Page 864 – Nejat Society

For Fundamentalists and the Hard Right

For Fundamentalists and the Hard Right, It’s ‘Spiritual Restoration’ Month

November 2006 has become the month of restoration.

Ted Haggard, following accusations of his relationship with a male prostitute, resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals and as senior pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Haggard will spend many years taking the four steps of spiritual restoration: submitting, admitting, restitution, and being humbled. His spiritual advisors will heed the biblical warning of the apostle Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians to attempt not to be tempted while restoring (rather than shunning) a sinner.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/10/haggard.restoration/index.html?eref=rss_latest

The David Horowitz Freedom Center posted an announcement and a registration form for David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend 2006, November 16 – 19, at The Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. Some of the listed speakers were Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, and Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo. Tancredo has been one of the strongest supporters of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran). http://www.horowitzfreedomcenter.org/

Today’s FrontPage Magazine did not include Tancredo’s speech or an explanation as to why David Horowitz would invite Tancredo to speak at Restoration Weekend. During 2005, FrontPage Magazine published articles of supporters of the Rajavi Cult. Following posted criticisms of FrontPage Magazine, the magazine posted, on January 13, 2006, Michael Rubin’s "Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq".

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=20780&p=1

Does Trancredo’s invitation to speak at David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend mean that David Horowitz has restored Tancredo and the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran)?

David Horowitz did not provide the answer in his speech "Restoration Weekend 2006: Storming the Universities", posted November 20, 2006.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25586

Instead, David Horowitz provided examples of some radical professors who offer indoctrination rather than critical thinking about their fields. His first example was Professor Dana Cloud, Associate Professor of Communication Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. Professor Cloud provides this description at her Web site:

"Dana L. Cloud (PhD, University of Iowa, 1992) specializes in the analysis of contemporary and popular and political culture from feminist, Marxist, and critical anti-racist perspectives. She teaches undergraduate classes in persuasion, social movements, speechwriting, and rhetorical criticism, as well as graduate courses in rhetoric and the public sphere, rhetoric and ideology, rhetoric and feminist theory, and rhetoric and popular culture. Dr. Cloud’s areas of current research include the critique of therapeutic discourse, feminist and Marxist theories and politics, rhetoric of "family values," and the rhetoric of the U.S. labor movement."

http://www.utexas.edu/coc/cms/faculty/cloud.html

David Horowitz failed to mention in his speech that his FrontPage Magazine is a promoter of the writings of Professor Donna Hughes, Women’s Studies Program, at the University of Rhode Island.

http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/

A search for "Donna Hughes" at FrontPage Magazine today will return 43 hits, one of which is "Sex Slave Jihad".

Is this high quality, academic research? Does this professor provide critical evaluations of both sides of each issue?

Donna Hughes has been a strong supporter of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran).

For an honest view of the Rajavi Cult, from a woman’s viewpoint, you need to read Anne Singleton’s Saddam’s Private Army: How Rajavi changed Iran’s Mojahedin from Armed Revolutionaries to an Armed Cult by A. Singleton. It can be obtained formAmazon.co.uk or directly from:

Iran-Interlink

PO Box 148

Leeds LS16 5YJ

United Kingdom

Price £12 – $20 US – €20 (inclusive of post & packaging)

Cheques or money orders payable to ‘Iran-Interlink’

Review

This up-to-date account and analysis charts the Mojahedin’s degeneration from one of the world’s most powerful armed opposition movements into a private army for Saddam Hussein.

Told by a Western woman who for twenty years had unique access to the secret inner world of the Mojahedin, this book is a very personal account of how Massoud Rajavi, leader of the Mojahedin, in his ruthless quest for power has perverted the original ideological basis of the organisation until it is little more than a cult which worships him as its quasi-deity.

Labelled as a terrorist entity by the governments of America and Europe, the author argues that the Mojahedin’s real danger lies in the unquestioning obedience of the members to the whims of their leader. Understanding Rajavi’s motivations is key to a thorough appraisal of this enigmatic organisation and the threat it poses to Western democracy.

http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/child%20pages/book_I-I.htm

A search for "Raymond Tanter" at FrontPage Magazine will yield many hits, including Jacob Laksin’s "The Ayatollah of Anti-Americanism". This article was critical of Professor Noam Chomsky and cited a book by Professor Raymond Tanter to support the criticisms.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23071

Professor Raymond Tanter, who claims to be a Republican, is a strong supporter of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran). Tanter works for the Iran Policy Committee, whose scholars and fellows include a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee and retired military officers.

Clare M. Lopez, Executive Director

Major General Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.)

Professor Raymond Tanter, Former Senior Staff Member, National Security Council

Lt. General Edward Rowny, USA (ret.)

Captain Charles T. "Chuck" Nash, USN (ret.)

Lt. General Thomas McInerney USAF, (Ret.)

Bruce McColm, President Institute for Democratic Strategies

Lt. Col. Bill Cowan, USMC (ret.)

James Akins, Ambassador (ret.)

FrontPage Magazine has published an article critical of the Iran Policy Committee: Kenneth R. Timmerman’s "When Making a Revolution, Allies Matter."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20972

David Horowitz should be exposing the professors and others who support the communist takeover of Iran by the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran). Who is funding the Iran Policy Committee?

Those who spoke at David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend can start on a restoration process of their own. They can oppose the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult or Pol Pot of Iran) and the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) who seek endless wars to impose totalitarian regimes in the world.

Authors Website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/traitorsusa/

Authors Bio: Professor, California State University, Fullerton

By Paul Sheldon Foote – OpEdNews.com – November 21, 2006

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_paul_foo_061120_restoration_3a__ted_ha.htm

November 27, 2006 0 comments

USA

Release the Iran NIE! and Hoaxster Hoekstra

According to former CIA officer Philip Giraldi, writing in the October 9th edition of the American Conservative magazine, the Bush administration is withholding a new CIA National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.

“The United States government’s intelligence community has prepared a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran, but the White House has decided that it is not “finished” yet and has decided to postpone any decision on issuing it until after the November elections. NIEs are the government’s document of record on international issues that confront the United States and they are supposed to be both impartial and definitive. Vice President Cheney’s office has reportedly objected to many of the conclusions in the draft Iran NIE, or, more to the point, to the lack of any conclusions that he would welcome.

“The draft document indicates that there is no solid intelligence confirming that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, contradicting many recent statements made by the Administration. It also states that Iran exercised virtually no control over Hezbollah in the recent fighting in Lebanon and that there is little to no confirmed information supporting the often cited contention that Iran is arming the militias and insurgents in neighboring Iraq. The report ruefully observes that there are plenty of weapons floating around inside Iraq without any assistance from Iran, though it does note, without hard evidence, that Iran could have provided some bomb making expertise and possibly sophisticated timers and detonators to the insurgency’s arsenal. For what it’s worth, most US intelligence officers working on Iran believe that Tehran is concealing a weapons program even if the hard evidence is lacking.”

The people of the Unitary Executive State of America[.pdf] have a right to know what that NIE says now, before the mid-term elections. Before the next war.

The rest of the piece is regarding Pete “Hoaxter” Hoekstra and Capital Hill staffer Vaughn S. Forrest’s visit with Manucher Ghorbanifar’s sock-puppet, Fereidoun Mahdavi, in Paris, which Larisa Alexandrovna also covered for RawStory earlier this week. Giraldi writes:

“The House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra has been receiving information reports from an Iranian exile source in Paris who is believed to be Fereidoun Mahdavi, a close associate of discredited Iran/Contra fabricator Manucher Ghorbanifar. Hoekstra, who has stated his contempt for the US intelligence community, has been using Vaughn Forest, a well-known Hill staffer who has a reputation for right-wing activism, as a channel to the Ghorbanifar circle. Hoekstra recently made a trip to Paris with Forest to meet the source who has been providing information on Iranian intentions in the nuclear field that CIA and DIA analysts consider to be largely fabricated. Unfortunately, some of these reports have been stove-piped to Vice President Cheney’s office through the Pentagon’s Abe Shulsky, who heads up an “Iranian Directorate”, an office that replicates the disbanded Office of Special Plans that was previously used as a clearinghouse for fabricated and speculative exile reports on Iraq. The Ghorbanifar information is also disseminated to the intelligence community from Hoekstra’s House Intelligence Committee. Ghorbanifar and his associates have no access to genuine information about Iran, often just repackaging media reports and propaganda handouts from the Paris-based Mujahedin e-Khalq (MEK), a Pentagon protected Iranian exile group that is on the US State Department’s list of terrorist groups. Ghorbanifar and Mahdavi are also reported to be the sources of Pennsylvania Congressman Curt Weldon, who advocates pre-emptive war against Iran. Weldon has written a sensational and factually challenged book on Iran that describes Tehran as the number one threat to world peace, a line that is curiously similar to that being promoted by the Israeli lobby AIPAC.”

October 18th, 2006 – in News by Scott Horton

November 26, 2006 0 comments

Iraq

Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz and MKO Against Iraqis

Mojahedin-e Khalq organization was established in Iran when Shah was in power. During that time, the group conducted a number of bombings and killed Iranians and even American citizens. After the revolution, it continued the killings and sabotage operations so that its lead had to flee to France. However, most of the supporters and members of the group chose Iraq as their safe shelter when the ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was in power. Baathist regime provided the group with training camps, light and heavy weapons, tanks, and …. Iraqi army and the Republican Guard trained MKO members, the number of whom increased to 3000. MKO members acted as Special Forces for Saddam security services. During the uprising of Sha’banieh, after Kuwait had been freed from occupation of Saddam in 1991, teams of terrorist MKO started killing civilian Iraqis in northern, central and southern Iraq. With the assistance of Republican Guard and after killing a lot of Kurds and Shiites and others in Iraq, the MKO could suppress the uprising.

Following the fall of dictatorial regime in 2003, coalition forces surrounded the MKO and forced them to give up their arms but allowed them to stay in their camp. Several MKO members in Iraq left the country to get to a European nation but many others remained in MKO camps. Some others started serving remnants of Baath party and were actually welcomed by Baathists who considered them as the guests of Saddam.

It’s surprising that so far, no one of new Iraqi governments has talked about punishing the criminals of Mojahedin-e Khalq, who were directly involved in killing hundreds of Iraqi civilians in 1991.

We ask Excellencies Dr. Jalal Talabani and Mr. Nuri al-Maliki, as well as the head of the parliament and all Iraqi officials, to dismantle the camp of Mojahedin-e Khalq in Iraq and transfer them to a third country.

When the constitution clearly bans any activity against Islamic and Arabic countries, Iraq and even coalition forces will benefit from expulsion of the MKO.

The presence of MKO in Iraq is a clear mistake, planned by Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.

Dr. Adnan Javad Al-Te’meh – Saut al-Iraqi/November 11, 2006

November 24, 2006 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Rajavi cult victims are not a political football

Donald Rumsfeld hardly had time to clear his desk at the Pentagon before the Rajavi cult began sending out distress signals.

The cult told human rights monitors that – based on statements by the Iraqi government that the terrorist MKO in Camp Ashraf can stay in Iraq only until the end of this year – the residents of Camp Ashraf were in imminent danger of deportation to Iran and that they would be immediately executed the moment they set foot in that country.

The panic, however, was not over events in Iraq or Iran – to where over 500 Mojahedin members have already been safely repatriated under an ongoing amnesty agreement – but over the realignment of the political map of the US government in which Rajavi’s erstwhile supporters were the main losers.

The actual fate of the 3,000 remaining residents of Camp Ashraf is the last of Rajavi’s concerns; except in how to prolong the death throes of the cult as it slowly, painfully, inevitably dissolves from within.

For the past three years, in her desperation, Rajavi has positioned her organisation’s members for maximum suffering and exploitation by offering the people in Camp Ashraf as a mercenary ‘force’ to anyone in the west who seeks to use any tool in their efforts to confront Iran, in total disregard for their actual willingness or capability.

Thus, parties from all sides have been taught by Rajavi to regard the Mojahedin-e Khalq as a political football, as a tool with which to pursue their various policies of confrontation with Iran – naturally for their own national interests and not in order to help the Iranian people’s struggles toward secular democracy.

From one point of view we learn that "[Robert] Gates had [in 2004] proposed engaging Syria and Iran in a dialogue while offering incentives and brandishing sanctions at the same time. He argued that dialogue and openness energize civic society as an instrument for change in the two countries. He also proposed the trade-off of dismantling the Iranian opposition Mujahidin-e-Khalq in Iraq in return for Iran’s suspension of its support for the Shi’i militias in southern Lebanon." (Source: Al-Sharq al-Awsat website, London, in Arabic 18 November 2006)

From another point of view we have Rabbi Daniel M. Zucker quoting the July 26, 2006 Congressional Record which "called for an end to the Iranian regime’s meddling in Iraq and emphasized the political refugee status of Ashraf residents in that country." Rabbi Zucker states, "It is time to recognize and cooperate with the NCRI [aka Mojahedin-e Khalq] so as to nullify the efforts of Tehran to spread extremist Islam. (Source: U.S. Newswire/ — On Tuesday, November 14, 2006)

What the schemes of these and other parties do not acknowledge is that the individuals in Camp Ashraf are exactly that, individuals. It is only on Rajavi’s terms that the people there comprise a group. According to Rajavi the Mojahedin-e Khalq is an ‘opposition movement poised to erase the ruling Islamic Republic of Iran in its entirety so as to replace it with a secular democracy which respects human rights’, with, of course, Rajavi herself as the president.

But the reality inside Camp Ashraf is shockingly different from the fictional image Rajavi has presented for western consumption. The residents of Camp Ashraf have been kept there (for over two decades) through the systematic and brutal imposition of cult culture. Through the pernicious use of isolation, psychological coercion, and extrajudicial punishment, which results in a ruthless denial of even their most basic human rights, Rajavi has kept the residents of Camp Ashraf in conditions of modern slavery where the ‘shackles’ are not merely physical (the residents have no money or possessions) but are largely psychological. By now refusing to allow them help from international humanitarian bodies and by refusing to enact the most basic requirements of their protected persons status under the Fourth Geneva Convention, not least of which is Article 116 which states: ‘Every internee shall be allowed to receive visitors, especially near relatives, at regular intervals and as frequently as possible. As far as is possible, internees shall be permitted to visit their homes in urgent cases, particularly in cases of death or serious illness of relatives.’ Maryam Rajavi has taken upon herself the responsibility for condemning these people to a living death.

This ‘Mojahedin-e Khalq’ is not a viable force with which to confront Iran. This ‘Mojahedin-e Khalq’ is a cult whose members are enslaved to Rajavi’s ambitions for power at any cost. This ‘Mojahedin-e Khalq’ is not a tool which can be bandied about in the political scene or bargained and traded with. The residents of Camp Ashraf who comprise Rajavi’s ‘Mojahedin-e Khalq’ are victims of gross human rights abuses. They must be rescued not used.

Above all, those in the west who believe they can use the group in their foreign policy, whether to threaten or cajole, would do well to face the simple fact that the name ‘Mojahedin’ no longer holds currency in Iranian political circles, whether in the ruling regime or in the opposition to it. As such it is a redundant factor. But, do not disregard it. Please, please rescue the residents of Camp Ashraf from Rajavi’s clutches before more people die.

Anne Singleton,November 21, 2006

November 24, 2006 0 comments

Lord Corbett

A Funny Solution to the Middle East Crisis

I’d like to congratulate Mojahedin for the new discovery of one of its enthusiastic advocates who believes that removal of the terror label from Mojahedin solves the crisis in the Middle-East. Mojahedin themselves had never thought of such an unsought potentiality.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, chairman of the British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom and the leading figure against the proscription of MKO, is more steadfast than Mojahedin in the fight. Published in the Birmingham Post, Nov. 17, Lord Corbett strongly contradicted Tony Blair’s recent saying that Iran- “in conjunction with Syria – may hold the key to a peaceful Middle East”. He adds that:

Western leaders are scratching their heads in desperate search for a new Middle East policy as the dire situation in Iraq worsens and tensions in Lebanon and Palestine rise.

It does not mean that Lord Corbett favors a permanent anarchy in the Middle East, no, heaven forbid, but that he conceives the West is unable to find the appropriate apparatus to solve the problem. Criticizing engagement of Iran to end the crisis, he states:

Those who favour ‘engagement’ of Iran’s Ayatollahs, sometimes described as appeasement, have taken this opportunity to call for ‘dialogue’ with Tehran as a means of resolving the various crises in the Middle East, including in Iraq.

Lord Corbett then suggests that the West must abandon the appeasement policy and exploit a force, beyond that of the US or Britain!, that the Iranian regime most fear:

Instead, as part of the present policy review, the West must ask itself what it is that the brutal oppressors of the Iranian people most fear. It is certainly not the US or Britain. What they fear is democracy and those that can bring it about – the 95 per cent of Iranians who despise this regime and the Iranian resistance, National Council of Resistance of Iran.

Thus, the problem is resolved. Mojahedin are a means of resolving the crises in the Middle East and as he states: “This is where the solution to the present crises in the Middle East rests”.

But what has barred such a potential force to solve so complicated a problem and to bring about peace and tranquility for the people of the Middle East? The blame is again on the US and those Western countries that have proscribed potential Mojahedin a terrorist group. By “removal of the unjust terror label from the PMOI.”, Lord Corbett believes the West can pave the way and take the first step towards building a stabilized Middle East.

“Should the West have the courage and the will to follow this course, we will soon see a very different Middle East”.

Once, on the pretext of war against terrorism, the US and the Western countries invaded Afghanistan and Iraq causing a destabilized region. Now comes another westerner who suggests utilizing a terrorist group to restore the equilibrium. I also congratulate Lord Corbett for proposing so lofty a suggestion; putting forth the terrorists that act as antidote to anarchy.

Sattar Orangi, November 21, 2006

November 24, 2006 0 comments

Iraq

The Bare Facts vs. the Elusive Claims

Of the important news of the past weak was the announced death verdict against the Iraqi ousted dictator. Making Iraqi people yell jubilant cries, the sentence at the same time perturbed the remnants of Saddam’s devotees and those who had secured a collective strategic alliance with him. The accomplices who during the past three years of his fall preferred to remain silent over the Baath Party and whom they persisted to respect not less than president.

The deliberate silence occurs at a time when MKO wrestle with the encountered predicaments in Iraq by taking advantage of the internal chaos and the deepened rift between the opponent factions and al-Maliki’s government. Mojahedin’s propaganda machine has never stopped dispersing the threats that democracy in Iraq is unattainable unless through the support of Mojahedin as it was advertised through the statement issued by 25 Sheikhs of the Dialy province. Enticing a few local papers, Mojahedin promulgated to have summoned the support of 5,200,000 Iraqi people and proceeded to proclaim to have bolstered supporters in some provinces. But Mojahedin’s silence, in contrast to peoples unanimous approval, on Saddam’s trial and death sentence has reached a juncture where their contradictory attitudes surface.

People will never forget Saddam’s crimes and the heavy price they have paid for his tyrannical rule although not all his crimes done against people can possibly be brought before the tribunal. These untried crimes might sink into the historical oblivion but his accomplices, especially Mojahedin, can be pursued to unveil facts on genocidal cases like that of the Iraqi Kurds and Shiits. The absence of Massoud Rajavi at the moment might fill Mojahedin with the induced forlorn hope of having escaped the trial and that Saddam’s announced sentence means the termination of further inquiry. However, the proven evidences of collaboration refute possibility of escape from the justice. Moreover, the existing challenge between people and the coalition forces is partly because of the latter’s support of Saddam accomplices.

The coalition forces, well aware of Mojahedin’s close collaboration with Saddam, should at least make it clear that how sincere are Mojahedin in their claims of standing by the people. Those who strive to justify Mojahedin’s stay in Iraq according to international conventions have to acknowledge on whose side were Mojahedin through their past two decades’ presence in Iraq. Nothing can conceal the broad fact of Mojahedin’s being the most favorite mercenaries of Saddam, who roamed on Iraqi soil fully armed while the oppressed people were under the hideous suppression of the dictator. What about many instances of Mojahedin’s meetings with Saddam’s high officials where they stressed their entwined destiny. The mind of the world is not devoid of the pictures of Rajavi shaking hands with Saddam and sharing hugs and kisses as if two brothers. The Iraqi people are clear-sighted enough to distinguish between the bare facts and the elusive claims.

Really, with so many evidences persisting, who dares to pass over them? Do they think that people have a weak mind as they do? What hands and for what reasons are in attempt of covering up Saddam’s crimes? The future might tell the hitherto untold.

November 13, 2006 – Omid Pouya – Mojahedin.ws

November 24, 2006 0 comments

Maryam Rajavi

Mojahedin admits to past errors

The MKO’s electronic newsletter, Mojahed, in its issue 148, 8 November mostly covering the reports of Maryam Rajavi’s trip to Norway, dedicated its first three pages to the details of the trip and the warm welcome she received from the reporters on her arrival saying: “Multitudes of the papers and TV networks” reporters already awaited her arrival”.

Reporting on her presence at the Norwegian Parliament, Mojahed quoted her, stating:

"The regime succeeded in utilizing the West to make obstacles in the path of the main Iranian Resistance (Mojahedin-e Khalq and the NCRI) by the means of labeling it a terrorist group that consequently kept the hands of the regime open”.

In answer to a question as to how the Iranian Resistance intended to confront the Iranian regime’s availing itself of such an opportunity, she was quoted to have stated: “the Mojahedin have given up the armed struggle”. She had added that: “settlement in Iraqi soil was a strategic error that the Mojahedin made”.

Mojahedin.ws, November 20, 2006

November 24, 2006 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

six-month deadline for the members of the outfit

Iraqi Pesident Jalal Talabani is due in Tehran on Saturday, Iraqi Ambassador to Iran Mohammad Majid al-Sheikh disclosed here on Tuesday.

Al-Sheikh told IRNA that during his stay in Tehran, Talabani will exchange views with Iranian officials on promoting two-way ties, on full implementation of mutual agreements and on a host of security issues of mutual concern.

He said Talabani’s Iran visit is of significance and would have drastic impact on stronger bilateral ties. Ministers of oil, education, science and technology will accompany Talabani, he added.

"Tehran-Baghdad ties should improve to the extent that Iranian and Iraqi nations would be able to cross borders just with a single identification card and a ticket," said al-Sheikh.

He said many agreements signed by the two sides have either been implemented or are in the process of implementation. "For instance, two million liters of kerosene is daily exported to Iraq from Iran and liquefied gas will also be exported from Iran to Iraq in future." "Furthermore," he noted, "By the next six months, up to 300 megawatts of electricity would have been exported to Iraq from Iran and there is no problem with other contracts."

Elsewhere in the interview, al-Sheikh said that under an agreement, the number of Iranian pilgrims visiting Iraq would reach 5,000 daily once security conditions improve.

On continued presence of the terrorist Mujahideen Khalq Organization members in Iraq, al-Sheikh said Iraqi people consider them as those who were loyal to Saddam and against the Iraqi nation.

He said Iraqi government has set a six-month deadline for the members of the outfit to leave Iraqi terrirory and ordered them not to act against neighboring states.

IRNA – Nov 21

November 24, 2006 0 comments

The Ideology of the MEK

Disarmed Terrorists Busy within Ashraf Walls

Saddam’s fall cracked MKO’s strategic capacity of armed struggle. The fall in fact depreciated MKO’s three opportunistic factors for their stay in side with Saddam; neighborhood with Iranian borders, strategic alliance with Saddam, and receiving military and financial aid.

The first unfavorable outcome of Saddam’s fall for Mojahedin was their disarmament by the coalition forces. Consequently, Massoud Rajavi, in justifying the situation, announced that between the arms and arms-masters, namely the Americans, they preferred the latter. Mojahedin hoped that the future would grant them the opportunity of being rearmed. For them, belief in armed struggle and holding it dear had priority over its practice. The ideology being survived, it could be put into practice at any time sooner or later. Thus, Camp Ashraf turned to be the ideological stockpile to infuse and ferment the mentality. In any occasion, the main emphasis has been on displaying the past instances of the armed and military practices, and the demonstration of miniature models of semi-heavy and small arms indicates Mojahedin’s innate interest in arms and playing the armed games.

Celebrating its forty-two formation anniversary, MKO had mainly focused on its adopted armed strategy that well distinguished it from other Iranian opposition groups. However, soon after being disarmed, Mojahedin adopted a new tactic of building a veneer of a pro-democratic group seeking peaceful ways of struggle. The third option proposal, call for referendum, calling on the UN Security Council and Bush Administration for harsh treatment against Iran’s nuclear threat and so are practiced examples of this new posture. But inside, to reveal their real nature, Mojahedin consent to nothing less than war and welcome any form of military solution.

Although disarmed, Camp Ashraf residents are under continual military training. There is also a possibility that the camp has kept some arms and military equipments camouflaged since the organization, naturally inheriting a clandestine form, can never be trusted to be sincere as it claims; adaptation is one of the organization’s basic theoretical principles of its outlook on the world and being.

The reports leaked out of Camp Ashraf, mainly by the majority of separated members, indicate that Mojahedin have initiated new rounds of military trainings and martial arts practices. The use of simulators in their military trainings presupposes two possibilities:

1- Mojahedin try to boost the members’ military morale to stop further detachment of the forces

2- They intend to have effective forces ready in case unpredictable conditions propel them into a new military phase

These military exercises just under the nose of the coalition forces at a time when Mojahedin propagate to be refugees and protected persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention might sound the alarm of a serious challenge.

Suppose that the coalition forces are unaware of what passes within the camp. Since the US has recurrently stressed that Mojahedin fail to be trustable and occupy a permanent status on the US State Department’s list of FTO, the mere surveillance over the Ashraf walls creates the best protection Mojahedin expect to get on with their clandestine activities. At the time when Iraq suffers increasing ethnic tensions and Nuri al-Maliki’s government accentuates the need to curb disorder and disarm the militia, it is so odd, and even might arouse suspicion, to see an untrustworthy, terrorist group with a long record of collaborating with the ousted Saddam so conveniently enjoying broad military and guerrilla training and exercise. On the other hand, Mojahedin, according to Iraqi official statements, have not been passive observers of events and disorders in Iraq. If the coalition forces really mean to give the Iraqi government a hand to curb the tension and restore the order, it seems to be a strategic priority to have thorough control over Mojahedin’s activities within the walls of Camp Ashraf.

Mojahedin.ws – Bahar Irani – October 29, 2006

November 20, 2006 0 comments

Missions of Nejat Society

Nejat Families meet IRC representatives in Shiraz

According to Nejat Society’s reporter in Shiraz, on Thursday,November 16th at 15 pm, a number of MEK’s families who are members of Nejat Society Shiraz Branch ,visited "Mr. Anderson" and "Mr. Bruce Graham", the representatives of International Red Cross in order to discuss the salvation of their beloved children.

During the meeting the families asked the IRC’s delegation to assist them to visit their children captured in Camp Ashraf and have phone calls with them.

At the end, Mr. Anderson the assistant of IRC promised the members of Nejat Society that according to Human Freedom Charter reminds the primary human rights to American officials in Iraq. These primary human rights include:

1- The residents of Ashraf could visit their families without the presence of MKO’s officials.

2- The residents of Ashraf could call their parents.

3- The residents of Ashraf could contact their families through writing letters.

A statement was arranged and signed by the attendees and delivered to IRC’s representative to be investigated.

November 20, 2006 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts