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 can call foreign groups terrorists, court says

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct 20  – The United States can designate foreign organizations as terrorist groups and bar Americans from financially backing them, a federal appeals court ruled on Thursday.

"Leaving the determination of whether a group is a ‘foreign terrorist organization’ to the executive branch … is both a reasonable and a constitutional way to make such determinations," Judge Andrew Kleinfeld wrote for a three-judge panel.

"The Constitution does not forbid Congress from requiring individuals, whether they agree with the executive branch determination or not, to refrain from furnishing material assistance to designated terrorist organizations."

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was made in a case involving people who raised money in California for Mujahedin-e Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government since 1997.

The defendants argued the MEK was not a terrorist group and they had First Amendment rights to contribute to the group.

The court disagreed, saying contributing money was not the same as exercising a right to free speech. "Guns and bombs are not speech," Judge Kleinfeld wrote.

The 9th Circuit ruling was a rehearing of the same panel’s decision in June. Both 9th Circuit decisions overturned a district court’s dismissal of the indictment in the case.

The "Committee for Human Rights" had solicited contributions at the Los Angeles International Airport and sent them to the MEK in Turkey.

The Iranian group was formed in the 1960s to overthrow the Iranian government and was involved in taking U.S. Embassy staff in Tehran hostage in 1979. Its members, dissatisfied with the clerical government, later fled Iran, and resettled in Iraq, carrying out attacks with the backing of Saddam Hussein.

The ruling acknowledged geopolitical changes could change the perception about the MEK, but said the U.S. government should be the entity that decides.

"Defendants could be right about the MEK. But that is not for us, or for a jury in defendants’ case, to say," the decision read.

"The sometimes subtle analysis of a foreign organization’s political program to determine whether it is indeed a terrorist threat to the United States is particularly within the expertise of the State Department and the executive branch."

Adam Tanner

October 24, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

UK ‘hypocritical on terror’

UK ‘hypocritical on terror’ by not banning MKO campaign meetings

A meeting was even held in the House of Lords in support of the MKO on the "very day London was bombed" in July

(Massoud Shadjareh, Chair of the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC))

London, October 11, 2005 – The British government was accused Tuesday of being ‘hypocritical on terror’ by failing to use existing legislation against proscribed groups, like the Mojahedin-e Khalq terrorist group.

"Double-standards involved in the policing of proscribed organisations, and in particular, the refusal to enforce the law against non-Islamic groups," chair of the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC), Massoud Shadjareh said.

His condemnation came after Home Secretary Charles Clarke announced proposals on Monday to ban 15 more organizations under the country’s Terrorism Act 2000.

It coincided with the MKO, which is already a proscribed terrorist group in the UK, being allowed holding its latest campaign meeting in London under its so-called front group, the National Council of Resistance.

Under the Act, anyone openly promoting or expressing support for outlawed terrorist groups face the prospect of being prosecuted. The police also have powers to seize assets and arrest those who threaten violence for political, religious or ideological causes.

Shadjareh said that a meeting was even held in the House of Lords in support of the MKO on the "very day London was bombed" in July.

He also accused the British group of being "Islamophobic" in listing 15 more organization involved in terrorism abroad, when he listed only Muslim groups.

"The double-standards are again exposed as not a single Zionist or Hindu extremist group has been listed," the IHRC chairman said.

"It is very telling that Mr Clarke has not moved to proscribe terrorist groups, such as Kach and Kahane Chai, even though they have been banned in the US, and in Israel itself," he said.

October 19, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MKO Spying for Americans

The German weekly “Focus” quoted a former CIA employee and said that the US is spying on Iran by using Mojahedin-e Khalq members.

Beside the pictures of MKO tanks (which were received from Saddam Hussein), Focus quoted Ray McGovern saying: “There’s no doubt in Washington that this group (MKO) can be a good leverage against Iran.”

This former CIA employee, referring to the possible use of MKO by the US against Iran, said: “these forces are now being deployed to Iran for intelligence activities.”

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Former members of the MEK

3 Former Members Joined Families

Three former members of terrorist MKO (Mojahedin-e khalq organization) joined their families in special ceremony held in Shahid Beheshti Hall in the city of Kurdkooy.

In the ceremony, the 3 former members, Yunes Yanpi, Ahmed Sarayee and Valiallah Vahedi, respectively with 3, 5 and 16 years of cooperation with the MKO terrorists, were delivered to their loved ones.

In this event, full of tears and happiness, the former members detailed MKO’s crimes. To date, ten former members from Golestan province, with 3 to 16 years membership in MKO, have returned to the country.

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The MEK; Baath Party Accomplice

Press Conference

The trial of Saddam Hussein will start on Wednesday 19th of October 2005.

We demand that Massoud Rajavi one of his closest allies, whose hands have been in many of Saddam’s crimes, also be put on trial.

The toppled regime of Saddam Hussein actively supported international terrorism, and the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation, led by Massoud Rajavi, was at the top of the list of these terrorist organisations.

The Mojahedin as part of Saddam’s military played a decisive role in the suppression of the internal uprisings in Iraq in 1991, and are responsible for the massacre of many Iraqi Shiites and Kurds who opposed Saddam. The best documented of these being the massacre of the Kurds in their uprising in March 1991.

The Mojahedin acting as ‘Saddam’s Private Army’ have actively participated in the war which Saddam Hussein waged against Iran between 1980 and 1988, engaging themselves in intelligence gathering for the Iraqi army as well as participating in joint operations with them.

Each and every military and terrorist operation carried out by the Mojahedin in Iran has been ordered directly by Saddam Hussein and his intelligence and secret services in Iraq.

On Tuesday 18th October 2005, Iran Peyvand Association will hold a Press Conference in Paris. The programme will include:

A documentary film exposing the Mojahedin’s role in the suppression of the uprising of the Iraqi people in 1991.

Video evidence, secretly filmed by Saddam’s own security services, showing the financial and spying relationship between the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation and Saddam’s regime.

Several former high ranking members of this organisation who have recently managed to get themselves out into Europe will speak and reveal up-to-date news and information about the Mojahedin, as well as talk about their own experiences in the Mojahedin under the rule of Saddam.

A new research paper published in 110 pages under the title of "Mojahedin Khalq Organisation: one of the reasons behind the existence of terrorism in Iraq" will be introduced.

The place and the time of the conference will be announced later.  Iran Peyvand Association.

Paris – Tuesday 18 October, 2005 – Iran-interlink

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Duplicity of the MEK nature

Terrorist MKO paid British MP to visit UN

"It is a sect, not a political party, and has virtually no support in Iran. It is a diversion from the real issues,"

(Phyllis Starkey, Chair of the all-party Iran parliamentary group)

London, October 12, 2005 – Chair of the all-party Iran parliamentary group, Phyllis Starkey, has cautioned the British government in its behavior towards Tehran, including in making allegations about any interference in Iraq.

"As the Iranians have historical reasons for not regarding all that we and the US do as being totally above board or without some ulterior motive, that is why we should be careful," said Starkey, who also chairs Committee on the Deputy Prime Minister’s Office.

"We need to be aware of how what we and the US say is perceived not only by the Iranian Government but by the public at large," she warned during a debate on UK-Iran relations in the House of Commons on Tuesday.

The debate, sponsored by Conservative MP David Amess, a self- confessed supporter of the front group for that Mojahedin-e Khalq terrorist group, come as the UK orchestrated fresh allegations about Iran’s involvement in Iraq.

"If the British Government have clear information about Iranian involvement in the bombings in southern Iraq, it needs to be brought forward. Otherwise, we must be careful to stick to what we know," said Starkey, who is an MP for the ruling Labor Party.

"We need to stick to the facts, and not to indulge in hyperbole which will only further alienate members of the Iranian Government rather than holding them to account and making sure that they move in the direction in which we would wish them to move," she warned.

In the debate, Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells insisted that there was "no question that there has been at least Revolutionary Guard involvement" in southern Iraq and that there was "no doubt" bomb-making technology came from Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The chair of the Iran group totally disassociated herself from Amess and his Conservative colleague Brian Binley, whom he ccompanied on a paid trip to the UN General Assembly last month to rally support for the so-called National Council of Resistance.

"It is a sect, not a political party, and has virtually no support in Iran. It is a diversion from the real issues," she said and repeated that the UK Government should be "clear, consistent and transparent" in engaging in dialogue with Iran and its people.

With regard to the nuclear issue, Starkey commended the role that the UK Government has played, together with its EU partners, in trying to reach a negotiated resolution.

"The nuclear issue is important, not only in relation to Iran but in the context of controlling nuclear proliferation in general and in asserting the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency," she cautioned.

But the Labor MP also voiced fears that "we are at a tipping point, from which we could easily slide into the sort of

confrontation."

"There is a deliberate diplomatic ambiguity about Israel’s nuclear potential, but the other countries in the region know about it and feel that it is not consistent for us to focus only on their potential for nuclear weapons," she said.

"Everyone in the region knows that Israel already has a nuclear capability. It is rather like the elephant in the corner: no one speaks of it," Starkey said.

She said that although the UK has been pursuing the right line, "we must also be extremely careful not to use language that allows our stance to be projected as yet another example of the US and the UK’s attempting to control Iran or impose their will."

"We should recognize Iran’s right to have access to a civil nuclear program, but like everyone else Iran must comply with the IAEA," the Iran group chair said.

She suggested the government’s argument should be that enriching fuel is as "uneconomically inviable for the Belgians, as it would be for the Iranians."

On Iran’s human rights record, Starkey also warned that "we must avoid at all costs the lunatic strategy that a variety of neo- Conservatives in the United States appear to be parading." "To suggest that one way to bring down the regime in Iran is to stir up conflict between all the ethnic groups there, in order to achieve fragmentation," she said.

"That appears to be giving an immense puff to a number of rather spurious groups in the United States that claim to represent different ethnic groups in Iran," she added.

Howells highlighted the contractions in Britain foreign policy by pointing out that Iran was a "very important country" but that all of the government’s discussions on relations were "almost always couched in negative terms."

"We want Iran to be a great country. It has a wonderfully rich history as everybody who goes to the British Museum can see for themselves," he said of the current exhibition in London.

The Foreign Office Minister for the Middle East also argued that Britain had "much on which to cooperate with Iran," using efforts to combat drug trafficking from Afghanistan as an example.

"It is all the more hurtful, in a way, that Iran chooses to snub our approach when we have kept the country for at least the last two years from having to face an immediate referral to the United Nations Security Council," he said about the nuclear stand-off.

Howells said Iranians were "very skilled diplomats" that was acknowledged across the world. But for them to snub Britain’s approach was "extremely worrying and a backward step," he said.

He argued that there was "absolutely no explanation" for Iran’s nuclear conversion program, given that the country did not have any working reactors.

The Minister, who is a former vice chair of Labor Friends of Israel, defended Britain’s double standards by insisting he applied the "same conditions to Israel to Iran" and that the UK had always asked Israel to abide by the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

Human Rights Watch: ‘We weren’t duped.’

WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 (UPI) — Human Rights Watch reasserted claims of abuses by an Iranian dissident group Wednesday even after a report compiled by a European Parliament delegation denounced its initial report as "devoid of any truth."

Earlier this year, the global watchdog group published a report alleging serial abuses at Camp Ashraf, the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq headquarters, six miles north of Baghdad. The report described the MeK as an extremist sect, whose leaders had exerted a manipulative psychological influence on their followers, as in the case of the 1980s mass divorces enforced to ensure total loyalty to their cause. Members who wish to leave the organization suffered from beating and prolonged solitary confinement, resulting in a number of fatalities, the report said.

The MeK denies the allegations, claiming an Iranian conspiracy to discredit the group.

A report by the parliamentary delegation, based on a visit to Camp Ashraf in September, backed the MeK’s claims. In its report, the delegation said that the watchdog group had gone "far beyond the mandate of a human rights organization." The delegation heard counter-testimonies from MeK members, supporting this view and vilifying Human Rights Watch.

"We found the allegations contained in HRW report unfounded and devoid of any truth. We also came to the conclusion that the HRW report was procedurally flawed and substantively inaccurate."

The HRW has been criticized by the delegation for not visiting Camp Ashraf and for basing their report on testimony gathered in 12 telephone interviews.

But HRW’s Joe Stork Wednesday fiercely defended his conclusions, throwing his own accusations back at the EU delegation.

"They’re fine ones to talk about methodology," he told United Press International. "The counter-testimonies are all from people high up in the MeK. Most of the criticisms in the delegation’s report are from MeK sources."

Asked why HRW did not visit Camp Ashraf, despite invitations from the MeK, Stork explained that his organization’s allegations dated back before the occupation of Iraq led by the American coalition. "We were invited during the Hussein era. No human rights organization could credibly take up that offer."

HRW had sought permission to visit the camp since the fall of Saddam, he said. But "U.S. forces did not respond positively to later requests. In hindsight, I regret not including that in the report." Coalition forces in Iraq were unable to confirm that these requests had been made, according to Stork.

The MeK was designated a terrorist organization by the Clinton administration in 1997. But the group has since won favor in the United States by providing information on the Iranian nuclear program. In 2004, MeK members were given ‘protected status’ by coalition forces in Iraq.

The group’s seemingly contradictory status, at once a source of valuable intelligence and an acknowledged terrorist organization, is fuelling a fierce propaganda war between the MeK and the Iranian regime, in which HRW, the European Parliament and the United States Government have become players.

Stork is a target of an elaborate deception by the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security, claims Raymond Tanter, a Georgetown University academic and founding member of the Iran Policy Committee, which advises the United States government, citing a June White Paper issued by the IPC that describes HRW as "victims of a world class intelligence operation."

According to the IPC paper, many of the witnesses interviewed by HRW were in fact Iranian agents. These included Hossein Sobhani, "whom HRW cites as a "credible" victim but who, in fact, runs an intelligence ring in Europe that works under the direct supervision of MOIS deputy chief Mohammad-Reza Iravani."

"Human Rights Watch has been duped," said Tanter.

Terrorists or indispensable friends? Uncertainty over the true personality of the MeK has prompted debate over the U.S. administration’s relationship with the group. In an October report by Foreign Policy magazine, freelance writer Erik Saas suggested that MeK intelligence might not be quite as indispensable as their advocates claim:

"The group has a record of exaggerating intelligence or sometimes simply making things up. U.S. officials have learned to take MeK claims with very large grains of salt," wrote Saas.

Nevertheless, there is, according to Saas, increasing co-operation between the MeK and the United States. (Although they remain on the U.S. State Department’s terrorist list.) Saas even claims MeK fighters have been deployed in Pakistan and Afghanistan, although this has not been confirmed.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, President of Strategic Policy Consulting and former MeK leader, says he sees no reason why the terrorist designation should not soon be lifted. MeK was placed on the terrorist list in 1997 as a conciliatory gesture aimed at Iran’s president at the time, Mohammed Khatami Jafarzadeh told UPI. "The designation came weeks after Khatami was elected," he said. But with the election this summer of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a shift in policy was likely. "With the new regime, the situation will change."

Tanter gives credence to the suggestion that the terrorist list has more to do with political expediency than human rights. "The designation is a diplomatic football tossed around to gain various diplomatic benefits," he said.

Asked if, in the light of the HRW allegations, co-operation with the MeK could damage the image of the United States, Tanter said: "American credibility is damaged if it doesn’t take sides with the Iranian resistance in general. The U.S. has to stand with the dissidents. That doesn’t mean picking a group."

"Regime change is the implicit policy of the Bush administration," he said. "Diplomacy has failed and the number of nuclear installations makes military action unfeasible." If Tanter is right, alliance with dissident groups, however unsavory, is one of increasingly few options.

By LEIGH BALDWIN

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

Let’s Break the Cult’s Life-Glass

Terrorist MKO showed its fear and despair by publishing a report on the final statement of “Recognizing Sectarian Terrorism Seminar”, signed by 140 former members and commanders of the group.

In a hurried reaction, remnants of Rajavi’s cult desperately brought their lawyers to the scene, swearing that they had not conducted anything illegal in Camp Ashraf. By threatening the Iraqi government to pursue the case by international attorneys, Mojahedin try to disrupt legal processes of the government.

The main message of “Recognizing Sectarian Terrorism Seminar”, expressed briefly in its final statement, is that “The mafia-like inhuman organizational structure- established by a number of MKO ringleaders- is the only obstacle in the way of those members who want to choose freely and leave the group, and that facilities provided by Saddam Hussein prepares a suitable environment for the survival of such an illegal structure”.

Considering this message, hurried position-taking by remnants of Rajavi can be analyzed.

Former members and commanders who have signed this statement are well aware that Iraq is the only place in the world in which Rajavi can continue to keep control on members and follow his political-organizational interests. On the other hand, group’s ringleaders confess to this fact that their expulsion from Iraq- not to Iran, but to any other place in the world- equals total destruction of the MKO structure. So, their existence is now tied to Iraq and is like “life-glass” of Rajavi’s terrorist band.

In its hurried reaction, MKO’s propaganda system revealed reasoning and cases reserved for the time after the confirmation of Iraqi constitution and the establishment of Iraq’s permanent government. “Regarding international regulations, as Iraqi president’s spokesperson said on October 5 in Radio Farda, MKO’s presence in Iraq has nothing to do with the responsibilities of current Iraqi government but it is related to the 4th Geneva Convention, executed under the supervision of International Committee of Red Cross.”

Then, by threatening Iraqi government and officials, they tried to strengthen their words: “Therefore, all Iraqi democratic, patriotic people are well aware that anyone who wants to violate or ignore recognized asylum rights of Mojahedin in the framework of 4th Geneva Convention would be considered a traitor and an ally of Mullah’s outlaw regime, and attorneys will press charges against him”.

According to 4th Geneva Convention, the agreement signed with each and every member inside Camp AShraf after disarmament process was an agreement between coalition forces and real individuals. So, legal status of 4th Geneva Convention has been granted to independent people, not to “Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization of Iran”.

Considering the articles of 4th Geneva Convention and its privileges for those who enjoy this status it can be said that all activities of terrorist MKO (listed in global terrorist list) are illegal and can be prosecuted internationally.

According to the same reasons for disarming this group, its satellite TV programs, controlling individuals in Camp Ashraf and their movements and also planning to restrict these people are illegal and Iraqi government, as MKO’s hosting country and where the Convention is being applied, can pursue the case.

Although 4th Geneva Convention provides a number of advantages for those who enjoy it, it’s really preventive for a terrorist group; however, the MKO makes so much noise about it.

Recent MKO position, taken due to its weakness and despair, reveals the reasons behind all MKO efforts during past two years in order to get assurance for staying in Iraq and encouraging forces to reject all other humane offers. It also exposes the real fears of MKO’s leadership. Mojahedin know well that forces in Camp Ashraf won’t cooperate willingly in other places of the world and that all steps against illegal activities of this group will lead to the freedom of these forces; that’s why they focus their major activities on creating petitions under the name of Iraqi people, lawyers and ad hoc NGOs as well as their satisfaction for MKO’s staying in Iraq!

Now, we can understand why they opposed the Iraqi draft constitution. All former members and those who have experienced the depth of crimes in Rajavi’s cult should stress this legal right that “MKO’s organizational restrictions and boundaries in Iraq should be lifted from members, and this should be done in Iraq, by Iraq’s legitimate government in the framework of the 4th Geneva Convention as well as fighting terrorism and investigation of Saddam’s crimes. Meanwhile, the security of all members should be guaranteed.”

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Exiled Iranian Resistance Could Help Pressure Tehran?

The terrorist status of the exiled Iranian resistance might be used to pressure Iran’s regime over the next few months as the US, the UN and the EU step up efforts to get the country to comply with specific rules on its nuclear program. The proposition is simple: the Mujahiddeen stays on the terrorist list for at least another two years and in return for this goodwill, Iran is more forthcoming in its nuclear pledges.

There wouldn’t be all that much substance to such a deal, but comments from diplomats reveal that it’s been pondered rather matter of factly time and again as a feasible bargaining ploy. The exiled Iranian resistance groups’ terrorist label can either be used as little more than a bargaining chip or -less likely- they might find that they might be fitted into a US cooked up plan for inciting popular uprisings inside Iran. Both ends of the spectrum have implications that might be unforeseen.

At the center of the action would be the dissident National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). It is also known as the Mujahiddeen el Khalq (MeK) or the National Liberation Army (NLA). Some 3,000 of its members have been granted protection in July 2004 by the US in their camp in Ashraf, northwest of Baghdad. The organization’s main appeal to Western backers, of whom the Europeans are even more enthusiastic than the Americans, is the result of intensive campaigning over the last 15 years. In a sense, it has found the perfect organizational formula to win over Western hearts and minds – it puts women’s rights at the heart of its philosophy. Women make out 30 percent of the group yet they are covering 70% of all leadership functions.

The MeK has successfully attracted world media attention and it appears that it charmes work. US congress member for Florida, Illeana Ros Lehtinen, who frequently campaigns for the recognition of Iranian resistance groups certainly will have bought into the female message. However, it appears that the group got some wires crossed when it made news headlines that indicated practices in stark contrast with such lofty idealism. The freedom fighters have a dysmal appreciation of human rights according to a report last May by Human Rights Watch (HRW). The report exacerbated the controversy surrounding the terrorist status of the group, and highlighted some rather gruesome incidents inflicted on people trying to leave the group. One of the instances involved a former bodyguard of Rajavi. Le Parisien describes what happened to him. "When he decided to leave MKO, they injected narcotics into his body and Tahmasebi was under heavy mental torture". The former bodyguard’s fate was relatively mild compared to the punishments the leadership cooked up for other members and which frequently ended in the death of the people punished.

Even though in some eyes the MeK has made significant strides in becoming an acceptable organization, vowing to lay off terrorist actions, insiders say that the last decade its leaders have adopted a cult like aura that not everyone has found to be admirable and which likely contributed to its difficulty in recruiting new members. In the early 1990s, the husband and wife team leading the group, Masoud Rajavi and Maryam Uzdanlu, asked all its members to undertake their own "ideological revolution" by divorcing their spouses. One of the victims of this kind of brainwashing operation is the Iran affairs analyst Ali Reeza Jafarzade who frequently appears on Fox TV. An Iranian exile, Jafarzade is an ex MeK member, as well as the head of a think tank that is not part of the group. It was Jafarzade who was the NCRI’s official spokesman breaking the news to the world of Iran’s  nuclear facilities in Natanz and Arak two years ago.

Iran Interlink, an organization that claims to reveal the MeK’s true face to the world, runs a website that claims that Jafarzade married his wife, Robabeh Sadeghi of Babol, in 1986 on Massoud Rajavi’s orders. Four years later, the couple divorced after Rajavi told all the group’s members to do so for ideological reasons. Iran Interlink published a bio of Jafarzade, that cast a shadow of doubt over his links with Fox News. "Fox News now introduces Jafarzadeh as either their employee or as the head of a consultancy company. But as recently as 2002 the same man was interviewed by Fox News as the MKO’s representative in the US Congress", according to the website. "There are serious allegations that Jafarzadeh has been involved in illegal deals in the USA, including deals involving chemicals which can be used to produce WMDs. There are also allegations that the MKO, with him as its representative, have been involved in serious money laundering and drug trafficking in the USA. These allegations, as well as his and Fox News’ dodgy connections in Washington, are currently under investigation," Iran interlink contends. Jafarzadeh apparently was such a committed member that he repeatedly volunteered for suicide operations, Interlink claims, adding that in one of the organization’s publications he is quoted as saying that he is ready to burn himself in front of the UN’s New York office whenever it is needed.

Even though it is unlikely that the MeK is not at all involved in helping out the covert agents running around inside Iran, it is equally unlikely that they are being heavily relied upon as an organization, observers believe. Ron Jacobs at counterpunch.com believes that it is not necessarily logical to expect that the US would immediately enlist the services of the NCRI’s members to conduct a foreign invasion of the country, even though this group has been actively publicizing the locations of Iran’s nuclear sites. "Should change come to Iran with minimal US interference, it seems likely that those groups and people with the fewest connections to DC will be those held in greatest favor by the Iranian people", Jacobs believes. But it is difficult to get a clear picture on this issue.

The only recent official sign that the Bush administration is working on the situation was the release by the US State Department to members of Congress of a classified report entitled ‘non compliance report’, covering the nuclear situation in Iran and a few other countries. Parts of the report were publicized, but it was also announced that there is a "secret" as well as a "top secret" version of the report in circulation – a clear sign that Washington wants the world to know that the wheels are turning.

For all that it matters, the main investigations that are ongoing into the role of individuals and groups like the NCRI are also mostly classified. It is virtually impossible to gain access to even the review dates of the three State Department lists that brand the MeK as a terrorist organization and which happens every two years.

This is bad news for the MeK, which has focused on losing the terrorist stigma for the last Decade. In recent years, the MeK appealed three times to the United States Court of Appeals to review the 1999 and 2001 decisions of the state Department to designate it as a foreign terrorist organization. But from a rational point of view it would be hardly possible to grant the MeK its wish. The Bush administration has named the organization a major reason for its invasion in Iraq, believe it or not. In a white paper released in September 2002, the US administration restated a claim President Bush had made before in a speech to the UN General Assembly, saying that one of the main reasons it had invaded Iraq had been its "sheltering of terrorist groups including the Mujahideen-e-Khalq Organization, which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians." Michele Steinberg, a writer for the Executive Intelligence Review says that "the only major concrete charge that the Bush administration made about a terrorist organization was against, rather than in favor of the MeK.

One of the allegations to haunt the organization most persistently is that it was actively involved in suppressing an uprising of the Kurds in Northern Iraq in 1991. One of its official spokespeople has a lot of experience countering this threat and says that even the PKA dismisses these allegations. That’s one example of putting out a fire that showcases the organization’s potential use yet again as an outfit that conveys reliability. If the US administration is at all orchestrating the publicity, it’s casting the group as precisely this – a  source of information.

Aside from the revelations on the two nuclear power plants that the Iranian leadership had not told the IAEA about, Jafarzade has recently started to take to repeating stories. News broken to the world by the Financial Times a few months ago was regurgitated once again, as well as the allegations that there are some 4,000 centrifuges spinning at full speed inside Iranian nuclear facilities. What the point is of such allegations is dubious. Outside observers believe that Washington might be readying the public opinion for a military strike against Iran’s nuclear sites. Analysts say that the majority of the policymakers in favor of attacking Iran favor this option over inciting an uprising. "Even so, the fate of democracy in Iran will hardly be determined solely in Washington. A year after NATO bombed Serbia to halt Milosevic’s brutal crackdown against the Kosovo Albanians, Serbian students led a peaceful struggle to overthrow Milosevic. The forces that lead to regime change are often unpredictable — and not easily suppressed", writes Laura Rozen, who is voicing just what some analysts at lobby groups are banking on. It remains to be seen whether such a scenario will be volunteered as easily. People at NCRI say they have a very difficult time educating the population on just how much money the Iranian regime is spending on the nuclear program. If the population finds it has any bones to pick with their government, it will likely be more inspired by economic incentives that are more readily digestible.

Rozen believes that a strike wouldn’t be without considerable risks either. "However, an unfortunate link might be made between the even more unfortunate bombing by US troops of Sarajevo .. in 1998 … US leaders might be dreaming of a similar scenario, when, a month after the bombing, a peaceful demonstration of a bunch of students led to the revolt that ousted the then president Slobodan Milosovic. However, it’s unlikely that policymakers will be so naieve as to think history repeats itself at their whim even without making an attempt whatsoever."

The main challenge the Iranian resistance abroad poses aside from the controversy surrounding the status of the MeK in the US and France are widely convering views within the organizations. For all the MeK hype’s worth, one wonders whether alternative support of Iranian dissidents exists besides the choice of this flagship group.  But this is offset by equally few scrupules over trading the MeK’s terrorist status for better nuclear pledges from the Iranian regime. From the ground up however, there is a growing movement among Brussels politicians that wants to end the restrictions on the MeK as an organization. The French closed the organization down two years ago . They kicked out the organization before too, when in 1986 it forced the movement to relocate to Baghdad and effectively hire itself out as Saddam Hussein’s private army. Surprisingly, the French are said to be most effective in garnering results from nuclear negotiations.

It’s most likely the MeK is only used to incite terror inside Iran in a non official capacity. Or even without direct approval from the very people that are responsible at the top in the US Bush administration. This won’t be a unique development. The officials like Bush and Rice were not informed of the decision by the US army to give the Mujahiddeen fighters their arms back upon invading Iraq and very shortly after the group were bombed by the Iraqi army. Yet as soon as she got wind of what the Vice President Dick Cheney and a few like minded friends were condoning, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice cancelled this agreement and declared the Asraf grounds a protected zone later on. It is US policy not to allow dealings between US officials and members of organizations that officially are listed as terrorist. The US, round about the same time as France, closed the MeK offices in the summer of 2003.

Even from the more recent State Department documents it appears that there is scepticism within the State Department. The Decades old claim that the group is essentially Marxist and that it does not envisage Iran as an Islamic state has obviously not been updated for years save on its stay in Iraq. "The MeK philosophy mixes Marxism and Islam. […] Its primary support came from the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein starting in the late 1980s. The MeK conducted anti-Western attacks prior to the Islamic Revolution. Since then, it has conducted terrorist attacks against the interests of the clerical regime in Iran and abroad. The MeK advocates the overthrow of the Iranian regime and its replacement with the group’s own leadership."

Massoud Rajavi confirms that a Marxist coup d’etat took place within the group when he was in prison following the street rallies in the MeK’s heydays, but that he managed to regain control even from his prison cell. In a bid to make the organization acceptable overseas, he has repeatedly repudiated all Marxist leanings. Aside from its dodgy philosophical makeup, information about how the group functions internally reads much like the accounts of the Davidian Waco cult that was butchered by the FBI in Texas in 1993. Radio messages are broadcast every day to induce members to the gospel according to its leaders and psychological pressure is the standard way of conveying orders. The MeK’s long history starts in 1965, when three former students of Tehran University -Mohammad Hanifnezhad, Saeed Mohsen and Asghar Badizadegan set up the movement to help topple the regime of the much hated Shah. They made Marxism and Islam the foundation of their ideology, a trend that most groups of the time participated in. The MeK found soon after the revolution that the new Ayatollah-run regime would simply not trust it or allow it any role in public life and took to arms. On June 20 1981, the movement started to organize mass rallies and soon thousands of its members inside Iran were arrested and executed in the streets because they had participated in regime hostile activities. With the anti-shah revolution still fresh in the Iranian people’s minds, the new regime’s leaders had legitimate worries that a similar fate could rather easily befall them.

The Mujahiddeen nowadays is not seen by experts as a major military outfit, but it has known its moments and could be up for a similar refashioning. Maryam Rajavi has been arrested while hiding in France and is currently awaiting trial on terrorism related charges. Husband Massoud hasn’t been seen in two years. Meanwhile, Iran Interlink reports that Maryam has been replaced by someone who served in Saddam Hussein’s private army, and who in turn is succeeding a deputy leader that has mysteriously disappeared from the scene. All is very sensitive in Tehran. The European Parliament invited Maryam to outline an alternative view for state organization in Iran and outraged the Iranian regime. It shows yet again that the organization’s international standing is somewhat of a potent bargaining chip with Tehran.

The impression one gets from the official organization is however that the MeK’s aspirations to topple the Iranian regime and replace it with its own officers are still going strong. But the ambitions are rather hopeless without some staunch backing. "The presence of a female-dominated army prepared to fight the mullahs and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards is a powerful symbol to all women in the region. Its effectiveness is not in its military might. The fact that the army exists at all is a huge threat to all male-dominated fundamentalist regimes. It shows what women can do", says Anne Land, a Danish Human Rights lawyer who visited Camp Ashraf. Yet last Summer’s human rights watch report has set the scene once again for a review of the group’s ‘sins of the past’. It looks increasingly difficult to fit the organization in any official US plan for regime change. For all its campaigning however to lose the terrorist label and to muster international support for the dream team of husband and wife aided by an army of innocent virgins, the MeK simply has too much blood on its hands for it to be feasibly considered suitable material by even the most unconscionable neocon in Washington.

Within Iran, the MeK won’t be greeted with open arms either. "The MKO are highly disliked and disregarded by Iranians worldwide. During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein financed and utilized the MKO to institute several attacks against Iranians," a writer at the IranTruth blog writes. These reports are confirmed time and again. It appears that it’s likely going to be rather difficult to gain trust as an organization that once has taken up arms against its own people -in the 1988 Iran Iraq war- rather than against only the regime in Tehran. The group is also widely perceived by the Iranian population to have been actively involved in suppressing the Kurds in 1991, together with Saddam’s army. "The MKO do not gain immunity for their previous actions simply by refraining from targeting European and American targets for 30 years", according to the IranTruth blog.

Angelique van Engelen is a former Middle East correspondent and currently runs a writing agency http://www.contentclix.com. She also participates in a writing ring http://clixyplays.blogspot.com/

October 18, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Former members of the MEK

13 MKO defectors repatriated

Nejat Society reporter: Mehr Abad Airport Tehran,October 14th, 16:30 pm.  A Red Cross flight in which there were 13 of separated members of Rajavi’s cult landed. These defectors returned to their homeland by the help of International Red Cross.

It is notable that most of these members were in Rajavi’s cult  for 18 to 20 years who are separated from it due to threat, torture … in Rajavi’s cult and introduced themselves to TRC.

This indicates the disappointment and depressive atmosphere in Camp Ashraf- Iraq.

Below is the list of the returnees:

Mohammad Reza Baraty – Tehran

Marzie Ghorbani Moghadam –  Tehran

Jamal Amirie – Tehran

Behrouz Nazarian – Nahavand

Jabar Ghaderie – Kamiyaran

Mohammad Ebadie – Mahshahr – Hendijan

Shanbe Kalantary – Ahvaz

Hussein Farah Bakhsh – Rasht

Naser Ravaee – Tehran

Ali Ekramie – Mahshahr

Saied Naserie  –  Abadan

Siyavoush Daryapeyma – Minab – Hormoz

Gholam Reza Yousefy – Dare Gaz

 

October 17, 2005 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Posts

  • A Criterion for Proving the Violent Nature of the MEK

    December 31, 2025
  • 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
  • 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