Page 771 – Nejat Society

Iranians protest UK verdict on MKO

Hundreds of people have gathered in front of the British embassy in Tehran to protest the removal of the MKO from the terrorists blacklist.

The protesters called for the closure of the embassy and condemned the British court decision which ruled in favor of the Mojahedin Khalq Organization, Press TV correspondent reported on Thursday.

Scores of police forces were deployed at the scene to prevent angry demonstrators to attack the embassy.

Analysts say the London Appeal Court’s decree clearly demonstrates that the British government exercises a double standard policy toward terrorism.

The London Appeal Court ruled on Wednesday that there were "no valid grounds" to assert that a British panel made legal errors when it ordered the Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) to be removed from the terrorist blacklist.

MKO – known in Iran as Monafeqin or hypocrites – has been blacklisted as a terrorist organization by many countries. It has committed innumerable terrorist acts against the Iranian people and top officials.

Press TV, May 23, 2008

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=56943&sectionid=351020101

————–

Tehrani women stage protest rally in front of British Embassy

A group of Tehrani women staged a protest rally in front of British Embassy in Tehran Thursday evening against a British Appeals Court’s exclusion of Iranian terror grouplet, MKO’s name from terrorist groups’ list.

According to one of IRNA Political Desk reporters, the ralliers were chanting slogans and carrying props in which they were demanding including MKO at entire lists of international terror organizations throughout the world.

A banner carried by two Tehrani women read, "British Appeals’ Court’s decision on MKO equals ignoring most obvious, most primitive human rights and is aimed at encouraging terrorist moves in United Kingdom and Europe."

Reference was made on the props also to the bereaved families of the victims of June 17th, 1981, Jomhouri Eslami Party Headquarters bomb blast that the MKO immediately and proudly claimed responsibility for, and dozens of MKO blind assassinations of Iranian civilians in early years following the glorious victory of the Islamic Reputation.

The ralliers were also chanting "Down with USA", "Down with Israel", "Down with Terrorists", and "MKO commits crimes, Britain approves of terrorism."

At the end of the rally the protesters read out a resolution in whose first article the bereaved family members of MKO terrorist moves have asked the judiciary and foreign diplomacy officials in Iran to keep accurate account of the countless crimes committed by the leaders of that grouplet and its deceived sympathizers, and to present such reports to concerned foreign and international organs to end recurrence of the mistake that has recently happened at a British Appeals court.

The ralliers have also asked for bringing the criminals who have committed all such horrendous crimes to courts of justice in Iran, or if that is not possible for any reason, to an international court of justice in Europe.

One of the ralliers told IRNA, "Those who claim to be the standard bearers of campaign against international terrorism are nurturing terrorists today and Britain, that was one day among the creators of the United States and Israel, is today playing the role of one of its creatures, the United States’ wretched servant."

This young girl said that the history of Britain is filled with cases of nurturing terrorists, such as providing a safe haven for the apostate Indian-born writer Salman Rushdie, and today they have begun supporting the most ill-famed MKO terrorists with a long black record of most criminal acts.

Another rallier, too, asked for resolute moves by our country’s officials, particularly the Iranian Foreign Ministry officials against the acquittal verdict issued in favor of the terrorist MKO grouplet.

The old lady said, "Today it is definitely necessary for Islamic Republic of Iran’s top economic and political officials to revise Tehran’s ties with Britain."

The ralliers left the British Embassy whereabouts following reading their declaration peacefully as they were asked and directed by Iranian diplomatic police forces to do so.

IRNA, May 23, 2008

http://www1.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-17/0805231828133639.htm

May 25, 2008 0 comments

Habilian Foundation

Habilian Exhibition in Interpol meeting

TEHRAN, Iran – The need to harness a pro-active, multi-disciplinary approach in terrorism-related investigations is the focus of the fourth working group meeting opening today in Tehran on Project Kalkan, Interpol’s on-going anti-terrorism initiative in Central Asia.

Habilian Exhibition

The two-day meeting draws together countries from the Central Asia region as well as from Africa, Asia and Europe and will review progress on the collaborative regional project amongst its 19 core countries. Specific issues under discussion include counter terrorism initiatives and operational cases, terrorism financing and the recruitment methods of terrorist groups.

Project Kalkan – meaning Shield in Central Asian countries – is one of several key regional components of Interpol’s multi-region Fusion Task Force (FTF) which was created in 2002 to identify active terrorist groups, and to collect, share and analyze information and intelligence on their activities. From just five initial member countries at the launch of Project Kalkan in 2004, following terrorist attacks in Tashkent, a total of 60 INTERPOL member countries are now sharing terrorism-related information as part of the initiative. Habilian Exhibition INTERPOL Secretary General Ronald K. Noble, on his first visit to Iran, told the meeting in his opening speech that these results bore out Project Kalkan as an excellent example of a coherent collaborative approach to security in the region, a far cry from 2004 when there had been little knowledge of the value of global tools to regional security, he said.

‘Clearly, one of Interpol’s responsibilities towards its 186 member countries is to maintain and develop strategic alliances with regional groupings and international organizations whose objectives are compatible with Interpol’s stated aims,’ Secretary General Noble said.

‘INTERPOL will therefore continually seek to integrate its activities, network and resources with such regional initiatives in order to fight terrorism and global crime.’

In the three-years that followed the launch of the project, there were 176 confirmed international arrests of wanted terrorists from the region for whom INTERPOL notices or diffusions had been issued. Of interest is that 140 of these 176 arrests were made in Europe – a strong indicator that terrorism in the region has an important global reach – and this explains why Project Kalkan now brings together more than 60 countries from all regions of the world, as well as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, a key institutional partner of this project. Habilian Exhibition

Meanwhile a terrorism exhibition was held in the sideline of the meeting revealing the negative impacts of terrorism and the damages it has imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran. In this exhibition which was attended by Interpol authorities and members Habilian Association, families of 16000 terror victims, disclosed the terrorist entity of MKO to the attendants and provided them with valuable documents about this terrorist cult’s atrocities and treasons.

Habilian Exhibition

Habilian, Mashad, May 25, 2008

http://www.habilian.com/view-en.asp?ID=02074

————–

Noble: I’ m so sorry about terror victims in Iran

Visiting terrorism exhibition in Tehran and along with expressing his appreciation for holding such an event, Interpol secretary general Ronald K. Noble conveyed his deep sorrow over terror victims in Iran.

According to Habilian Association (families of terror victims in Iran) public relations report in an exhibition held by Habilian in the sideline of Interpol conference in Tehran which was unprecedentedly welcomed by the representatives of over 30 countries from around the world, a part of MKO numerous atrocities and crimes was revealed to the world.

In this exposition the details of how ness of persecuting civilians, ordinary people and also 1981 bomb planting in then ruling party of Islamic Republic’s main office as well as killing innocent women and children and kidnapping and torturing police officers to death and also the survivors of mortar shelling in residential compounds conducted by MKO were shown to the audience.

It was also exposed to the public the persecuting tools discovered from this terrorist group as well as the confessions of arrested members admitting that their goal had been to establish disunion among the people and also between the people and the new born government .

The report also adds: The secretary general of Habilian Association explained the different aspects of MKO atrocities in Iran to Interpol secretary general Ronald K. Noble in his visit to Habilian terrorism exhibition .Hashemi Nejad who is the son of Ayatollah hashemi Nejad, a cleric who has been assassinated by MKO terrorists, also disclosed to the Interpol top official the terrorist bloody history of this cult.

At the end of the visit Mr. Noble expressed his full sorrow about MKO crimes in Iran and signed the memorial book of 16000 terror victims in Iran.

May 25, 2008 0 comments

Rajavi, the absolute cult authority

No cult begins unless lead by a charismatic religious or political entrepreneur and hardly a cult can survive following the death of its charismatic founder unless succeeded by another charismatic successor. A charismatic leader does not appear in a vacuum and is in part the product of a larger social or political trend. To build a hierarchical authority with him atop, a charismatic leader claims divinity or special knowledge and demands unquestioning obedience and devotion from the followers. Doubting or questioning the leader’s authority is not at all tolerated and the leader may be aided by one or more core of leaders.

The guru in a cult plays the key role to lead and influence the followers. In Brainwashing within the bars of Rajavi's Cult fact, the process of brainwashing in a cult can be carried out within a structure of an absolute charismatic authority. Besides, in facing the outsiders, the built courage within the insiders originates out of the charismatic impact of the guru before whom they cringe and bow. Thus, first the recruits have to be convinced to put all trust in the leader before anything else and as Singer analyses:

Legend has it that all cult leaders are charismatic. In reality, charisma is less important than skills of persuasion and the ability to manipulate others. In order to start a group, a leader has to have ways of convincing others to follow him or her, and such leaders tend not to relinquish their control. Cult leadership can be a heady role when the leader comes to see the amount of control he or she holds and how easily he or she can influence followers. 1

Unquestionably, the spirit of self-sacrifice within a cult is fostered by devotion and absolute faith in a leader. As a result, the first step following the entry of a new recruit is to build in him/her a sense of devotion to a specific and exceptional sanctity or exemplary character by whose authority instructions or orders are revealed or ordained:

Day one is usually devoted to demonstrating the leader’s absolute authority. The leader, often called a facilitator or trainer, immediately takes control of the setting with a demeanor that suggests he is a powerful, in-charge person and no one is to challenge what he says.”This program works,”the trainer proclaims.”It’s all up to you to obey and get the maximum benefits.”He remains totally in charge, acts knowledgeable, and is practiced in verbal skills, so that he never loses an encounter. Anyone who challenges the trainer will be humiliated and verbally mashed. 2

The idea is strongly infused into the members and, going through the totalitarian authority of Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization or the cult of Mojahedin’s leadership, one can easily notice the cult-like leadership in its most excessive practice in the group. The complexity of leadership relations within MKO requires a study of its own which comes in the category of a variety of phases. There are also differences in the hegemonic styles in each phase as the members’ impression of the leader changed continually as each phase came to engage the organization in a different enterprise according to circumstances. In any case, it was the hegemonic authority of the leadership that compelled the members to take on ventures that were doomed to failure from the very beginning and no logic advocate them. Explaining the authoritative relationship between the leader and the followers in a cult Hoffer states:

It is somewhat terrifying to realize that the totalitarian leaders of our day, in recognizing this source of desperate courage, made use of it not only to steel the spirit of their followers but also to break the spirit of their opponents. In his purges of the old Bolshevik leaders, Stalin succeeded in turning proud and brave men into cringing cowards by depriving them of any possibility of identification with the party they had served all their lives and with the Russian masses. 3

Notwithstanding the deception and cult manipulation within MKO, Rajavi’s authoritative leadership has played a totally influential role in the nature of converting a political group into a destructive cult of personality. Rajavi’s hegemonic leadership can be discussed in two aspects; a) employing leadership absolutism to subjugate high-ranking members and b) to deploy the relationship between the charismatic authority and followers to establish an organizational leadership hegemony entailing absolute devotion.

References:

1- Thaler Singer, Margaret; Cults in Our Midst: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace, introduction..

2- Ibid, 193.

3. Eric Hoffer; The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements, New York: First Perennial Classics 2002, p. 62.

Research Bureau – Mojahedin.ws – May 24, 2008

May 24, 2008 0 comments

The Ideology of the MEK

An Ultra-Left Trend

The Cult of Mojahedin; An Ultra-Left Trend

The Americans and some capitalist disposed European countries have always been mistrustful of the leftist parties. That is mainly because the leftists believe the ideology and policies of liberalism and capitalism are doomed to failure. At least through the cold war phase, Americans invest a big bulk of energy and resource potentialities in beating or deflecting the left movements rising in other countries. A Marxism-Capitalism conflict, among other political and economical disputes, is a battle of two ideologies. During the cold war era, the two blocks fought in a variety of political, cultural, social and even arts fronts. We have nothing to do with the winner or loser but it is evident that it has given rise to complex and widespread tensions and challenges in the contemporary modern world.

The battle ceased to halt even after the collapse of the main communist camp and Americans have been insisting on dissolving the remaining undeveloped or progressing left oriented countries. Furthermore, it is unlikely they ever consent to utilize leftist movements or oppositions to make changes in a region. In fact, Americans can never be convinced that it can rely on the counter-capitalist currents that focus the sharp point of their struggle, as part of their Marxist ideology and teachings, mainly on the annihilation or diminishing the influence of imperialism. According to Marxist social thought, particularly in its analysis of feudalism, capitalism, and imperialism, the capitalist camp with America atop is the historical enemy that has to be confronted. That is raison d’être behind the US’s peaceful coexisting with the former Soviet Union representing the left camp regardless of existing controversies.

There are instances of some European left movements that mid-way shifted from the Marxist to totalitarian and fascist slant. For instance, following Great Depression, which affected France in 1931 and caused much anxiety and disturbance, new solutions were being looked for. As a result, Jacques Doriot, a member of the Presidium of the Executive Committee of the French Communist Party from 1922 on, and from 1923 on Secretary of the French Federation of Young Communists, came to advocate an alliance between the Communists and Social Democrats and later moved sharply to the right and formed the Parti Populaire Français.

Today, from a different angle, MKO, developing a leftist, anti-democratic ideology and pursuing a lead of totalitarianism, is seemingly moving quantitatively from the left to the right. Is it possible that the US is convinced MKO has retreated from its originally left, anti-imperialist ideology to receive American support? It is against all expectations.

At the first look it might seem hard to believe that following the collapse of the communism camp, any group might assent to the left ideology. But MKO does.

Americans have officially announced their academic recognition of the group’s eclectic ideology which is an amalgamation of Islam and Marxism with the emphasis on the latter’s social thought as the ideological infrastructure. They have also come to recognize that MKO will do anything to overthrow the Iranian regime. The finding is that MKO’s apparent shift from the left to the right is more a shift of tactic to accomplish power struggle ambitions rather than actually forswear anti-imperialist mentality. Despite harshly denying its references to Marxism at the present, MKO is strongly bound to the belief in the obliteration of capitalism. That is how Gessler depicts MKO’s ideological birth:

The Sixties, the time of the PMOI’s birth, are defined in black and white. Perhaps the colours red and white would be more accurate since the East-West conflict deeply divided the mid-20th Century world. On one side, the Soviet bloc under Moscow’s command gathered in the Warsaw Pact. It was held together by a rigid Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy. On the other, stood the western countries inside the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) led by the United States. They were bound together by their belief in the triumph of capitalism…. Moscow and Washington, on the other hand, set off local points of conflict which opened the way for their bids to control strategic regions. Whether it was in Asia, Latin America, or Africa, these centripetal forces led back to the Kremlin or the White House. It was basically in the Middle East that the East-West rivalry found its most serious field of action: the key to access to extraordinary oil reserves. It is in this basic paradigm that it is best to understand the birth of the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran. Like many similar organisations, the PMOI was not born ex nihilo. It comes right out of our contemporary history. This was a period of chances and changes which shed light on the triple political nature of the PMOI: political, religious and social. Like his "colleagues" elsewhere, Massoud Rajavi invented nothing new. 1

The analysis well indicates that the birth of MKO was an out-of-question issue devoid of the two blocs’ challenges. In the same way, the made claims to be backing away from the left ideology is a tactic of fooling Americans. It is taking a chance by wearing pro-democratic mask in European countries more to win Americans’ attention. As explained in Gessler’s book:

The People’s Mojahedin of Iran have hardly any choice but to begin moving their activities to Europe. To do this, they can count on active support from a certain "Progressive International" which has hoped for years to weaken the West. This ultra-Left has no roots in the traditional political currents of thought, even using the idea of "democracy" as bait to lead the unsuspecting into the maze of a kind of instinctive socialism. 2

Referring to Gerard Chaliand as specialist in geopolitics and strategy and the author of the best analytical works available today on the subject of terrorism, Gessler classifies MKO as a terrorist movement that is a devoted anti-imperialist or revolutionary group without a mass base:

In his classification of terrorist movements, he [Gerard Chaliand] devotes an entire chapter to "anti-imperialist or revolutionary groups without a mass base, usually committed to class struggle and armed struggle – almost exclusively in the form of urban guerrilla warfare – in non-democratic countries. This type of movement took root first in Latin America, like the Marighella group in Brazil, Uruguay’s Tupamaros, and the Argentinean Monteneros. Within this category, we also find, with small variations, the small Turkish extreme left groups, [and] the Fedayeen and the People’s Mojahedin of Iran. The efforts of these groups, given the weakness of their social support, usually lead to failure, the hardening of the State and the rise to power of the most repressive elements". 3

Thus, the ideological infrastructure of MKO being Marxism, it cannot possibly adapt itself to the right current but showing a lay-democrat. Of course, the US can never trust the quasi-democrats as a liable alternative. And besides, MKO because of its totalitarian mannerism can hardly walk in the same line with pro-democratic movements and will turn to confront ultra-right if assuming power. As Ervand Abrahamian quotes Mojahedin’s members revealing the gist of their ideology exactly following the Iranian Islamic revolution, there remains no doubt MKO’s ideological background:

A Mojahedin handbook published on the eve of the Islamic Revolution declared: ‘We say "no" to Marxist philosophy, especially to atheism. But we say "yes" to Marxist social thought, particularly to its analysis of feudalism, capitalism, and imperialism’. The same theme was further elaborated in a Mojahedin pamphlet published immediately after the revolution. Beginning with the premise that Marxism is a ‘complex ideology’ containing a ‘scientific’ as well as a ‘philosophical’ component, the pamphlet stressed that the Mojahedin organization from its very inception had accepted much of its science -of course, in an ‘undogmatic manner’- but had rejected most of its philosophy, its denial of the soul and the afterlife, and its dismissal of all religions as the opiate of the masses. 4

References:

1. Gessler, Antoine; the autopsy of an ideological drift, pp. 23-24.

2. Ibid, 22.

3. Ibid, 29.

4. Ervand Abrahamian; The Iranian Mojahedin, Yale University Press New Haven and London, p. 93.

Research Bureau – Mojahedin.ws – May 20, 2008

May 20, 2008 0 comments

Errors in UK Court Decision

A recent UK Court of Appeals decision to uphold a lower court ruling that PMOI (MEK, or MKO) is no longer “concerned in terrorism” revealed serious flaws and a lack of sophistication in the UK legal framework when it comes to combating terrorism. In addition to other vital means, a serious fight against terrorism requires a mature legal system that could not be easily manipulated by deceptive tactics and faulty reasoning developed by terrorist organisations in their efforts to take advantage of our legal apparatus with its pre-911 outlook and structure. After all, leaders of such organisations are known to be masters of deception and PMOI’s leaders are no exception.

Paragraph 38 of the above ruling that has been quoted by the press appears to be the pivotal wisdom behind the UK Appeals Court decision

[http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/443.html]

38- An organisation that has temporarily ceased from terrorist activities for tactical reasons is to be contrasted with an organisation that has decided to attempt to achieve its aims by other than violent means. The latter cannot be said to be ‘concerned in terrorism’, even if the possibility exists that it might decide to revert to terrorism in the future.

In Paragraph 16, the Court takes note of the PMOI statement that: “The PMOI’s permanent cessation of any military activity is the result of a deliberate choice to abandon all military action and instead to use political will as a means of bringing about freedom and democracy in Iran. Taking account of domestic and international circumstances, the PMOI decided at an extraordinary Congress held in Iraq in June 2001, to put an end to its military activities in Iran (i.e. to all its military activities). The decision taken by the extraordinary Congress was ratified by the two ordinary congresses organised in early September 2001 and 2003. This policy has been stated publicly and the PMOI’s leadership and membership signed statements to this effect.”

The Court then quotes several other statements purported to be made by the PMOI and its representatives “denouncing terrorism.” To better illustrate the flaws in the Court’s thinking that led to its erroneous decision, I have quoted most of these statements below directly from the Court’s ruling:

29. On 6 September 2004, in a public and formal address, then PMOI Secretary General, Mrs Moj[g]an Parsai, announced, ‘As it has declared on many occasions, the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran condemns all forms of terrorism and has played a major role in a combating terrorism and fundamentalism under the banner of Islam – inspired by the clerical regime…

In February 2006, in her speech on the anniversary of the fall of the Shah, the PMOI’s current Secretary-General, Ms Sedigheh Hosseini, who was elected in September 2005, again condemned violence and called for a peaceful solution. She said ‘We have said before and reiterate now that we are categorically opposed to and condemn any type of violence.’ She added, ‘We announced our commitment to the call by the Iranian Resistance’s President-elect in October 2003 for a referendum… ”

…

49- (a) there was a significant change in the nature of the PMOI’s activities in 2001 and thereafter, and…

(c) the nature of the rhetoric employed in their publications and propaganda by the PMOI and other, related, organisations such as NCRI, changed significantly during 2001 and 2002 such that, from 2002, we were not shown any material which either claimed responsibility for any acts that could fall within the definition of terrorism for the purposes of the Act or even reported the actions of others carrying out such activities

Denouncing Terrorism!

To realise the manipulations and deceptive tactics that led to PMOI/Mek outsmarting the UK Courts, one needs to understand the language behind the statement attributed to the organisation. Just like any other cultic group, PMOI has its own lingo with self-serving definitions of words and phrases. This is even more true when it comes to defining loaded terms such as “terrorism.” The following arguments can be made to illustrate the disingenuous and demagoguery nature of the group’s statements to the court in “denouncing terrorism.” They also show the lack of sophistication in the EU legal system PMOI has taken advantage of.

The truth of the matter is, not only has MEK refused to denounce violence in its Farsi (Persian) publications, but a review of its recent Farsi materials reveals the opposite. A true denouncement of terrorism should start with a publicly-stated commitment to peaceful and non-violent agenda in the group’s mainstream media, and in its native language. To whisper anti-terror statements to non-Iranian audience without first defining terrorism, and yet publicly glorifying violence under the façade of “revolutionary military resistance” is a known deceptive tactic for those familiar with terror groups. When PLO decided to abandon its military campaign against Israel, and before it was taken seriously by the international community, they publicly announced the shift in their views for their own people in their native tongue, Arabic. PLO also publicly vouched for its commitment to peaceful settlement of its conflicts with Israel followed by announcing its readiness to join the negotiation table.

This is a good paradigm to gauge MEK’s sincerity in its non-violent and peaceful approach, if indeed such commitment exists. PMOI has never believed that its past and present actions have amounted to terrorism. Therefore, when they make private statements denouncing terrorism, what they actually mean is denouncing the actions of others deemed to fall under the definition of “terrorism” in the group’s own dictionary.

The mullahs in Iran, rightly branded as the godfather of international terrorism, have done exactly the same. They too denounce terrorism, and even see themselves as the “victim” of such acts. They do this because they see the actions of others (their opponents) as terrorist activities, not their own. It seems as though the term terrorism is defined by the subjective underlying beliefs and causes of its perpetrators. PMOI claims whatever they do is aimed at the toppling of an oppressive regime, therefore it is justified. Consequently, violence and killing of others is not labelled as terrorism, it is worded as “revolutionary military resistance” as stated in the PMOI’s various Farsi (Persian) publications.

To make my point even clearer, I pose the following key, yet simple question to those who seem to have believed PMOI’s private statement in denouncing terrorism. Does PMOI believe that its military actions in the past fit the definition of terrorism? Any answer but a definitive “yes” to this question leads to a logical conclusion that relying on the PMOI’s private remarks in denouncing what the group considers as terrorism is akin to believing Hitler’s orations in endorsing friendship and cooperation among neighbours. It is a pure manipulation.

The core philosophy of PMOI’s existence is based on violence and terrorism. This is depicted in the group’s emblem as well as the logo of the group’s Farsi (Persian) weekly, the Mojahed.

As seen in the pictures above (left), there is a Koran verse that sits on top of a globe. The informal translation of this verse reads “God has given His priority and special blessings to the warriors (Mujahedin) of His path than the non-warriors (sitters).” This crystallises MEK’s core ideology to establish a world under the Islamic laws. The Earth meridian on the left side of the globe emphasises MEK’s beliefs in internationalism. Also as evident in the emblem, the term Mojahed has graphically metamorphosed into an arm bearing a rifle. This is meant to portray MEK’s core philosophy that military might is the only means of achieving the organization’s goals. The picture on the right is the PMOI’s weekly logo. In this logo, a mirror image of the word MOJAHED in projected as a rifle (April 30, 2008), again, to depict the group’s core view that violence and terrorism is the way to go. The Farsi statement at the bottom of the pictures above refers to National Liberation Army (NLA), the group’s main apparatus of violence and terrorism, and reads “long live NLA as the mighty arm of the heroic people of Iran.” (Mojahed weekly, No. 906, May 7, 2008).

Once again, emphasizing violence and terrorism as the PMOI’s main artery of its existence. With regard to the absence of terror activities by MEK in the past five years (supposedly the threshold period for removal from the FTO list), it would suffice to remind the English maxim that “the wolf may lose his teeth but never his nature.” The group was disarmed after the coalition forces raided Camp Ashraf in 2003, effectively pulling the teeth of its terror machine. The savage nature of PMOI has remained intact, however.

A strong court system is needed if we are serious in combating terrorism. The UK court fell short of a mature legal framework when it was manipulated by the PMOI. This should teach other courts in EU to be alert and cognizant of terror groups tactics. Terror groups like PMOI are capable of deceiving politicians and the public. They take advantage of a porous legal system and waylay for the due time to show their true barbaric nature.

Ahmad Baaraan – Paris, May 19, 2008 – ABaaraan@yahoo.fr

May 19, 2008 0 comments

Lord Corbett

Terror Most Imperial

Lord Colbert does not do his title justice

For centuries the colonizers exploited and dominated the third world. Today, one of the more subtle tools of imperialism is the use of value-laden language that seeks to define the Arab and Muslim world. With labels such as ‘terrorists’ and ‘Islamofascism’, they wish to establish an ‘Orientalist’ perspective of otherness denoting barbarism as set apart from Israel and the West which represents admirable qualities. It is imperative to reject this imperial imposition of characterization and for each state, individually and collectively, to self-rule, foremost through self-definition.

The case of Mojahedeen-e Khalg (MEK) showcases the ever present imperial influence of the West in defining the ‘other’ due to the ownership of language. The hypocrisy is stark given that the U.S. with the help of her ally the British waged a ‘war on terror’ which has resulted in the death of over a million people to date. Yet, a certain Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, a member of the House of Lords from Gordon Brown’s ruling Labor Party, has coauthored an opinion piece with Congressman Bob Filner (D-CA), both of whom promote the terrorist organization of the MEK. In their opinion, these two argue that engagement with Iran would risk, among other things, a “support for international terrorism”[i].

Lord Colbert does not do his title justice; to paraphrase Samuel Butler, a degenerate nobleman is like a turnip. There is nothing good of him but that which is under ground. Else how can he explain throwing in his lot with terrorists who are in the employ of Israel? "Israel is said to have had a relationship with the M.E.K at least since the late nineties, and to have supplied a satellite signal for N.C.RI. broadcasts from Paris into Iran” [ii]. Their servitude to the Israelis was after they had committed treason, murder, and terrorism while under the tutelage of Saddam Hossein – the man that the Americans and the British considered a threat to world peace, and whose demise and the invasion of Iraq has now caused a threat to world peace.

While innocent Iraqis were being killed en masse in the ‘war on terror’, the Commander in Chief gave ‘special persons status’ to Saddam’s pet terrorists in Camp Ashraf while an associate from the powerful Republican lobbying group of Barbour Griffith & Rogers invited Neil Livingstone, the C.E.O. of Global Options, an international risk-management firm, and Gregory Minjack, who was an executive at Public Strategies, a Washington-based crisis-management company” to remove the group from the FTO designation. The lobby group was not without help. Congressman Filner has been on the Hill promoting the group. But perhaps one of their most ardent admirers is Cuban-born Congresswoman Senator Ros-Lehtinen who is not new to the game.

In February 1988, Orlando Bosch had been arrested in Miami and implicated in the 1976 Cubana plot, a terrorist act which had resulted in the downing of flight 455 killing 73 passengers. Joe D. Whitley, associate United States Attorney General at the time, called Bosch “a terrorist, unfettered by laws or human decency, threatening and inflicting violence without regard to the identity of his victims”[iii], had the distinct advantage of having Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) Bosch’s release as one of the cornerstones of her 1989 congressional campaign. This murderer of 73 innocent lives had the more good luck. Ros-Lehtinen’s campaign manager was Jed Bush, the President’s son. In July 1989, a month after meeting his son Jed and Ros-Lehtinen to discuss the Bosch case, President Bush rejected his Justice Department’s recommendation and authorized Bosch’s release who became a resident of the United States two years later.[iv] In granting the MEK terrorists asylum in Iraq, George W. is following a family trend.

Bosch’s terrorist partner, Cuban-born, Luis Posada Carriles dedicated his life to the over throw of Fidel Castro and was a CIA recruit who participated in the calamitous 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, “he was part of Operation Southern Front…and he worked for the Hammer [Oliver North]…From 1967 to 1986, Luis was a compensated agent of the CIA. And George Bush, the vice president, knew what he was doing.”[v] Yet for blowing up a plane and causing 73 people to be killed, he was arrested in 2005 on immigration charges and released in 2007[vi] . It is interesting to note that George H.W. Bush was director of the CIA when the Cubana airliner exploded. What makes the Cuban-born Ros-Lehtinen support the MEK terrorists, does she have a fatal attraction towards assassins and murderers? Or are she and the rest of Congress following the leader of nation that has waged ‘war on terror’?

Perhaps they believe that by imposing the colonial language of calling the ‘other’ ‘uncivilized’ and state sponsor of terrorists, their mass murder and moral annihilation will go unnoticed. “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.” – J.F. Kennedy.

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is an Iranian-American studying at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. She is a member of World Association of International Studies society, Stanford. Her research focus is U.S. foreign policy towards Iran, Iran’s nuclear program, and the influence of lobby groups. She is a peace activist, essayist, radio commentator and public speaker.

[i].http://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-world-press/dont-enable-irans-offenses.html

[ii] Connie Bruck, “A reporter at large: Exiles; How Iran’s expatriates are gaming the nuclear threat”. The New Yorker, March 6, 2006

[iii] Quoted in Weiner, “Case of Cuban Exile Could Test the U.S. Definition of Terrorist,” p. A1.

[iv] Bardach, “Twilight of the Assassins.”

[v] Bardach, “Ibid

[vi] “The Good Terrorist: The United States and Cuba,” The Economist vol. 383, iss. 8526. 28 April 2007. p. 44.

Counter Currents

May 17, 2008 0 comments

Open Letter to UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown

Dear Prime Minister,

The ruling of the UK court of appeal on May 7 indicates that the government has failed to win an appeal against a previous court ruling to keep the terrorist MKO on its proscribed list. However, the ruling has led to an increased tension that may face your country with new challenges. Although your government has insisted that it will ensure that public safety is not endangered by de-proscription of the terrorist MKO, and as the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith reiterated "We will ensure that the safety of the public is not in any way jeopardised by this and tighten legislation if necessary”, it might imply that the government and the judiciary system walk on opposite lines.

We come to understand that you are well aware of the four past decades’ notorious activities of MKO and its future terrorist potentialities when we hear the Home Secretary saying the group has "a long history of terrorism and this is why it was proscribed both in the UK and by other countries around the world”. For sure, such a perception is based on confidential intelligences that for security reasons the public opinion has to be uninformed but are raison d’être for keeping MKO on the list.

In contrast, the court relies only on some partial evidences of the past four years for its judgment. MKO cessation of militarism and terrorism claimed by the group and to which the court refers as an evidence has never been the result of a deliberate choice but forced on it following the coalition forces attack to Iraq as part of fulfilling a mission of uprooting terrorism. There are clear evidences to show that MKO military activities continued right up to the allied invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Even right now they are openly promoting terrorism and threatening their critics in the EU and US.

How is that a globally blacklisted terrorist group decides overnight to abandon all military action and instead to use political will as a means of bringing about freedom and democracy to Iranian people while majority of its fighters are still active in a military camp, many of them held against their will. Furthermore, have you ever received any officially issued statement concerning MKO’s forswearing terrorism?

It is an undeniable fact that MKO remains a terrorist group and will retain its terrorist potentialities even if removed from all countries’ lists. It might only question credibility of claims to combat terrorist threats. MKO’s resort to militarism is not the outcome of a once deliberate decision to abandon it deliberately but innate in its early ideology and methodology of struggle. As once openly asserted by Mehdi Abrishamchi, Maryam Rajavi’s first husband, military infrastructure of the organization stems from its ideology; “We are not the ones to decide the necessity of an organized or aggressive struggle; we are not the ones to decide where to an organized or unorganized struggle leads us. It is not our mentality to decide the necessity of an armed struggle”.

At the time when the terrorist cult of Mojahedin has to be prosecuted for countless instances of terrorist operations against Iranian and Iraqi people, we are shocked to see it is nearly acquitted of its crimes and orders to unleash it of its controlling tag, and somehow, apologized for the injustice done against it by its proscription! It won’t be out of the blue to picture MKO and Maryam Rajavi in particular insisting on an official apology from the UK government, Ministry of Justice and even Her Majesty’s Court.

There are some speculations for the reasons behind the court’s ruling; political reasons, ties of some kind and lack of knowledge about the group’s terrorist nature. No doubt, the escalated tension between Iran and the West plays a role to keep MKO on the scene for instrumental use against Iran. That is the case with a number of the US politicians causing challenges among the country’s administration. It is also the same with some British MPs. It has to be studied to what extent such condemned relations can influence and benefit a country’s national interests and solve internal as well as global problems if the politicians feel a responsibility to have a share.

The stigma of conducting ties with proscribed terrorists is too bad for the advocates of a nation. For any political or maybe personal reasons, ties with the individuals and entities that threaten people’s security is a blameworthy act.

It has to be also pointed out that MKO manipulate sophisticated techniques to establish close friendly ties with politicians who are in dark about the true nature of the organization and fail to have access to accurate evidences on the group’s past history. It is mostly because MKO’s history is a mess of complexity and hardly any outsider can become acquainted with the complexities of its history. Presented evidences on the group’s history in the three past court rulings are good examples to notice.

MKO only believe in a black and white world and whoever walks in the former side is the foe and has to be confronted. If the supposed foe is too powerful to confront, the language of profanity and threat will substitute. MKO’s blasphemous and threatening tone in reaction to the EU Council of Ministers’ decision and other international and humanitarian organizations that disclosed truths on violent nature of the group portend heavy costs that the European states have to sustain. Your country, as a member of European Union, can well prevent unexpected violent moves by MKO agents if well ordered countermeasures are taken and the members are put under close surveillance. Any remiss in close monitoring and investigating of MKO’s activities results in irreparable damages that make statesmen confront great challenges regardless of the heavy price that will be imposed on Western citizens.

Long known as a globally blacklisted terrorist group, MKO is transformed into a destructive cult and a cult of personality as proscribed by the US state Department report in May 2007. In many cases, MKO is referred to as second to al-Qaeda for its globally threatening features and, in spite of being expelled from Iraq, majority of Western countries’ security apparatus are cautious about penetration of its members since they know they would have a hard task to deal with the organization. And your country is not an exception.

The killing of a Brazilian man by armed plainclothes Metropolitan police who shot him as a preventive measure to guarantee the national security is a plain evidence that you are concerned about further possible violent, terrorist operations. It has to be taken into consideration that MKO is a bigger threat since it has merged terrorism with cultism, the latter being the second modern world’s nightmare along the former. Regardless of any court’s ruling, security systems have to be necessarily more watchful of the organization since it will be too late to deal with it after it has struck. A look at Iranian’s contemporary history depicting countless instances of MKO atrocities will be sufficient to remove any subsisting doubts.

Mojahedin.ws – May 17, 2008

May 17, 2008 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The Beaten Bargaining Chip

Then, as speculated before, MKO is nothing more than a waning political cult whose last days of any weight is to be exploited as a political instrument and bargaining chip in political conflicts. Those Western countries that suggest MKO as an alternative definitely pursue accomplishment of their own ambitions vis-à-vis Iran than thinking of any democratic solution in favor of Iranian people. There are broadly stated comments that corroborate what the West precisely follows by decisions to de-proscribe the terrorist MKO.

As stated by Birmingham peer and former MP for Erdington Lord Corbett, released in an article entitled High court offers new hope for Iran, ‘A decision to remove an Iranian opposition group from the UK terror list offers a new solution to the Iran crisis’. ‘As the recent incentives package has followed in the path of its predecessors in failing to bring about any change in Tehran’s behaviour, a new path must be opened alongside any further dialogue to end this crisis. It is here that the PMOI and the Iranian resistance movement, whether in Iran or abroad, offers the international community an Iranian solution to the Iranian crisis.’

Long expelled from Iran, MKO have no iota of publicity in Iran let alone being recognized a legitimate alternative. Any made claim in this respect is a fabrication of MKO propaganda machine in accomplice with a number of its advocates. Under the impact of these misinformation, others are fooled to believe that the group is the only domestically recognized opposition when we hear them stating ‘The people of Iran, assisted by the PMOI, can bring about the peaceful democratic change that Iranians desire. Lifting the ban on the PMOI and recognising it as the legitimate opposition would be a positive solution from the West’s extremely limited options’. Sattar Orangi-Mojahedin.ws – May 17, 2008

May 17, 2008 0 comments

Lord Corbett

Lord Colbert does not do his title justice

(Robin Corbett, who promoted terrorism in Iran and Iraq under the logo of MKO for the past 25 years!!)

Lord Corbet Lord Colbert does not do his title justice; to paraphrase Samuel Butler, a degenerate nobleman is like a turnip. There is nothing good of him but that which is under ground. Else how can he explain throwing in his lot with terrorists who are in the employ of Israel?”Israel is said to have had a relationship with the M.E.K at least since the late nineties, and to have supplied a satellite signal for N.C.RI. broadcasts from Paris into Iran” [ii]. Their servitude to the Israelis was after they had committed treason, murder, and terrorism while under the tutelage of Saddam Hossein – the man that the Americans and the British considered a threat to world peace, and whose demise and the invasion of Iraq has now caused a threat to world peace.

[i] http://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-world-press/

dont-enable-irans-offenses.html

[ii] Connie Bruck, “A reporter at large: Exiles; How Iran’s expatriates are gaming the nuclear threat”. The New Yorker, March 6, 2006

[iii] Quoted in Weiner, “Case of Cuban Exile Could Test the U.S. Definition of Terrorist,” p. A1.

[iv] Bardach, “Twilight of the Assassins.”

[v] Bardach, “Ibid

[vi] “The Good Terrorist: The United States and Cuba,” The Economist vol. 383, iss. 8526. 28 April 2007. p. 44.

By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich, Counter Currents, May 17, 2008

http://www.countercurrents.org/ulrich170508.htm

May 17, 2008 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Neo-Con General Calls for Terror Attacks in Iran

McInerney urges U.S. government to support terrorist organization MEK, Bush administration already bankrolling Al-Qaeda-linked Jundullah group.

Fresh off the revelation of Donald Rumsfeld’s 2006 audio tape admission that a method to reinvigorate the Neo-Con agenda would be another terror attack, Neo-Cons like Ret. Gen. Thomas McInerney, who was part of the Pentagon’s "message force multipliers" propaganda program, have been calling for the Bush administration to commit acts of terror in Iran.

According to the Crooks and Liars blog, McInerney has appeared on Fox News 144 times since Jan 2002. In one of his recent appearances he publicly called for the U.S. government to support groups like MEK, which is listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization, and carry out deadly bombings in Iran.

McInerney: Here’s what I would suggest to you. Number one, we take the National Council for Resistance to Iran off the terrorist list that the Clinton Administration put them on as well as the Mujahedin-e Khalq at the Camp Ashraf in Iraq. Then I would start a tit-for-tat strategy which I wrote up in the Wall Street Journal a year ago: For every EFP that goes off and kills Americans, two go off in Iran. No questions asked. People don’t have to know how it was done. It’s a covert action. They become the most unlucky country in the world.

McInerney’s frothing desire to see women and children blown to bits in the streets of Tehran may have something to do with the fact that "McInerney is on the Board of Directors for several companies with defense-related contracts that would seem to benefit from his pro-war propaganda. For example, Alloy Surfaces Company (ASC), whose contracts for “ammunition and explosives” with the Department of Defense appear to have grown from $15 million in 2002 to more than $169 million in 2006. A conflict of interest, perhaps?"

McInerney "tit-for-tat" strategy, to support MEK-run terror bombings in Iran in retaliation for Iran supposedly killing U.S. troops in Iraq, a baseless claim in itself, is all the more horribly ironic when one considers the fact that MEK "has killed US troops and civilians before back in the 1970s".

As Crooks and Liars points out, the U.S. government is already funding MEK and the group has been linked with numerous bombings inside Iran over the course of the last few years.

In addition – British SAS have been caught training insurgents in Iraq to carry out hi-tech bombings that are later blamed on Iran.

Another Iranian-based terror group that the Bush administration is already funding as a means of regime change in Iran is Jundullah – a Sunni Al-Qaeda terrorist group formerly headed by the alleged mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

"The CIA is giving arms-length support, supplying money and weapons, to an Iranian militant group, Jundullah, which has conducted raids into Iran from bases in Pakistan," the London Telegraph reported last year.

The group has been blamed for a number of bombings inside Iran aimed at destabilizing Ahmadinejad’s government and is also active in Pakistan, having been fingered for its involvement in attacks on police stations and car bombings at the Pakistan-US Cultural Center in 2004.

Crooks and Liars documents White House efforts to censor reports about MEK and other Iranian terror groups in the U.S. corporate media.

In Dec 2006, just days after Rumsfeld was forced to step down, the NYT published a heavily redacted op-ed by Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann. Though none of the info was classified, all of which had previously “been extensively reported in the news media,” much of their article was blacked out because the “White House intervened” before it went to print. In response, Leverett and Mann followed up with an accompanying piece “What We Wanted to Tell You About Iran“ where they provided citations to previously reported sources for all of the redacted info. Raw Story compiled those sources in their “The redacted Iran op-ed revealed” and, surprise, many of the articles refer directly to the MEK terrorist group, but there had been nary a mention in the portions the White House allowed.

So, to recap: One of the Pentagon’s propaganda TV analysts who has clear ties to defense industries that would likely stand to benefit from any increased hostilities is advocating that the US ought to use a terrorist organization to commit acts of terrorism against Iran in response to alleged Iranian involvement in attacks against US forces in Iraq, which might be true, or maybe not. And if that wasn’t outrageous enough, it seems that Bush may have been authorizing such tactics already. Source

factsnotfairies.blogspot – May 16, 2008

May 16, 2008 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts