Page 836 – Nejat Society

Khodabande open letter to Lord Corbett

Dear Lord Corbett,

With the greatest respect, I refer to my previous letter dated February 28, 2007 and many questions which were forwarded to you relating your interview with the BBC that remained unanswered. I was expecting you to clarify at least some of the queries I mentioned in my letter in your next interview.

Nevertheless, now I wish to refer to your recent interview with the Sky News television which was reflected in the website of the Mojahedin-é Khalq Organisation (MKO) called “hambastegimeli”. In this interview you called upon the west to move the obstacles on the way of the MKO who wants to topple the Iranian regime and you demanded the UK to adopt tougher stances against the Islamic Republic of Iran. You have also repeated your previous comments that enlisting the MKO as a proscribed terrorist group was done for political purposes due to appease the Islamic State.

Initially I should emphasze that your comments in your interviews are the replicate of those of Mas’ud and Maryam Rajavi which are constantly repeated in their statements. You also – exactly like them – do not go into details and leave many unanswered questions behind. I do not object you to repeat the leaders of MKO as long as you are prepared to explain quarries.

First of all I wish to know in details that how MKO was stopped to restore peace and freedom in Iran by simply being listed as a terrorist group? What political limitations are they experiencing in the western countries at this very moment? Do you expect the western security services to leave a destructive cult completely unwatched in their countries particularly after the terrorist incident of 11th of September? The MKO today is enjoying satellite broadcasting towards Iran from London; their weekly publication “Mojahed” is published in London and distributed round the world; they have access to parliamentarians and do get supportive press coverage; they have an open hand to raze money in the western countries and guide their activities inside Iran from Paris and other western capitals; they have no limitation on holding demonstrations, press conferences, and public meetings as well as travelling round the world and openly meeting people and they spend huge sums of money on this and have access to excessive funds. So I would be grateful if you could mention some facts relating to the limitations the MKO is enduring in the west to restore peace and democracy in Iran which has come from the direct result of being listed as a terrorist group.

Secondly I would like to ask you that how come the organisation was listed in one instance for political reasons but now its name would not be removed from the list for similar political reasons. I do not believe that the deal – according to you – which was once held between the west and the Islamic Republic of Iran, still applies. On the contrary the relationship between the two sides has deteriorated day by day. I really want to know that what the entire American and European countries, particularly the US and the UK, are gaining politically by keeping the name of the organisation in the various international terrorist lists.

I am anxiously waiting to get the answers of the two above mentioned questioned either from you or any person who is claiming the same as you do. I also do wish that the name of the organisation be removed from any terrorist list round the world and every supposedly limitations imposed on them be lifted as soon as possible in order to take any excuse from them.

Yours faithfully,

Ebrahim Khodabandeh

April 10, 2007 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

CNN: US backing Iran’s Mujahedeen Khalq rebels

CNN reports April 6 that the US military is providing logistical support for the Mujahedeen Khalq, an Iraq-based Iranian guerilla group—which is on the US State Department list of foreign terrorist organizations. According to the report, the US military "regularly escorts" MEK supply runs between Baghdad and its base, Camp Ashraf. "The trips for procurement of logistical needs also take place under the control and protection of the MPs," said Mojgan Parsaii, vice president of MEK and leader of Camp Ashraf.

Officially, it seems this is being done because coalition forces regard MEK as protected people under the Geneva Conventions. "The coalition remains deeply committed to the security and rights of the protected people of Ashraf," U.S. Maj. Gen. John D. Gardner wrote in an official document in March 2006. No official from either the US military or Iran’s embassy in Baghdad would speak on record about the Mujahedeen Khalq Organization (which goes by the acronyms both MEK and MKO).

But former US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said: "What we have here is a policy that described the people here from the MEK as a protected group, and one of our coalition partner countries is actually protecting them in the camp where they mostly are, but there is no change in our policy that the MEK, we still regard them as a terrorist organization."

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, Green Berets arrived at Camp Ashraf to find gardens and monuments, as well as more than 2,000 well-maintained tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, anti-aircraft guns and vehicles.

All 3,800 camp residents were questioned by US forces—including members of an all-female tank battalion. No arrests were made, and a cease-fire agreement guaranteed the camp’s safety, according to ABC. "Everyone’s entry to the camp and his departure are controlled by the US military police force," Parsaii said. However, as we noted in April 2003, media accounts at the time said the camp was destroyed by US bombardment.

"We gave this organization a six-month deadline to leave Iraq, and we informed the Red Cross," Shirwan al-Wa’eli, Iraq’s national security minister, told ABC. "And presumably, our friends the Americans will respect our decision and they will not stay on Iraqi land."

For now, however, the United States continues to protect MEK. "There are counter-pressures, too," Khalilzad said. "There are people who say, ‘No, they should be allowed to stay here.’ And as you know, around the world there are people with different views toward them."

Iran’s Press TV March 27 loaned credence to recent claims that the US is also backing the PEJAK Kurish rebel group in Iran. Press TV interviewed Reese Elrich, author of the book Target Iraq, who recently visited Iran and Iraqi Kurdistanh with Hollywood actor Sean Penn. "Intelligence agencies in the U.S. also sponsor secret armed attacks within Iran. I have found that the US and Israel support the military wing of the outlawed Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PEJAK) and Mojahedin Khalq (MKO)," Elrich said. He also outlined a cynical US strategy to avoid formally supporting groups labelled "terrorist": "The US asks members of these groups if they have left the organization, if they answer yes, they will be given military training for secret operations inside Iran." Submitted by Bill Weinberg on Sat, 04/07/2007

April 10, 2007 0 comments

USA

US Forces Attack Mojahedin Khalq Supporter in Baghdad

US army released a statement on Saturday saying: "In a joint operation with Iraqi forces, the house of a man tied to a Sunni political group in Baghdad was raided in which a large cache of weapons and materials needed for making bombs were found." "During the attack, which was performed on Tuesday, 14 terrorists hiding in the house in Al-Mansour district in western Baghdad were arrested. They had gathered there under the name of body guards for known terrorist Khalf Al-Elayan, member of Sunni Accord Front." The statement also adds: "The amount of weapons found is unbelievable. There are modern weapons, mortar rounds, 5000 bullets and materials used for making bombs." "In the initial inspections, forces found maps planned for attacking coalition forces, pictures of burned British soldiers, photos of an explosion in a restaurant in Mosul in 2004 as well as pictures of dead US soldiers wrapped in US flag."

The operation came at a time when the Iraqi government was pressurized by Washington to employ more Sunni figures in political posts. Shiite and Kurd officials have repeatedly accused some Sunni politicians of having ties to terrorism.

Khalaf Al-Elayan is of few Sunni representatives who went to Europe by the invitation of Mojahedin-e Khalq and held lobbies there to get support for the Mojahedin Khalq (Rajavi cult).

Buratha news, April 08, 2007

http://www.burathanews.com/index.php?show=news&action=article&id=18366

April 10, 2007 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Bush Hypocrisy?

Bush Hypocrisy? The Mujahedin E-Khalq (MEK) Does history not teach those in power anything? Is President Bush comfortable placing his gut instincts (thus far proven rudimentary to say the least!) in a covenant with evil? Can the U.S. once again make a pact with truly bad people under the hackneyed expression, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"? As previously mentioned, the Bush Administration passionately believes the United States "may face no greater challenge from a single country than Iran." So the Bush Administration, under the reported direction of then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, makes parley with a flavor of terrorist organization so virulent that it comes with a slew of names, including: – The People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI) – Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) – Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO) – The National Liberation Army of Iran – National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) Use whatever name grabs your fancy but peruse its terrorist activities since it was founded in 1965. – Opposed the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi

– Assassinated U.S. military personnel and civilians working in Iran in 1970s

– Actively supported the U.S. embassy takover in Tehran in 1979

– Largest opposition group in Iran against newly appointed Ayatollah Khomeini

– Relocated to France, after Khomeini-backed crackdown, until 1986.

– France made deal with Iran to force MEK from France. They moved to Iraq.

– Iraq’s Saddam Hussein gave military and financial aid and base of operations.

– Iraq armed the MEK and used it against Iranian forces in Iran / Iraq war

– MEK assisted the Iraqi Republican Guard in suppressing the Kurdish and Shiite uprisings in Iraq after the 1991 Persian Gulf War

– MEK leader, "Take the Kurds under your tanks, and save your bullets for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards." See report by Human Rights Watch for more examples should this not be enough evidence that the MKO was, at the very least, complicit with the actions of the sick dictator Saddam Hussein. The MKO have the blood of American servicemen and citizens on its resume of terror. Yet even as recently as 2003 there have been reports of political support for the MKO by members of the U.S. Congress – across party lines I must say – including the reputable Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) and Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas). 08/04/2007

April 10, 2007 0 comments

France

New Charges Added to MKO’s Criminal Case

French prosecutor announced that new charges have been added to the case against MKO and the head of the group Maryam Rajavi.

AFP’s report from Paris on Wednesday indicate that prosecutor general has asked the court to add money laundering and fraud charges to the case, which includes connection with terrorism and saboteur groups.

According to the report, prosecutor has submitted this request to anti-terror court on March 19.

MKO collected public donations in Paris and sent the money to bank accounts abroad, judges say.

On June 17, 2003, French police attacked MKO headquarters in the suburbs of French capital and arrested 164 MKO members including Maryam Rajavi.

The group has been listed as terrorist by the US and EU.

IRNA, April 07, 2007

April 10, 2007 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

U.S. protects Iranian opposition group in Iraq

USA support and protects Mojahedin Khalq (Rajavi cult) terrorists in Iraq

U.S. protects Iranian opposition group in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — An Iranian opposition group based in Iraq, despite being considered terrorists by the United States, continues to receive protection from the American military in the face of Iraqi pressure to leave the country.

It’s a paradox possible only because the United States considers the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, or MEK, a source of valuable intelligence on Iran.

Iranian officials tied the MEK to an explosion in February at a girls school in Zahedan, Iran. (Full story)

The group also is credited with helping expose Iran’s secret nuclear program through spying on Tehran for decades. And the group is considered an ally to America because of its opposition to Tehran.

However, the U.S. State Department officially considers the MEK a terrorist organization — meaning no American can deal with it; U.S. banks must freeze its assets; and any American giving support to its members is committing a crime.

The U.S. military, though, regularly escorts MEK supply runs between Baghdad and its base, Camp Ashraf.

"The trips for procurement of logistical needs also take place under the control and protection of the MPs," said Mojgan Parsaii, vice president of MEK and leader of Camp Ashraf.

That’s because, according to U.S. documents, coalition forces regard MEK as protected people under the Geneva Conventions.

"The coalition remains deeply committed to the security and rights of the protected people of Ashraf," U.S. Maj. Gen. John D. Gardner wrote in March 2006.

The group also enjoys the protection of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

"The ICRC has made clear that the residents of Camp Ashraf must not be deported, expelled or repatriated," according to an ICRC letter.

Despite repeated requests, neither Iran’s ambassador in Baghdad nor the U.S. military would comment on MEK, also known as Mojahedin Khalq Organization, or MKO.

But former U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said, "What we have here is a policy that described the people here from the MEK as a protected group, and one of our coalition partner countries is actually protecting them in the camp where they mostly are, but there is no change in our policy that the MEK, we still regard them as a terrorist organization."

When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, Green Berets arrived at Camp Ashraf to find gardens and monuments there, along with more than 2,000 well-maintained tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, anti-aircraft guns and vehicles.

All 3,800 camp residents were questioned by Americans — including, interestingly, a female tank battalion. No arrests were made, and the camp quickly surrendered under a cease-fire agreement — an agreement that also guaranteed its safety.

"Everyone’s entry to the camp and his departure are controlled by the U.S. military police force," Parsaii said.

The MEK denies it is a terrorist group. Both Iran and the Iraqi government, however, accuse the group of ongoing terrorist attacks, and the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government wants it out.

"We gave this organization a six-month deadline to leave Iraq, and we informed the Red Cross," said Shirwan al-Wa’eli, Iraq’s national security minister. "And presumably, our friends the Americans will respect our decision and they will not stay on Iraqi land."

For now, however, the United States continues to protect MEK.

"There are counter-pressures, too," Khalilzad said. "There are people who say, ‘No, they should be allowed to stay here.’ And as you know, around the world there are people with different views toward them." From Michael Ware, CNN, Apri 05, 2007 http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/05/ protected.terrorists/index.html?section=cnn_latest

April 10, 2007 0 comments

USA

Suspicious deal with the Terrorists

For many years Mujahedin-e Khalq received direct assistance from Saddam Hussein. They are on the U.S. government’s official list of terrorist organizations, that is to say, it’s a serious crime for any American to deal with it. The US banks have a responsibility to freeze MEK assets and any member caught anywhere in the world will be arrested.

MEK militants operate out of a camp protected by American military police, are routinely escorted by the U.S. military on their supply runs and Major Gen. John Gardner has prounounced his command as "deeply committed to the security and rights of the protected people of Ashraf (MEK’s base camp)".

MEK is an Iranian "Shiite-Marxist" guerrilla group based in Iraq, making forays into Iran to blow things up and, apparently, to gather intelligence. The value of whatever intelligence MEK claims to have is the quid pro quo for using U.S. troops to provide safe haven for a group of terrorists who had been deemed beyond the pale of any human contact by the State Department. Apparently even the Shiite government in Baghdad wants the MEK out of the country – they’ve given them six months to go. But who knows? If it serves U.S. interests to harbor anti-Iran terrorists on Iraqi soil, they may well continue to get a pass.

To add to the "complexity" of the US harboring MEK, according to numerous sources, this outfit originally settled in Iraq for its base of operations in 1986, and not only was funded by Saddam’s government for it’s actions against Iran, but MEK fighters assisted Saddam in his bloody suppression of the Shiite rebellion in 1991.

Posted by Reg – 08/04/2007

April 10, 2007 0 comments

Ann Singleton Former members of the MEK

LK Today program on GMTV (England)

The interviewer: my next guest is a married mother, she comes from Leeds and she is from a white middle class British family. She probably is not somebody who in the first view is expected to have gone to a military base to receive military training that’s exactly what happened to Ann Singleton after being brainwashed by an extremist group and she joins me today. It’s really good to see you, Ann. I can’t believe how your life has changed so much that you left the life you liked and the road you were supposed to travel and now you have again a different life. Its extraordinary, isn’t it? How did you get involved with the group at the first place?

Singleton: in the late 1970’s I went to a college in Manchester University to study English. I had an Iranian boy friend. It was just after the revolution. There were a lot of activities going on. In fact, 1979 was completely a political year and Margaret Tacher has just been elected. So I joined the students’ union in the university and there were groups of students from every corner of the world almost talking politics. But the only group that really seemed to be active, actually doing things like calling for demonstrations and meetings were the Mujahedin. I guess because I had already an introduction through my boy friend, I joined them.

Interviewer: And thus it was the beginning but they were apparently a sinister group, almost it was a cult. Wasn’t it? They did brainwash you? Didn’t they?

Singleton: It was really a cult. Something I didn’t find out until I left the group.

Interviewer: Right. You do know in such groups the process happens so gradually and slowly. They are very clever. They became manipulative people.

Singleton: exactly, very manipulative. The individuals were completely unaware of what the cult did with him or her. At first you think they are very sincere and self scarifying people but actually they model a kind of special behavior to you which you get drawn into that kind of behavior that you start to mirror and take it on yourself.

Interviewer: you told me before that you became active here and showed some videos to me, by the way you entered the group but according to what you said you went abroad for their work? How did you do that?

Singleton: they took me to a stage that I voluntarily, with pure eagerness prepared myself to go to their military training camps in Iraq.

Interviewer: what was their training program? I mean what did they teach you?

Singleton (while her photo with military uniform is shown): in fact we were about 50 people went to Iraq. Men and women were separated. We went to a place where was clearly obvious that was an Iraqi military base. They started to train us with basic, normal military training including collective system, individual attack and defense, driving trucks and getting familiar with Kalashnikov.

Interviewer: did they tell you for what purpose or objective all these trainings were? You told that they showed videos on people who were receiving military training in Iraq, however what was their purpose, had they ever declared this purpose?

Singleton: it’s now unbelievable even for myself. By the way it was clear to me that the final stage is a military invasion to Iran. This was something that was determined. At that time I was so inspired by their inspirations that I was completely delivered myself to them and followed them, I was ready to fight for them.

Interviewer: how did you leave the group? Because many people can’t do this.

Singleton: it was extremely difficult. It was the most difficult work I have ever done. In 1993, I escaped from their safe house in London because I couldn’t respond their illogic demands any more.

They told that a member of the group should never marry and they forced the married members to divorce their spouses. At that time I was single and had no kids but I thought that I couldn’t accept this idea. I left them in 1993 but it lasted three more years until I could cut all my psychological and affectional relations with them and they always tried to get me back. But even when I had no contact with, it lasted three or four years with research I did on cults and getting familiar with mind control methods and manipulative work on individualists I found out that I was quiet under their control.

Interviewer: it’s very curious and extraordinary. The problem is that you were a normal, educated person, you might have been a little naive but if they could have such a control over you, I suppose we have to be concerned about everyone in the world, who may be even more vulnerable than you. It’s so horrible, isn’t it?

Singleton: yes, absolutely it is. I hope that my experience works as a warning for any other person. Every body, in a point of time during the life may be vulnerable from an aspect. In case of rights, for example about business there are rules that support the customer against the deceiving salesperson, but there is no support for those who are deceived by people like Mujahedin and are recruited by a destructive cult.

Interviewer: yes that’s right and even some people substantially fear doing anything and getting involved in quarrel. They are afraid of some issues for example being accused to supporting racism. By the way, it should be considered that such people do anything to achieve their goal. Now that you have a little boy, isn’t there any danger from their part because you talk against them? since you got married and rebuilt your life. Don’t you fear to talk about them so openly and prevent people from joining them?

Singleton: I personally don’t feel dangerous from MKO but they have tried a lot, by various ways to stop me. Many of former members of the cults don’t set out for describing their stories in the cult and the reason is that they’re very afraid of their threat and intimidation.

Interviewer: by the way you could really rebuild your life. You are definitely very concerned bout those who couldn’t do this.

Singleton: I am at present time, managing a website and my objective to launch this website is that I can denounce the reality of the organization and what its real nature is. This organization has got a modern pro-western gesture that is apparently very democratic and advocating human rights. But I know that the members of the organization don’t enjoy even the least of human rights. The global statement of human rights includes 30 articles. Even one of those articles isn’t applied for members of a cult like Mujahedin. I’m really interested in rescuing the members of MKO and taking them out of the cult and also I’d like to prevent new individuals from being recruited by the cult.

Interviewer: its exactly so since unfortunately now the situation is much worse than the time you were recruited by them. I appreciate you because you shared such information us with. And also it is very important that this information with more details be reflected in your website since they’re very crucial.

TRANSCRIPTION: NEJAT SOCIETY

April 10, 2007 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Unconscious Intelligence Sources!

As the crisis on British sailors happened, remnants of Rajavi who thought they could take advantage of the issue tried to win the attention of public opinion.

One of their moves was to reveal so-called intelligence claimed by the group to have been received from revolutionary guard!

The alleged intelligence indicated that detention of sailors had been planned before and that it was supervised by Iranian supreme leader!

The MKO’s project, called "Hostage taking Crisis", was aimed at instigating British government against Iran. They tried to convince Britons that Iran’s move was in response to UN Security Council’s resolution.

According to the analyses of Rajavi’s gang, this crisis could last for months and they had to do their best to prevent a diplomatic resolution.

However, stupid remnants of Rajavi’s gang were wrong from the beginning:

1. British government was well aware of espionage mission of its soldiers in the Iranian waters and therefore paid no attention to the stories of MKO.

2. As usual, the gang of Rajavi had no proof to present and this added to reporters uncertainty so that all news wires reporting MKO’s claims said that the group had presented no documents.

3. In an interview with the Sky News before the detention of British sailors, their commander had stressed that they had espionage missions in the Iranian waters. This also adds to the failure of MKO’s scenario.

Now, the question is that why MKO’s intelligence sources, who are allegedly aware of even top secret meetings of Iranian leaders and IRGC commanders, didn’t say anything of Iran’s plan to release British sailors! Why aren’t there any words by them on the reasons why Iran freed them?

It seems as if MKO’s sources become unconscious when there’s no crisis and they start making stories as they feel there’s a crisis.

This is called "intelligence unconsciousness at the time of scandals"!

Irandidban – 2007/04/07

April 10, 2007 0 comments

The Ideology of the MEK

The Islamic Republic Referendum, an Issue of Challenge

The presence of Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) in the run of Islamic Republic Referendum in 1979 and its support of the move is an underlying matter of dispute between the Iranian opposition groups, and in some respects the US State Department, and MKO. The group has constantly reiterated that from the very beginning of the Islamic revolution in 1978 has taken an opponent position against the move and its leadership. To justify its congenial attitude in some phases based on existing and unquestioned evidences, MKO claim it was a force of circumstance to follow a conciliatory attitude towards the revolution and the leadership. Mojahedin say they could well have been liquidated unless they moved on a front of accommodation.

No doubt, both in the issue of referendum and the seizure of the US embassy in Tehran, Mojahedin were very critical, mostly not of the moves but of the contents. In fact, their dismay was the result of the group’s political and ideological teachings that did not evaluate the two moves coinciding with their strategic ends, that is to say, to escalate a gross military tension with the US. In general, their main objective was aimed at heating up the created tension between the US and Iran to a point that lead to a military face-off according to Mojahedin’s antagonistic ideology. In other words, more than any thing else Mojahedin were focusing on the counter-imperialistic aspect of the Islamic Republic, as they said:

The main issue is not what the form and the name of the regime should be, the most important goal and the attempt of the imperialism is directed at keeping our society fundamentally unchanged and non-reformed so the move could be totally shifted towards the imperialism and bolstering up the bastion of non-revolutionary elements and links. [1]

Somewhere else, in an attempt to intensify the challenging attitude, they said:

From now on, Shah is no more a protector of the imperialism’s interests but, in respect to your [Khomeini] decisive leadership, more known as a nemesis and a cause for a greater, violent anti-imperialism revolution. [2]

Addressing Ayatollah Khomeini, they also said:

The imperialism well understood that further confrontation with people and you would lead to a deliberately aggravated public rage. [3]

Indeed, Mojahedin position at the time, in contrast to their present claims of willing to establish freedom and democracy, persisted in political standstill and anarchism, which they called revolution, and establishing a form of conductible democracy or, according to Mojahedin’s ideological trend, a revolutionary democracy modeled in Stalinism. It was the absolute form of the democracy they deemed for the Islamic Republic. In a statement they said:

Our congratulation carries the hope that in future the flaws and errors of this prime democracy in its revolutionary concept are corrected, so there would be no dispute in the form in the coming elections. [4]

Based on their ideological trends, Mojahedin had the same Marxist-based interpretations of other issues in Iran including the human rights. They believed that the issue of human rights in Iran was an instrument for the Shah’s regime to prevent any revolution. In a statement congratulating the initiation of the Islamic Republic they said:

No doubt, the traitor Shah was the most servile puppet of imperialism. So it was impossible for the colonialists to anticipate totally ignoring so anti-national a puppet. Thus, by scheming a totally imperialistic plot called the human rights, imperialism tried to lessen the burden pressing on the proxy regimes to prevent possible burst of revolutions in those societies. [5]

Such views work as a good yardstick to have an analysis of Mojahedin’s antagonistic positions against the Islamic Republic and its principles with the exception that today, because of the grave political situation they are entwined with, their views are tainted with a liberal and American culture. No body is in the doubt that Mojahedin from the very beginning were challenging the Iranian revolution. However, as mentioned, their today’s position is completely different with their past in respect to the issues of imperialism, liberalism and bourgeoisie which indicate that Mojahedin, following an ideologically opportunistic policy, seize the opportunity in any position taking.

Mojahedin’s earlier confession of their perforce coincidence with the Islamic Republic at its early days and their present adaptation with the West in general and the US in particular carries the message that zigzagging position taking [6] is an innate feature of hypocrite Mojahedin. Moreover, Mojahedin, besides zigzagging tactics, never retreat from their ideological and cult-funded teachings. Now the question is that how much are the Americans convinced, being aware of Mojahedin’s opportunistic nature, [7] to manipulate Mojahedin as an instrument against Iran? Although not exposed before the eyes of the world, the evidences tell a possibility of the US maintaining contacts with Mojahedin.

Notes

[1]. A collection of MKO’s statements and announcements, vol. 1, MKO Publications, Bahman 1358.

[2]. ibid.

[3]. ibid.

[4]. ibid.

[5]. ibid.

[6]. Radio Farda interview with Saeed Shahsavandi.

[7]. In a part of the US State Department Announcement about Mojahedin we read “It is difficult to accept at face value promises of future conduct when an organization fails to acknowledge its past”. 1994.

Bahar Irani – April 7, 2007 – Mojahedin.ws

April 10, 2007 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts