UK

UK has no responsibility for Rajavi cult victims in Camp Ashraf

Written Answers, Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs – Iraq

Andrew MacKinlay (Thurrock, Labour) Hansard source

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

(1) how many and what proportion of the people of Ashraf signed forms accepting their compliance with the conditions stipulated by the Commander of the Multi-National Force-Iraq for their continued protection by the Multi-National Forces-Iraq;

(2) whether the letter of the Deputy Commander of the Multi National Force-Iraq to the people of Ashraf dated 21st July 2004 was on behalf of the International Coalition;

(3) on what date in February the headquarters of the Multi National Force-Iraq reaffirmed its commitment to Article 45 of the Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of civilian persons, 1949 in respect of the people of Ashraf; whether the communication made reference to the principle of non-refoulment; and if she will make a statement;

(4) on what date the commander of the multi national coalition forces authorised the opening of bank accounts in Iraq by residents of Ashraf city;

(5) whether individuals in Ashraf have abrogated the undertakings they entered into with the commander of the Multi-National Force-Iraq and which were detailed in the signed agreements prepared by the force commander;

(6) if she will publish the communication dated 7th October 2005 from Major General William Brandenburg on behalf of the multi national coalition forces to the people of Ashraf; and if she will make a statement.

 Adam Ingram (Minister of State (Armed Forces), Ministry of Defence) Hansard source

I have been asked to reply.

Camp Ashraf, near Baghdad, is outside the UK’s area of responsibility in Iraq. As such, the UK has no responsibility for, or involvement with, Camp Ashraf or its residents. These are matters for the US and Iraqi Governments.

Source: Hansard, November 6, 2006

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Maryam Rajavi

A Gift From Maryam Rajavi!

Maryam Rajavi took a list of 20000 fallen MKO members as a gift for Ms. Siv Jensen, member of Norway’s Progress Party.

It is the first time that the list, covering all MKO’s fallen members, including those who were killed during Iran-Iraq war, has been presented by the MKO and Maryam Rajavi; this means that the MKO has withdrawn its historical lies on the number of MKO’s fallen members.

So far, they offered unreal funny figures, claiming to have 120000 victims but they presented no documents. Today, due to several reasons, they have to release a list of the members who were killed while serving for Saddam (in his war on Iran) and Rajavi’s ambitions. What’s more shameful is that Maryam Rajavi considers this list as a document of honor for herself.

This sudden withdrawal from a historical claim and subtraction of 100000 (85%) from MKO’s casualties is an important issue that should be discussed in depth.

Irandidban  –   2006/11/12

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

A Look at the Report of Gates-Brzezinski

"When the US President George Bush suddenly announced the removal of his Defense Minister, many of the experts were not surprised of the change, but they were surprised by President’s nominee "Robert Gates". Gates has been advocating the talks and relations with Iran. Two years ago in the summer, beside then the National Security Advisor of the White House, he headed a group that sought opening dialogue with Iran. Part of this group’s report said that lack of relationship with Iran and lack of presence in this country for a long time would deeply hurt US’s understanding of domestic and regional developments. This, in turn, restricts Washington’s influence in the Middle East; there’s no need to wait for full coordination between the two countries before starting the dialogue." (Radio Farda)

This very report from Radio Farda mentioned that the members of Mojahedin-e Khalq should be either extradited to Iran or be exchanged with Al-Qaeda members held captive in Iran.

The report was based on the experiences of relations between Iran and American as well as a very pragmatic view on Iran. Neocons couldn’t understand this report and ignored it wholly.

It seems that tasking James Baker with the preparation of a report on Iraq’s situation was not simply an act of propaganda, but there was really a need to change the strategy in Iraq. Nomination of Gates for the Ministry of Defense proves that the White House is determined to conduct these changes. Although the Neocons are still insisting on their slogans, it seems that they have no choice except accepting these changes.

In this way, the extradition or exchange of MKO members is possible because:

– US’s efforts to transfer them to a third country have failed,

– The US has remained silent on Iraqis’ decision to expel the group.

So, with respect to the changes in the policies of US military in Iraq, we should expect real developments in the situation of Mojahedin-e Khalq.

Irandidban  –   2006/11/11

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The MEK; Baath Party Accomplice

The Death Verdict Repudiating Assertions

Since the very beginning of the multinational forces’ settlement in Iraq to the Saddam’s pronounced death sentence, MKO have been making big claims of appreciating the existing empathy between them and Iraqi people. Two years ago, they first announced to have procured the support of 2,800,000 Iraqis. Then they continued to claim:

– tens of Iraqi political factions considered MKO’s presence in Iraq as legal and in accordance with People’s just demands

– any decision concerning MKO guaranteed Iraq’s strategic democracy and that its stay dammed the emergence of another Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq

– they enjoyed advocacy of hundreds of Iraqi lawyers and intelligentsias

– to have summoned the support of 5,200,000 Iraqi people, each vote representing 5 people

– to have support of many tribe sheikhs and chieftains

– to have established a strategic alliance with Iraqi people

– and ….

But Mojahedin have never taken any position against the Baath regime. They never referred to the key issue of who has been responsible for the violation of Iraqi people’s basic rights and crimes against people and dissident clerics and intelligentsias. Voicing for peace and democracy in Iraq, MKO has absolutely forgotten the center cause of all the past predicaments long plaguing Iraq.

Moreover, while Mojahedin’s feeling of loyalty forbore taking insubordinate stance against the ousted dictator, they, pretending not to interfere in Iraq’s internal affairs, refrain to stay on an indifferent line. They protested against the Iraqi Constitution and made indirect threats to escalate insurgencies, through the statement issued by 25 Sheikhs of the Dialy province, in case the Iraqi government expelled them. They condemned al-Maliki’s government and advertised its incompetency especially in controlling the armed insurgents and tried to escalate the ethnic and religious tensions to reinforce the US further stay and domination in Iraq.

Undoubtedly, Saddam loyalists and the remnants of Baath Party’s activities to restore Saddam’s rule is believed to play a crucial role in the expansion of the tension, something Mojahedin crave for. MKO’s silence over Saddam’s announced death sentence that drew the jubilant Iraqis into the streets antagonizes its previously claimed solidarity with people. If possible, it joined the insurgents to condemn the verdict as it yet believes in Saddam to be its strategic alliance. Saddam was only tried for the 1982 killing of 148 Shiites in the city of Dujail. The world would develop a better understanding of MKO and Saddam’s complementary collaboration if the ousted dictator’s further crimes, including the Kurds suppression, are brought before the tribunal.

Those in the West who repeat Mojahedin’s claims of receiving Iraqi people’s support should come to know that Mojahedin’s strategically contradictory conduct well justifies falsity of their assertions. Those who believe that Saddam’s sentence might put an end to Iraq’s black era do not need much speculation, seeing MKO’s silence and passiveness, to picture Mojahedin’s virtual play in the extension of disorder and tension.

Omid Pouya – November 9, 2006

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Maryam Rajavi

West Serves Iran Against the MKO

Maryam Rajavi complained of Western countries’ apathy about the MKO as well as these countries’ silence on the decision of Iraqi government to expel the group from Iraq; she also took projective stance toward Iraqi government and asked the Western country to employ her group in Iraq.

Maryam Rajavi, who failed to meet Norwegian officials and sufficed to visiting a handful of parliament members, expressed her real pain as being discredited in the West and Western countries’ apathy about her gang.

"Unfortunately, mullahs have taken advantage of the policy of compromising to use the West in order to restrict the main threat for their regime, namely the Iranian Resistance. Thus, the only factors that can bring a change to Iran have been restricted and the world has been deprived of the major factor for thwarting regime’s threats.

3500 members of resistance are in Camp Ashraf and the mullahs want to remove the main threat for their regime by denying their refugee status that has existed for 20 years. Meanwhile, Western governments are still silent on regime’s plots against Camp Ashraf," said Maryam Rajavi.

Maryam Rajavi revealed why the MKO insisted that Iran’s case should be dealt with in the UN Security Council (that is, the survival of the group in Iraq) and said:

"To prevent the expulsion of MKO from Iraq, UN Security Council should apply diplomatic, military, technological and oil sanctions against the regime. Mullahs’ hands should be cut from Iraq and the region and restrictions on the Iranian resistance should be lifted."

So, it becomes clear that the project of "making Iran angry" by a number of European countries (to get advantages in dealing with Iran over its nuclear program) has already failed and that Maryam Rajavi, practically inviting these countries to participate in terrorism, uses this project to express the restrictions and sufferings of her own cult.

Irandidban  –   2006/11/12

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Norway

What’s Coming for the MKO?

Norwegian foreign ministry, which reflects the policies of the government, announced that in regards with Maryam Rajavi’s visit to Norway the parliament has neither conferred with ambassadors nor with the government.

The foreign ministry announced this to show that this visit is unimportant and that the Norwegian government doesn’t support it.

The head of Foreign Affairs Committee that the MKO claims a member of which (Morten Hoglund) has invited Maryam Rajavi to visit Norway declared that "Rajavi’s visit doesn’t mean that the Parliament supports the group, but the parliament only want to listen to her."

The amazing point, however, in Rajavi’s visit to Norway is that the MKO has declared the names of racist anti-Iranian and anti-refugees groups (under the influence of Zionists) as the sponsors of this visit; one should say that the MKO and these groups have found each other in a proper way!

But the main issue (as it was clear in Rajavi’s visit to Belgium) is that Europeans want to take advantage of the MKO to put pressure on Iran. These visits will have no benefits for the group.

This fact was expressed two years ago by the British ambassador to Tehran that Europeans now consider the MKO as a card in game with Iran.

This time, Deputy Norwegian Foreign Minister said the cold relations between Iran and Europe is the reason for the visit. "There’s no warm and friendly relationship between Iran and us that Iranian ambassador warns about its future! We only have serious ties in the level of embassies."

All Europeans’ efforts in the past few weeks have been aimed at getting advantages in Iran’s nuclear case, but it’s clear that they won’t succeed. In this way, they wouldn’t be able to press Iran and get points since Iran believes that such moves worsen the ties with Europe and this is exactly what Europeans doesn’t like. So, the issue will go to the point where nuclear issue is settles and after that Europeans will correct their behavior.

On the other hand it should be noted that, despite temporary happiness of the MKO (that consider this a victory), the group will have to struggle with its historical isolation because these visits do not benefit it.

Irandidban  –   2006/11/07

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

MKO’s Propaganda for Boycotting Elections Fails

Calling on people to boycott an election (that is a civil attempt) is usually performed by groups and individuals with popular support who hope to be able to weaken the other side by this act or to prevent their rivals from getting to power centers.

MKO’s call for boycotting the elections (city councils and assembly of the experts) is a formalist act with no result since the group believes in overthrowing the regime with all its bases. This move by the group can only be viewed as a propagandistic effort.

That the MKO tries to separate Iranians from the state and opposed to the regime (the people who are waiting for a spark from MKO’s armed forces to overthrow the regime!) is an issue beyond contradictions and only proves unpopular the group is.

It should also be noted that the slogan of boycotting is far back from MKO’s claims on Iran’s political situation. The picture the MKO presents of Iran and tries to force others to accept is a picture which shows the regime destined to be overthrown!

So, boycotting elections- a civil act to force the state to withdraw- is in contradiction with this picture.

However, the main reason for such act is MKO’s unpopularity. MKO leaders know that the major reason for not being accepted by different governments (including the US and even Israel) is the hatred of Iranians towards this group.

For long time, MKO leaders have tried to deceive the Westerners on this issue.

Now, at the threshold of the elections, Rajavi’s gang is trying to show that Iranians have supported group’s call for boycotting the event!

Since Maryam Rajavi knew that this won’t be achieved, she asked the people not to come out of their homes! Moarchists also tried this trick 20 years ago and claimed that people didn’t come out of their homes on Friday (in response to their call)!!

The end of the scenario is clear: the MKO will claim that the people didn’t come out of their houses on Friday and that "We won it"!

This scenario is already failed due to the presence of the world’s media. There are no reports of the effects of such a boycott among people and among the media.

More importantly, MKO’s efforts to get out of the terror list and become recognized by world powers has already failed this scenario and the way for MKO’s taking advantage of this issue has been closed.

Irandidban  –   2006/11/06

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The MEK; Baath Party Accomplice

Silence over Master’s Death Sentence

The former Iraqi dictator finally got what he deserved. Many believe that Saddam’s death sentence is the smallest punishment for someone who executed tens of thousands of Iraqi people. His crimes against humanity exceeded the 1982 killing of 148 Shiites in the city of Dujail for which he received the sentence. Besides of his many evident instances of human-slaughters and bloodbaths, he was openly sponsoring terrorism. He had turned the soil of Iraq into a fertile land for the seeds of terrorism to germinate and MKO was really a favorite.

MKO adored him not as a patron but because he moved on the same violent ideological path they were treading. Mojahedin called him master, host, the great president, and brother above all. They were his most trusted mercenaries and ready to kill on his order. And he gave them a land to construct a city, Ashraf, and equipped them with arms to form an army, NLA, and supported them financially and politically.

Nevertheless, Mojahedin have preferred to keep silent about their previous master’s death sentence. Do they feel loyalty towards him or they are prudent not to aggravate the predicament they are entangled in Iraq?

mojahedin.ws –  07/11/2006

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts