Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
Nejat Society
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
© 2003 - 2024 NEJAT Society. nejatngo.org
USA

US already at war with Iran

The US seems to be using an Iraqi terror group known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) to create instability and commit acts of violence (remember the terror bombings there?) in Iran before going to a full-on war with them, as reported by The Raw Story here. It appears that most of this group has been trained by the CIA.

If you read the article, you’ll see many things that were mentioned in the New Yorker article by Hersh which I mentioned in a previous post, being confirmed. One of them is the fact that the US already has special forces in Iran gathering information on targets and other intelligence.

And what was even more surprising to me, is that I found an article by Scott Ritter published in June 2005, where he was already mentioning that the US was working with the MEK along with more details on that, and where he also mentions the use of drones above Iran.

The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein’s dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA’s Directorate of Operations.

It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

Perhaps the adage of “one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist” has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

His article is also a very interesting read, and again confirms much of the story by Hersh.

When you read the Raw Story article and the one by Scott Ritter, note that both mention that the US already seems to be at war with Iran. Here is a comparison:

Raw Story article (April 2006): “We are already at war,” the UN official told RAW STORY. Asked how long the MEK agents have been active in the region under the guidance of the US military civilian leadership, the UN official explained that the clandestine war had been going on for roughly a year and included unmanned drones run jointly by several agencies.

Scott Ritter article (June 2005): The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

The diplomatic efforts just seem to be a show to mislead everyone while actual war preparations, and indeed the beginning attacks, are already taking place, similar to the months before the war with Iraq.

In a stunning repeat of pre-war Iraq activities, the Bush administration continues to publicly call for action and pursue diplomatic solutions to allegations that Iran is bomb-ready. Behind the scenes, however, the administration is already well underway and engaged in ground operations in Iran.

Scott Ritter talks about this in more details in his article.

The question that now remains seems to be: When will Bush officially declare the war with Iran on TV?

Karel Donk –  April 13th, 2006

December 6, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

Treacherous Plan Exposed, MKO Moans

Following the revelation of a plan on using the MKO members by Pentagon in Congressional Weekly, moaning and complaining started to rise from both sides of this dirty deal.

On one hand, the Pentagon denied the issue as whole and even admitted the group has mistreated its own members and on the other hand, cult’s spokespersons in Europe tried to cover the issue as if there has been nothing between the group and the Pentagon.

Earlier, Rajavi and his followers stupidly claimed of being independent from Saddam Hussein but when the tapes of their relationships were broadcast they started to deny the facts.

When the spies of MKO reported of when the Iranian military operations were going to start (documents are available from MKO’s own journals), they called it patriotism- like what they do to flatter Americans.

This is not a fault by the people of the world, who believe disloyalty to the nation is called treachery, who can’t say dependence on Saddam Hussein is "independence", who can’t ignore MKO’s readiness for participation in any possible war against Iran.

As stated by the spokesperson of the MKO, no secret service in the world- including Pentagon and others- is going to hire the spies who are ready to work against their nation for free; the fact is that they will use such people as a throwaway handkerchief.

So this is the message to the gang of Rajavi and its spokespersons: don’t try to deny being employed by the Pentagon, because the US officials will be certainly criticized for hiring the most stupid spies of the world.

Irandidban –  2006/11/30

 

December 4, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Humiliation of Women in MKO

Women’s activists have marked 25 November as a day to contradict all forms of violence against women and the campaigners seek to eliminate violence done against women.

In the modern world, the evil of inequality, humiliation, sexual harassment, and a domineering masculine violence against women still continues to exist. The most prominent instances of violence against women are sexual slavery and social deprivation and limitations. Not only in the under-developed but also in developed countries women are subject to various physical and psychological practices of violence and pressure. Many of these victims are wives and daughters who are regarded as the possessions of the husbands and fathers. Multitudes are also the victims of the clandestine cults and political groups wherein they are abused as sexual slaves, instruments to advance the cult and group’s objectives, and in general, servitudes of a masculine hegemony.

An example to reveal the hegemonic abuse of women is the condition of female insiders of MKO. The predicament of these insiders, who under the hollow slogans of being the pioneers and heroines of freedom and democracy suffer crushing physical and psychological pressures, is even worse than those living in the outside world. They are under severe physical and psychological cult bounds of the organization and deprived of free will, thought, and even imaginations.

In two phases, at least to mention, women suffered under the extreme exploitation exercised by MKO. In the first phase, on pretext of removing obstacles for the advancement of the struggle, the leaders ordered compulsory inter-organizational marriages. These marriages didn’t take place according to the members’ tastes or ages. This was closely related with rising and degrees of merit. Meanly, it was related with how much the members had adapted to the organization. The couples thus married were forbidden to have children and their conjugal duties and meetings were under strict control.

In fact, the marriage was an ideological practice; the couples were the property of the organization and their marriage had to be channeled for the advancement of organizational ends rather than to secure familial and emotional relations. The target was not love, emotion, sexual pleasure or continuation of the generations but the control of the forces and maintenance of the organization. Women were utilized as the objects of controlling the male insiders and motivating them onward.

The second phase began with the ideological divorces after MKO’s failure in the operation Eternal Light. To justify the failure, Massoud Rajavi in 1991 completed his philosophy of ideological revolution by the decree of ideological divorcing. He gave the command of general divorcing of all married members. Thereafter, women, suffering grave humiliation, had to succumb to the wills of the leaders. In 2003, the world was shocked to see members of MKO setting themselves on fire to protest Maryam Rajavi’s arrest by French police. Two women members, Marzieh Babakhani and Neda Hassani, died of the injuries. They had the order to sacrifice themselves for the leader.

Many of women members are crushed under heavy physical and psychological pressures at the present. They suffer humiliation by regular confessions of the sins they have never committed before other members and have to write and report about their dreams and fancies. Where in the world women are treated as they are? Confined within the walls of a heavily guarded military camp in Iraq, these women are susceptible to any form of assault and harassment.

If international bodies and Women’s activists seek to eliminate violence against women, a proven case of exploitation and violence extends before their eyes. If they are determined, they can easily hear the help cries of these women. They do not wish for much; they want to live like any ordinary woman in the world.

Mojahedin.ws  –  Bahar Irani – December 3, 2006

December 4, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Charge d’affaires explains invalidity of MKO testimony

Charge d’affaires explains invalidity of MKO testimony to Argentine Judge

Iranian charge d’affaires to Argentina Mohsen Baharvand explained invalidity of the testimony made by members of terrorist Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) to Argentine Judge Rodolfo Conicoba Corral, Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said on Sunday.

He told reporters that the meeting of the charge d’affaires with the Argentine judge had been arranged seven months ago in the context of cooperation between Tehran and Buenos Aires on legal proceedings about bombing of Argentine Jewish Center (AMIA).

"Following Tehran prosecutor’s decision to reciprocate Argentine justice system’s action violating immunity of Iranian government, the Foreign Ministry planned a meeting to take place in Buenos Aires between Iranian charge d’affaires and and Judge Corral to help him get rid of isolated approach and the big mistake he committed in the legal proceedings about the AMIA bombing."

"The charge d’affaires enlightened the Argentine judge that testimony produced by MKO members who according to US State Department are the dangerous terrorists of the Middle East is invalid and away from wisdom, especially the allegation that the terrorist bombing has taken place in reaction to Argentine government’s refusal to go ahead with cooperation on nuclear program," Hosseini said.

The spokesman said that Iranian Jewish community enjoy freedom and they have historical co-existence with other communities of Iranians so that the Argentine justice system has been misled by the false testimonies to bring those responsible to justice.

He said that Iranian nation and government sympathize with the bereaved families of AMIA bombing and is ready to cooperate with Argentine justice system to hunt down the terrorists.

"Iran reserves the right to defend Iranian nationals against baseless allegations about AMIA bombing and expects Buenos Aires government to respect immunity of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its senior officials."

IRNA –  December 03, 2006

December 4, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Iran, Iraq Issue Joint Statement

TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- To conclude the 3-day visit to Tehran by President Jalal Talabani, Iran and Iraq issued a joint press statement here on Wednesday.

According to the Presidential Press Office, the two sides have stressed in the statement that Iran and Iraq share many common views about various bilateral, regional and international issues.

The statement further said that both sides are insistent on upgrading their present level of relations and cooperation in all political, security, oil, industry, economic and cultural spheres, given their abundant age-old historical, cultural and religious commonalities.

The Islamic republic of Iran has also stressed the necessity for the safeguarding of Iran’s national unity, territorial integrity and independence, while it also voiced support for the building up of a political trend, establishment of democratic institutions, and restoration of the Iraqi nation’s right to control their countries’ natural wealth, enjoy territorial integrity and form their desired political life based on Iraq’s new Constitution.

….

..

In another part, the Islamic Republic of Iran welcomed the recent decision and a relevant approval of the Iraqi government for expelling the members of the terrorist group Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) from that country, and stressed that accelerating implementation of the said decision will be a positive step in the development and deepening of the two countries’ relations.

Reminding the crimes committed by Saddam’s regime against Iraqi people and its military aggression against Iran and Kuwait, the two sides reiterated the necessity for a transparent and just trial of Saddam and the other high ranking officials of the former Iraqi regime.

Fars News Agency –  2006-11-30

December 4, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
UK

The residents of Camp Ashraf are subject to the laws of Iraq

UK foreign Office: The residents of Camp Ashraf are subject to the laws of Iraq

Harry Cohen (Leyton & Wanstead, Labour) Hansard source

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what her Department’s policy is on the proposed extradition to Iran of the Iranian dissidents in Camp Ashraf, South East Baghdad; and if she will make a statement.

Kim Howells (Minister of State (Middle East), Foreign & Commonwealth Office) Hansard source

The residents of Camp Ashraf are subject to the laws of Iraq, including laws on residency and immigration. We would expect the Government of Iraq to implement these laws fairly and with due regard to the rights of those concerned. Camp Ashraf residents who have not personally been involved in illegal activities are free to leave the camp and return to their home countries if they have the appropriate travel documents. A number have already voluntarily returned to Iran, where they are now living. Some 300 of the approximately 3,500 residents of the camp have chosen to return to Iran with assistance and support from the Iraqi Human Rights Ministry and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki recently announced that he would establish a committee to look into the continuing residence in Iraq of those people living in Camp Ashraf, who in the main are not Iraqi nationals. But we are not aware of any plans to extradite Camp Ashraf residents to Iran.

House of Commons

 

December 4, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq 's Terrorism

A Humanitarian Negligence in Favor of Terrorists

Maziar Bahari, a Newsweek correspondent in Iran, in an article published in blog.washingtonpost under the title of “An Iranian Dissects U.S.-Iran Talks” states that both the US and Iran have lost opportunities to get engaged in a dialog about issues of interest that matter to both countries. He believes that “There are four issues Americans can start having a dialog about with Iran to get the ball rolling”, the first of which is “Disbanding the Iraqi-based Iranian terrorist group PMOI (People’s Mujaheddin of Iran aka MKO aka NCRI)”.

He further elucidates facts about the terrorist nature of the group and the terrorist atrocities its members perpetrated in Iran and the Iraq under Saddam.

The Iraqi-based PMOI is a terrorist organization that killed an American citizen in the 1970’s and helped Saddam to massacre the Kurds after the First Gulf War. If you think Al Qaeda or Hezbollah came up with the idea of suicide bombing you should know that PMOI pioneered suicide bombing in Iran in the early 80’s when they killed a number of Iranian senior officials as well as innocent people. PMOI was in turn ruthlessly punished by the Iranian government. In the mid-80’s PMOI moved to Saddam’s Iraq and became part of his army. Since then they have been regarded as traitors and lost any sympathy inside Iran. But through a powerful public relations campaign and focused lobbying in Washington they managed to present themselves as a viable alternative to the "regime of mullahs." PMOI was put on the American government’s list of foreign terrorist organizations in 1997. But the neo-cons thought that following their success in Iraq they could conquer Tehran with the help of PMOI. As a result the U.S. government gave the members of the terrorist group protection.

As things stand today PMOI members in their base north of Baghdad became more of liability than help to the American forces in Iraq. These days the Kurdish president of Iraq, Jalal Talibani, whose people were killed by the PMOI want them out of there and the Shia Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri Al Maliki, last September asked PMOI to find a new base within six months. It’s difficult to prescribe to anything to do with three and something thousand Shia Iranians stuck in the middle of Sunni Triangle but it’s time to at least start talking to Iran about the fate of PMOI members. If not for political reasons at least for humanitarian reasons.

Maziar Bahari’s conclusion is a fact that all Western supporters of MKO should pay some attention to; Mojahedin are most detested both in Iran and Iraq regardless of their public relations potentiality to establish close identification with mavericks and intransigents.

The Iraqi people, especially the Kurdish people, in no wise forget Mojahedin’s collaboration with the ousted Saddam against the innocent Iraqi people, neither do the world. Dr. Amir Matin in his comment on Mr. Bahari’s article expounds that:

PMOI exemplifies terrorism. They acted as professional militia in Iraq to help Saddam massacre Kurdish innocent people. They killed civilian Kurds on large scales in most brutal ways possible. An ex-member of PMOI reported that they used tanks to overrun bodies of old Kurdish villagers and could hear their scream while they were being crushed! There is a tape of Massud Rajavi reporting on these massacres. With pride, in a meeting with Iraqi officials, he was describing it as only fulfilling his duties and also saying "your enemies are my enemies".

Besides, the issue of those members who reside in Camp Ashraf in Iraq should be taken into consideration as a humanitarian issue rather than political. Nearly 3000 members are living under harsh conditions in the camp while the group’s leaders are concerned about the refugee state and insisting to stay in Iraq. No body cares the less about these members as individuals who have rights to decide for their own destiny.

The international bodies should act before it is too late because Mojahedin, as a terrorist cult, do not exempt their own insiders from the innate violence to pave the way towards the fulfillment of the goals.

A. Afshar – Mojahedin.ws – November 28, 2006

November 30, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
UK

UK Lords must eventually face the facts

Beginning 11th of September 2001, the west has in the name of fighting terrorism made enormous investments in the Middle East with little to show for it in the past 5 years. In Afghanistan, the Taliban are growing stronger with each passing day. And in Iraq, the coalition military machine is stuck in the bloody conflict between Shiites and Sunnis.

Perhaps one of the explanations for this disaster can be that few, if any, western governments can come to an agreement as to what terrorism means. Whenever the economic and special interests of the west are in danger, there seems to be no hindrance or doubt in working with known terrorists. The violent and barbaric regime of Taliban came to power in 1996 amidst a civil war with the backing of Pakistan and C.I.A. with funding from Saudi Arabia and U.A.E. And it seems Pakistan is now being portrayed as a close ally in the fight against terrorism.

Saudi Arabia was one of the biggest contributors to the Taliban regime and was one of only three nations worldwide which recognized the Taliban as a legitimate government. Today, these three countries are regarded as the United States’ allies in the ‘war against terrorism’. There are many examples of such double standards, which begs the question, ‘how are we to trust the west’s intentions in this global battle against terrorism?’

The west conveniently ignores human rights issues in countries which it regards as allies such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and others. Clearly this ‘war on terror’ is a complex, multilayered issue.

A glaring example of the lack of clarity on this issue is that a number of western countries, in the name of fighting the Iranian regime, have chosen to support the terrorist cult of Mojahedin-e Khalq of Iran (aka MKO, PMOI, NCRI). The MKO has a 40 years’ history filled with violence and terrorist activities. This group has also shown the brunt of its viciousness toward its own members, and has resorted to torture and imprisonment and also killing of its internal opponents. The cult of Mojahedin-e Khalq, drew a large following with its anti-imperialist and anti-Israeli slogans during and after the revolution of 1979. They proclaimed in its newspaper that they would turn Iran to another Vietnam for the Americans and the assassination of six American personnel in Iran before the revolution was and always has been a proud achievement in their past. Of course they will deny this now, but documents and evidence show otherwise.

The MKO cult then fled to Iraq and for the next 20 years became a close ally of Saddam Hussein. Under the reign of Saddam Hussein the MKO became a more trusted part of his apparatus of power than his own Republican Guard. And he had good reasons for feeling that way. The MKO has a large and well connected public relations department that will distribute any news about Iran to the outside world no matter how small and insignificant. But it’s interesting to note that the Mojahedin-e Khalq have never publicly denounced the terrorist act of 11th of September either on their TV channels or their numerous websites or newspapers. Even more startling are the stories of joyful celebration which greeted the September 11th attack which were revealed by ex-members of MKO who fled the organization after the Iraq invasion of 2003 and the fall of Saddam Hussein. In 1991 when the Ba’athist Party and military was facing uprisings from the Iraqi masses, the MKO stood firm and helped to suppress the Iraqi people on Saddam Hussein’s orders. The Mojahedin-e Khalq saw their common interest with Saddam Hussein, and formed an even closer relationship with the Iraqi dictator.

Interestingly, the greatest support for the MKO beside Saddam Hussein has always come from the U.K. parliament; the House of Lords and the House of Commons. A number of these parliamentarians are unaccountably eager to present the MKO as an alternative to the current regime for the Iranian people.

A parliamentary group has been created for the so-called task of ‘freeing Iran’. I personally have no objection to efforts aimed at the establishment of a democratic government in Iran and have fought for the past 20 year for that same purpose. But when I see that these members of the British parliament are supporting a terrorist cult, then no matter how much I study it, I can’t seem to come to grips with the thinking and motives of these parliamentarians. I ask myself whether this is the result of old-fashioned British colonial thinking which deems it necessary to interject their involvement in the fate of Third World countries. Or could it be that the few individuals who openly support the MKO have short term interest in the form of payment from the MKO, as their reason of support? Or maybe it’s simply old age that has brought them to this decision?

When members of the Lords support the Mojahedin-e Khalq, then democracy and human rights have surely lost their meaning.

I’m certain that none of this support will lead anywhere simply because the MKO have no base of support in Iran and there is nothing but contempt for an organization that is seen as treacherous and an enemy of the people.

Western politicians must become aware that the people of Iran hate the MKO with a passion. Hundreds of former members of the MKO who have left the organization and have are settled around Europe and other countries are more than willing to speak about the facts surrounding this dangerous, destructive cult. I look forward to the time that particular members of the House of Lords finally pay attention to these facts.

Respectfully,

Karim Haghi Moni

November 22, 2006

Iran Peyvand Association

Iran Peyvand Association,Karim Haghi Moni,November 22, 2006

November 30, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MEK , USA ;Strange Bedfellows

Called a Terror Cult by Many, MEK Wins Friends in U.S. Because It Opposes Tehran

Early this summer, as Washington fretted about Iran’s nuclear program, supporters of Mujahedin-e Khalq, an Iranian opposition group, held a rally in an auditorium two blocks from the White House. Prominent members of Congress addressed the crowd, as did the State Department’s recently retired ambassador-at-large for war crimes.

Maryam Rajavi, the dissident outfit’s leader, beamed in a stirring speech via satellite from France. Denouncing Iran’s clerical rulers and their nuclear ambitions, she proclaimed democracy "the answer to Islamic fundamentalism."

Mujahedin-e Khalq, known as MEK, is Iran’s largest exile opposition group and, say its supporters, the best hope of bringing democracy to Iran. It reaches into Iran through its own satellite TV channel and claims an underground network of activists inside the Islamic republic. It also has a big presence in neighboring Iraq, where U.S. soldiers watch over more than 3,000 MEK members gathered in a sprawling camp north of Baghdad.

The MEK, however, has a big handicap: The U.S. government says it’s a terrorist organization. Officials cite its role in the murder of Americans in the 1970s and subsequent terror attacks that killed hundreds of Iranians. Another big blemish is the group’s long collaboration with Saddam Hussein. On top of all that, former members describe the MEK as a personality cult obsessed with celibacy and martyrdom.

So how does an outlaw organization with a bloodstained past, a history of intimacy with Iraq’s toppled despot and a reputation for oddness generate thunderous applause almost within earshot of the Oval Office?

Part of the answer lies in subterfuge: Mujahedin-e Khalq, which means People’s Holy Warriors, has a raft of support groups with innocuous names, such as the National Convention for a Democratic, Secular Republic in Iran, the host of the Washington event. These haven’t been banned and disavow violence.

Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein greets Massoud Rajavi, head of the Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e Khalq, before America’s 2003 invasion of Iraq.

More important in blurring the MEK’s status, however, is the muddle surrounding U.S. policy toward Iran. With the U.S. armed forces bogged down in Iraq and America’s military options against neighboring Iran severely limited, the MEK and its fans are lobbying hard to present the group as an ally that can help curb Tehran’s growing influence. These supporters, who include lawmakers and conservative foreign-policy analysts, insist the MEK has no links to terrorism.

Most U.S. officials scoff at forming any alliance with the MEK and dispute its claims of having a mass following in Iran, stressing that many Iranians despise the organization. A senior White House official says the Bush administration continues to view the MEK as a terrorist organization and "not an advocate for democracy or human rights" in Iran.

But some Iran analysts say the MEK’s thinly disguised presence in the U.S. makes a mockery of the administration’s antiterrorism campaign. The White House accuses Iran of supporting terrorist groups, they say, yet turns a blind eye toward the MEK. "It gives the impression that some terrorist organizations are better than others," says Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, an Iranian-American civic organization.

Charm Offensive
Leading the push to get the MEK’s "terrorist" tag removed, with help from some members of Congress, is an outfit called the Iran Policy Committee. The committee’s president, Raymond Tanter, a former National Security Council official under President Reagan, says the MEK’s designation is "restraining" the organization’s ability to promote democratic change in Iran. His group recently published a glossy book that challenges the terrorism charges made against the MEK, and this month helped host an event on Capitol Hill arguing the same point.

The charm offensive has taken the MEK far from its origins. First set up in 1965 by vaguely Islamic left-wing intellectuals in Tehran, Mujahedin-e Khalq used to curse American "imperialism" and murdered a string of U.S. military personnel and defense contractors in the 1970s, says the State Department. The group blames the attacks on rogue Marxist factions and says they were not endorsed by MEK’s leaders, who were in jail at the time or had been executed.

Mujahedin-e Khalq members at a rally in Camp Ashraf, north of Baghdad, before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Shortly before Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution, the Shah’s crumbling America-backed regime released jailed MEK activists. One of them, Massoud Rajavi, a former law student at Tehran University, became the group’s paramount leader and allied with Islamist forces to topple the Shah. But the group quickly split with Iran’s new clerical rulers led by Ayatollah Khomeini, who executed thousands of MEK supporters. The MEK retaliated with a wave of terror of its own.

Mr. Rajavi fled to France, where his brother, a doctor, has a house in Auvers-sur-Oise, a sleepy town outside Paris. To rally Iranians to his cause, Mr. Rajavi sent Massoud Khodabandeh, a British-educated electrical engineer, to Iran’s Kurdish region to set up a radio transmitter. He began to broadcast taped tirades against Ayatollah Khomeini.

In France, the group swiftly fell prey to political and romantic bickering. Mr. Rajavi, who had just divorced his second wife, shocked supporters by taking up with the wife of a close friend and fellow MEK activist. They married and she took the name Maryam Rajavi.

Another contentious liaison followed. Mr. Rajavi moved to Iraq in 1986 with his new wife and forged an alliance with Saddam Hussein, then at war with Iran. Former MEK members say the Iraq dictator provided a six-story office building in Baghdad and military bases, including Camp Ashraf, named in honor of Mr. Rajavi’s first wife, who had been killed in Iran by Ayatollah Khomeini’s regime.

After a disastrous lunge into Iran in 1988, the MEK embarked on a more successful military venture. It helped Saddam Hussein crush an uprising by Kurds after Iraq’s defeat by U.S. forces during the 1991 Gulf War, according to U.S. diplomats and the State Department’s 2005 Country Reports on Terrorism.

Increasingly seen in the West as an Iraqi stooge, Mr. Rajavi sent Ms. Rajavi back to France to drum up support. Her campaign made some headway but foundered when the U.S. and Europe began looking for ways to reach out to Iran’s newly elected reformist president, Mohammad Khatami.

Senior diplomats in the Clinton administration say the MEK figured prominently as a bargaining chip in a bridge-building effort with Tehran. Washington hoped it could get Iran to back a Middle East peace initiative, stop funding terrorist groups and forswear nuclear weapons. Iran, for its part, wanted the U.S. to take a hard line against the MEK.

In 1997, the State Department added the MEK to a list of global terrorist organizations as "a signal" of the U.S.’s desire for rapprochement with Tehran’s reformists, says Martin Indyk, who at the time was assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs. President Khatami’s government "considered it a pretty big deal," Mr. Indyk says.

The MEK also got hit by a string of defections. Among those to quit was Mr. Khodabandeh, the electrical engineer. He married another defector, Anne Singleton, an English woman who had visited Camp Ashraf, where she says she was taught an anti-imperialist song that vowed "death to America." Ms. Singleton wrote a book denouncing the MEK as a crazed cult of enforced celibacy and brutal discipline.

Other former members describe a good cause warped by methods reminiscent of Mao Tse-tung’s Cultural Revolution — a constant hunt for internal enemies, ideological "cleansing" sessions and harsh punishment of real or imagined dissent. Mohsen Abbasloo, a 28-year-old former MEK activist, says he was jailed and beaten at Camp Ashraf for over a month after he voiced mild doubts. "I went there full of hope but it was not even 1% of what I expected," says Mr. Abbasloo, who says he spent four years at the huge desert complex of barracks, office buildings and military training grounds between Baghdad and Iraq’s border with Iran.

Mohammad Mohaddessin, a veteran MEK member and chief foreign-affairs official of its political arm, denies accusations of brutality and describes defectors as "tools of the Iranian regime."

Throughout the 1990s, the MEK continued to operate in Washington and elsewhere through various front organizations, the most prominent of which was the Paris-based National Council of Resistance of Iran. In 1999, the State Department banned the NCRI on the grounds that it is the MEK’s official political arm. The NCRI describes itself as an Iranian parliament-in-exile comprising 530 members and not just representing the MEK.

Its former U.S.-based spokesman, Alireza Jafarzadeh, remained a regular on the Washington lobbying and policy circuits. In recent years he appeared routinely on Fox News as a foreign-affairs analyst. In 2002, he held a Washington news conference to reveal a secret uranium enrichment facility in the Iranian city of Natanz. The International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna later confirmed the claim. President Bush and other senior U.S. officials publicly praised what they called an Iranian "dissident group" for unearthing the information.
Former MEK members and some U.S. officials say they believe the Natanz information was fed to the MEK by Israel, which wanted to make it public. The MEK derides this as nonsense.

John Moody, a Fox News senior vice president, says Mr. Jafarzadeh’s contract as a foreign-affairs analyst lapsed, but doesn’t rule out further employment. "He consistently provides accurate and sometimes exclusive information," he says.

In 2002, 150 members of the House of Representatives signed a petition seeking the MEK’s removal from the U.S. government’s terrorist list.

As America geared up for war with Iraq in early 2003, the MEK muted its adulation of Saddam Hussein, say people who were in Ashraf at the time. Top leaders, including the Rajavi couple, quietly bailed from Camp Ashraf.

"We suddenly noticed that a lot of senior people were missing," says Behzad Alishahi, an Iranian who spent more than 15 years at the camp working as an MEK TV presenter. Just before the U.S. invaded in March, he says, hundreds of MEK fighters rushed toward the Iraq-Iran border for an attack on Iran. They turned back, he says, after U.S. planes bombed their convoy and Camp Ashraf.

Ms. Rajavi fled to the group’s compound in Auvers-sur-Oise, France. Her husband vanished, along with his hairdresser and bodyguards. This stirred rumors that he had been picked up by the U.S. military and was providing intelligence about Saddam Hussein and also Iran.
A State Department official says Mr. Rajavi was last seen in Baghdad in March 2003 and is now eit
her dead or in hiding. The MEK says he’s alive and evading Iranian assassins.
When American troops pulled up outside Camp Ashraf shortly after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003, the MEK offered no resistance and later agreed to disarm. Mr. Alishahi says he and colleagues at the TV station were ordered by MEK commanders to destroy film and other evidence of close ties to Saddam Hussein.

U.S. officials launched a review of camp residents to decide if they should be prosecuted for terrorism. At the same time, the Central Intelligence Agency warned French authorities to watch out for the MEK. The French dispatched hundreds of police to storm the MEK’s Auvers-sur-Oise compound. They arrested Maryam Rajavi and carted away $9 million in cash and documents detailing bank accounts in France, the U.S. and elsewhere holding tens of millions of dollars.

Also confiscated, says a senior French security official, were videos of Mr. Rajavi meeting Saddam Hussein and 99 satellite-positioning devices programmed with coordinates for Iran. The French also found what they say were signs that the Iraqi dictator had bankrolled the organization, something the MEK has always denied. These included stacks of dollar bills wrapped in Iraqi newspapers and documents relating to a gift of Iraqi oil, say French officials who were involved.

Drawing Criticism
The raid drew criticism from lawmakers and others in France and also the U.S. About 10 MEK members set themselves on fire in Europe and Canada in protest. Two died from their burns. French police released Ms. Rajavi but launched a formal terrorism-conspiracy investigation of her and 16 others.

Mr. Mohaddessin, the group’s foreign-affairs spokesman, who was also detained and later released, ridicules the raid as a publicity stunt to win favor with Iran. There were enough police, he says, "for a coup in an African country."

The U.S. review of Camp Ashraf, which began around the same time as the French raid and finished in summer 2004, partially vindicated the MEK. Only one person has faced any U.S. charges, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Iran who was arrested in September in New York for allegedly providing support to a terrorist group. The roughly 3,300 now still in Ashraf were given the status of "protected persons" under the Geneva Convention, which promises humane treatment for nonnationals in a country at war. The U.S. military, as the occupying power, took on the role of protector. A White House official says this "protected" status applies only to individuals, not to the MEK as an organization.

Former Ashraf residents say MEK commanders, most of whom are women, have worked hard to woo the American soldiers who are now nominally in charge, inviting them to use a big swimming pool and serving them pizza. American forces have, under an agreement with the MEK, confiscated the group’s roughly 300 tanks, 250 armored personnel carriers, 250 artillery pieces and 10,000 small arms. They also blew up most of the MEK’s ammunition. But Camp Ashraf still functions as a bastion of opposition to Iran, shielded from the turmoil elsewhere in Iraq by American soldiers.

In June, the MEK camp hosted a mass rally of Iranian dissidents and thousands of Iraqis. Ms. Rajavi sent a message from France urging them to "cut off the tentacles of the Iranian regime." The MEK’s satellite TV station, meanwhile, pumps out adulatory propaganda for Ms. Rajavi and her missing husband, Massoud.

Both the Pentagon and the U.S. Central Command declined to comment on the military’s dealings with the MEK in Iraq. But individual officers have expressed support for the MEK. In May 2003, Maj. Gen. Raymond Odierno, then-commander of America’s 4th Infantry Division, commended MEK members at Camp Ashraf for their cooperation and told reporters that "this should lead to a review of whether they are still a terrorist organization."

In 2005, following a report by Human Rights Watch detailing torture and other abuses at MEK camps in Iraq before the U.S. invasion, the commander of a U.S. military police unit that had been stationed at Camp Ashraf wrote to the U.S.-based human-rights group to defend the MEK. He said U.S. forces had not found "any credible evidence" of any such abuses and said he would "like my own daughter to someday visit these units for the cultural exchange."

In Washington, debate raged during this time over how to deal with the MEK, say current and former U.S. officials. Amid the screening of Ashraf residents, some in the Pentagon pushed to use the MEK as a tool against Iran and Iranian-backed militants operating inside Iraq, say current and former State Department officials involved in Iraq policy.

Colin Powell, who was then secretary of state, pushed back against the idea of cooperating with the MEK, say current and former officials. Mr. Powell and his underlings argued that any flirtation with the MEK would undermine Washington’s stand against terrorism. The State Department then designated the group’s previously tolerated U.S. affiliate, NCRI-U.S., as a terrorist front for the MEK. In August 2003, the Federal Bureau of Investigation shut down its offices at the National Press Club in Washington.

"There was this kind of language [being offered by Pentagon officials] that one man’s terrorist was another man’s freedom fighter," says Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as Mr. Powell’s chief of staff at the time. He says the State Department pushed through 2003 and 2004 for the MEK’s disarmament.

Douglas Feith, who served as the Pentagon’s No. 3 civilian official until last year, denies any desire by the Pentagon to cozy up to the MEK. "The idea that we would use them against Iran is fantasy," he says.

MEK leaders sheltering in the West are now ramping up a campaign, along with their American and European fans, to present Maryam Rajavi and her missing husband as the only way to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb. This summer, thousands of their supporters gathered in a Paris convention hall. Ms. Rajavi arrived in a chauffeured Bentley, stepping onto a red carpet to the sound of trumpets. Rose petals were strewn at her feet. A former French prime minister and other VIPs applauded.

Among the MEK’s Washington supporters are a significant mix of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican who chairs the International Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia, drafted legislation this year that would require the White House to provide funding to Iran’s largest opposition groups, although the bill doesn’t explicitly name the MEK.

Mr. Abbasloo, the former Camp Ashraf resident, who is now in Europe, says he doesn’t like Iran’s current regime but mocks the MEK as an alternative. "I hope America is not going to be that stupid."

By ANDREW HIGGINS and JAY SOLOMON

November 30, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

Pentagon Nails the Coffin of MKO

Apart from verifying the accuracy of BBC’s report (that Pentagon dismisses report on employment of MKO members by US army), the conclusion of Adam Brooks, BBC’s correspondent in the Pentagon, at the end of the report is more important than the report itself and reflects a reality the MKO officials have been trying for months to deny. MKO leaders deny this reality in order to force the MKO members, which have no access to the news from outside, stay in Iraq.

What Brooks has revealed is that Pentagon has lifted its support for the MKO and this can be interpreted as the removal of the last obstacle for the expulsion of the group from Iraq. This means that opponents of MKO presence in Iraq should be assured that this terrorist cult has no supporter among US authorities, including Pentagon officials.

BBC quotes former Pentagon spokesman:

"With MKO’s records, we don’t consider it a supporter of human rights and democracy. This organization has also abused its own members."

Some may say that recent stance by Pentagon is something that has been expressed by US officials before, or they may consider it as a cover for Pentagon’s secret operations. But the fact is that C.Q’s report was prepared in order to make the Pentagon- which is accused of supporting and using terrorist MKO- state its clear stance on the issue of MKO after recent changes in the department and its policies in Iraq.

BBC even goes further and gives assurance on the issue by stating that the new Defense Minister will restrict covert operations and this means that no one will be able to support the MKO anymore.

It can be said that the new approach by the Pentagon means that efforts for keeping the MKO in Iraq have all failed and that Iraqi officials have succeeded in pursuing their decision (on expelling the group from Iraq).

However, why the remnants of Rajavi, being aware of these developments, still try to censor the news for the MKO members?

An important factor that should be considered with much care is that from now on the MKO will be directed by CIA.

This issue will be discussed in the near future.

Irandidban –  2006/11/29

November 30, 2006 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Posts

  • Rebranding, too Difficult for the MEK

    December 27, 2025
  • The black box of the torture camps of the MEK

    December 24, 2025
  • Pregnancy was taboo in the MEK

    December 22, 2025
  • MEPs who lack awareness about the MEK’s nature

    December 20, 2025
  • Why did Massoud Rajavi enforce divorces in the MEK?

    December 15, 2025
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Youtube

© 2003 - 2025 NEJAT Society . All Rights Reserved. NejatNGO.org


Back To Top
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip