has developed its own terminology of cult values to entrap new recruits and to subjugate the already activists. It borrows the characteristics of a leftist cult proselytizing under a variety of catchy mottos like revolution, social change, freedom, emancipation of women and much more. To achieve the goals, first the members have to undergo a change themselves and the change is enforced through a number of processes if they show signs of reluctance; only the leaders and high ranking cadres seem to have already been acclimated to the changes and the whole body of the rank and file had to suffer the crushing pressure of the changing processes.

Some may question that why MKO insists on compelling the members to adapt themselves to the required changes? It has to be pointed out that MKO’s theoreticians of the group’s internal ideological revolution believe that any system of value has to be tested in a miniature model of society, the organization itself, before being generalized for the actual, real society and overpowering the ruling political power. But the first organizational objectives can be numerated as:

1- To destabilize members’ power of thinking in the face of critical circumstances

2- To prepare for change in the exterior milieu

3- To block members’ contact with the outside world

4- To prevent internal antagonistic moves against the made decisions

5- To get members ready for committing whatever command

6- To grow in members the illusion of being on the right path

7- To detect suspected infiltrators

8- To enforce unquestionable submission and total devotion to the leadership

9- To detach members from all personal attachments

10- To instill into members that they are safe until they are consistent with collective organizational identity

The organization strongly believes that the authority of change is beyond questioning and it is the most urgent task to be accomplished because:

1. It is essential for any ideological alteration

2. It is to legitimize organizational identity

3. It is the criterion to determine ideological disobedience

4. Being passive against it equals to becoming passive and slanting to enemy

5. Any reluctance to undergo it means being overpowered by anti-revolutionary, bourgeois attributes

6. vAnd finally, submission to change means an everlasting attraction towards the pole of the ideological leadership

Once Massoud Rajavi said “the effect indicates the cause”. He meant to say that change sets up the base for the continuation and legitimacy of the organization and it has to be ascertained within the organization through a change in ideological principles and teachings. It eventually crystallized into a cult. The ideological revolution set the door open for the change and Rajavi insisted it was a rebirth that all members necessarily had to go through it:

All have to experience this rebirth. All the sins you have committed comes to an end. Either you leave or accent to change. Make sure nobody remains but revolutionized among the real Mojahedin. Except those who may have not be informed. 2

Rajavi would compare the ideological revolution to a forge wherein the members had to be melted and reshaped as he desired them:

This [ideological revolution] is to test you; we need iron men. We seek new versions of power and capacity. Those Mojahedin who pass through this forge will be more rough and resistant. 3

As stated earlier, it was not a change only intended for the organization but aimed to encompass a grater milieu out of the organization:

Because of the fundamental role of this value system [ideological revolution] in ideology in general, the extent of the consequent changes within it included all the reactions and the individual- organization relations with the widespread scene of social and political sphere. 4

Thus, the ideological revolution turns into a standard to measure the members’ fidelity and commitment to the organization and leadership:

It is the ideological gauge that decides how good you are, and you are bad to the extent of the criticism you receive, and your power of dynamism depends on the change you undergo. 5

The ideological revolution before being considered an extraordinary way of initiating change in Mojaheidn Organization can well be defined as an internal coup d’état to accomplish Rajavi’s own ambitions and promoting him to the highest and unbeatable status of a hegemonic leader and even above that. Explained by Anne Singleton:

It [ideological revolution] is now operating around a pseudo-religious ideology for which Rajavi is the deity. Was the change necessary? Did they have to change in order to survive? It is possible to argue that any organisation has a degree of organic and dynamic change built into it. Also, that it must be flexible enough to make pragmatic alterations to the way it operates as a consequence of both the world it exists in and the demands of the situation it is in direct relation to. But the Mojahedin has done almost the opposite of what could have been expected. Rather than change in response to external demands, the organisation has wilfully ignored these and instead, obeying its own internal dynamic, rendered itself more and more distant from any constituency it might possibly have previously had recourse to for support. This internal dynamic is controlled directly by Rajavi himself and it demands that the organisation, down to every last member, must be kept totally and unquestioningly obedient to him. 6

References:

1. Eric Hoffer; The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements, New York: First Perennial Classics 2002, p. 99.

2. Massoud Rajavi’s speech in Paris, 1985.

3. Ibid.

4. Niyabati, Bijan; A different look at the internal ideological revolution within MKO, Khavaran publication.

5. Mahdi Abrishamchi’s speech on ideological revolution, 1985.

6. Anne Singleton; Saddam’s Private Army, Iran-Interlink, 2003.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Mojahedin Khalq to be put in UK terrorist list once again

Lawmaker: Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, Rajavi cult) to be put in UK terrorist list once again

An Iranian lawmaker said here Friday that the terrorist Mujahideen Khalq Organization (MKO) will be put in the UK terrorist list once again.

Member of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Javad Karimi said a number of the UK parliamentarians had in a meeting with several members of his Commission said the UK parliament and government will follow the European Union in putting the MKO in their terrorist list once again soon.

The `Habilian Center’, which groups bereaved families of those martyred in terrorist incidents, quoted Karimi as saying that current term of Majlis has become more diplomatically active than its predecessors and intends to make maximum use its potential.

He hoped that London will soon rectify its past mistake so that suitable bilateral relations are built.

As for Iran’s parliamentary diplomacy to secure the MKO expulsion from Iraq, Karimi said on Iraqi people’s request, the issue of MKO expulsion from Iraq has become an axis of the Iran-Iraq diplomacy over the past years and this is the point on which Iraqi resident, prime minister and lawmakers have repeatedly laid emphasis.

He said Americans try to prevent materialization of the goal but judicially speaking, they are not in a much influential position and not much time remains until MKO expulsion from Iraq.

After the MKO members’ expulsion from Iraq, Iran will follow up the issue of the grouplet leaders’ hand over to Iranian judicial authorities and if necessary, they should be tried at the Hague as war criminals.

On the MKO activities in Jordan, he said since they know they will be expelled from Iraq, the MKO try to go to Jordan.

Despite a few number of Jordanian policy makers’ support for the MKO, the Jordanian government and nation are not willing to keep a number of notorious terrorists, he concluded.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts