In an interview with London’s Financial Times, Ahmed Chalabi, Iraqi deputy prime minister, said: “Iraq acknowledged Iran’s “legitimate concern” about the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), an armed Iranian opposition group under US protection in Iraq under what he called “murky circumstances”.
“We should enforce the article in our constitution that Iraq should not be a transit point or base for destabilising neighbours,” he said.
Iran Interlink Demands Indictment of Mojahedin-e Khalq’s Massoud Rajavi
The trial of Saddam Hussein has begun. His toppled regime actively supported international terrorism and Iran’s Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) group – led by Saddam’s closest ally, Massoud Rajavi – was at the top of the terrorist list.
In a press conference on Thursday November 10 – at The Ambassador’s Hotel in Bloomsbury, pressure group Iran Interlink demanded that Massoud Rajavi joins Saddam in being brought to justice.
The conference started with a documentary film showing Massoud Rajavi as he briefed his forces on their mission, along with eye witness accounts of the Mojahedin’s offensives against civilian Kurdish populations in the Spring of 1991. The documentary revealed that the Mojahedin, acting as Saddam’s private army, played a decisive role in the suppression of the 1991 internal uprisings in Iraq, and is responsible for the massacre of many Iraqi Kurds who opposed Saddam.
Following the film, French journalist and researcher on terrorism, Alain Chevalerias, spoke about the terrorist nature of Massoud Rajavi’s Mojahedin organisation. Chevalerias – whose book ‘Burned Alive’ charts the psychological manipulation exerted on MKO members which resulted in several members setting fire to themselves in Paris and London in June 2003 – gave a clear definition of terrorism for the audience and said that groups which attack civilian populations in countries of which the west is critical must be viewed in the same way as the terrorists who target western populations.
Anne Singleton, author of ‘Saddam’s Private Army – how Rajavi changed Iran’s Mojahedin from Armed Revolutionaries into an armed cult’, spoke about the cult nature of the Mojahedin. It is not a political organisation, nor is it a military organisation, it is a cult, said Ms Singleton. Worse than this, it is a terrorist cult. Ms Singleton spent over fifteen years in close proximity to the cult and spent three years full time with them. Ms Singleton pointed out that neither the Mojahedin organisation, nor its leaders, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, have ever publicly condemned Saddam Hussein or his crimes, and have never publicly renounced violence as a means to achieve their aims.
Ms Singleton asserted that the Mojahedin, because it is a cult, can play no part in the political future of Iran. Moreover, now that its forces – with the exception of the people in Camp Ashraf in Iraq – are based in western countries, the Mojahedin no longer presents a threat to Iran. Rather, when its forces set fire to themselves in the streets of western cities, this organisation has now become a problem for the people of those countries.
The speakers were followed by video evidence secretly filmed by Saddam’s own security services depicting the financial, spying and terrorist relationship between the Mojahedin-e Khalq organisation and Saddam’s regime.
The conclusion of the press conference was that not only was each and every military and terrorist operation carried out by the Mojahedin in Iran ordered directly by Saddam Hussein and his intelligence and secret services in Iraq, but that as it faces greater and greater rejection from western governments, the Mojahedin will inevitably return to the side of Saddam Hussein. In this respect, it is possible that they are already participating in the insurgency in Iraq as well as planning terrorist activities in the west.
At the end of the press conference, a Question and Answer session was held with two former members of the Mojahedin.
A three-member team of supporters of Massoud Rajavi and the Mojahedin had been admitted to the conference by Iran Interlink in order to have them watch the films and listen to the speeches. It was hoped they might be in a position to answer some of the journalists questions about the crimes of Massoud Rajavi. During the Q&A session, the team began to rant and admitted they had come with the sole aim of accusing speakers at the meeting of working with the Iranian intelligence ministry.
Massoud Khodabandeh and Karim Haghi, who were holding the Q&A session, restored order so that bona fide journalists were able to get their stories. Unfortunately, the team of Mojahedin supporters, frustrated in their efforts, then began to accuse journalists at the press conference also of being agents of the Iranian intelligence ministry.
The supporters of Massoud Rajavi were unable to answer the central accusation, or to refute or deny the evidence shown at the press conference – that Massoud Rajavi had ordered his own people, Mojahedin forces, to suppress the Kurdish uprising in 1991 as a part of Saddam Hussein’s repressive regime.
Iran Interlink repeats its demand – that Massoud Rajavi be tried alongside Saddam Hussein for war crimes, terrorism and crimes against humanity.
November 12, 2005
Following discussion of the controversial UK Anti-Terrorism Law by the House of Commons, a prominent Muslim figure criticized double standards of the government in approaching terrorist groups.
This law would enable British law enforcement to keep terrorist suspects under arrest for 90 days. Supporting and encouraging terrorist activities are also considered as crimes.
Some MPs have criticized the content of this law.
Massoud Shajareh, a prominent Muslim leader questioned whether UK police have double standards in approaching the issue of terrorism. Islamic Human Rights Commission, chaired by Shajareh, had earlier asked the UK government to ban a meeting by Iranian opposition group in UK parliament.
National Council of Resistance, political wing of the MKO (listed as terrorist organization in UK, U.S. and EU), held a meeting in UK parliament in which a number of MPs took part.
Shajareh told UPI: “NCRI is the political wing of the Iranian terrorist organization, the MKO which has been banned in the US and Europe. In addition, this council itself has been declared a terrorist group by the US and EU.”
“The Terrorism Act 2000 bans supporting any terrorist organization or an organization whose members have also the membership of a banned organization. The punishment for violating this law can be 10 years in prison.”
He said the police appeared negligent since it didn’t act to arrest the conductors of the meeting according to the law. He said such moves would convince Muslims that such a law has been approved only for political advantages.
“It seems that there are double standards in fighting terrorism. For instance, this question is raised as to why the police ignores the activities of NCRI and allows them to raise money but cracks down on Islamic Freedom Party,” he said.
“Do they allow Al-Qaeda, as they do an Iranian terrorist group, to hold a conference in London on the future of Iraq and Afghanistan?” he asked.
Al Quds Al Arabi
LONDON, Nov 7 (Reuters) – Iraq must do more to stop the country being used as a base for foreign militants seeking to destabilise its neighbours, Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi said in comments published on Monday.
In an interview with Britain’s Financial Times, Chalabi acknowledged Iran’s "legitimate concern" about Mujahedin-e Khalq, an Iranian opposition group operating in Iraq which the United States lists as a terrorist organisation.
He said there were also concerns in Turkey over bases in northern Iraq operated by the banned Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).
"We should enforce the article in our constitution that Iraq should not be a transit point or base for destabilising neighbours," Chalabi told the newspaper. "We should deal with these issues humanely and fairly, but firmly."
Turkish leaders complain the PKK has a safe-haven in the mountains of northern Iraq from where rebel commanders direct operations into Turkey.
After more than 20 years of conflict, Turkish forces have failed to completely quell the PKK’s armed campaign for home-rule in the mainly Kurdish southeast.
On Iran, Chalabi said Tehran had agreed to study his proposal for an inquiry by British, Iranian and Iraqi representatives into recent violence in the southern city of Basra.
Chalabi said Britain raised tension in the area by accusing Iran of helping Iraq militants to plant roadside bombs which killed British troops.
He added that Iran also inflamed the situation with allegations of British backing for militant Arab separatists in south-west Iran, according to the FT report.
November 7, 2005
A few hours after expressing support for the Mojahedin-e khalq organization, Elina Åberg, member of Sweden’s Environmentalist Party, Green party (Miljöpartiet de Gröna), received severe criticisms from the political leaders in her party so that she was forced to turn 180 degrees and withdrew her comments. On Thursday morning, she said that the MKO was an active organization which “works for the freedom of people” but a few hours later she had to announce that expressing such words resulted from her being young and inexperienced. “After I talked to my colleagues in the party, I found that I had not enough knowledge on the MKO and the situation in Iran”.
Ms. Lotta Hedstrom, member of parliament and Green Party leader, also denied Åberg’s support for the MKO and said to the media that supporting the MKO is not the policy of the party. “The MKO is not suitable for overthrowing Iranian regime,” she said.
Carl B. Hamilton, member of the Parliament for the Liberal Party, also criticized Åberg’s comments and said that her comments proved her inexperience. “I was shocked. This is a terrorist organization”.
Mojahedin-e Khalq has been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. and EU, mainly because of cooperation with the ousted regime of Saddam Hussein.
Elina Åberg expressed support for removing MKO from terror list but withdrew her comments very soon after receiving harsh criticism from inside and outside her party.
November 7, 2005
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – 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."
One of the allegations made by Seymour Hersh in his piece on Iran was that the United States was infiltrating Iran, with the clear implication being that the members of the strange Marxist terrorist (ex-terrorist?) Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization were being used by the United States to gather information on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Doubtless with the MKO in mind, David Kay made the important point yesterday in the Washington Post:
[D]issidents and exiles have their own agenda — regime change — and that before being accepted as truth any "evidence" they might supply concerning Iran’s nuclear program must be tested and confirmed by other sources.
In any case, it’s not clear how effective the MKO can be, anyway, writes Massoud Khodabandeh of the Jamestown Foundation (echoing a point made by the Brooding Persian):
In any event, the notion of sending MKO members inside Iran as secret operatives tasked with undertaking espionage and sabotage operations was always a non-starter. This proposal entirely overlooks the actual state of the organization itself. The average age of the members is over 48 years, with a significant number over 50 years old. And these are people whose bodies have been ravaged by the conditions of constant military training, sleep deprivation and inadequate nutrition. Most have not set foot in Iran for nearly 24 years and would have difficulty now navigating around their own neighborhoods, let alone an unknown nuclear facility. More than this, the psychological state of the members following years of isolation and psychological coercion would not allow them to act independently or intelligently outside their immediate organizational environment – let alone in hostile territory. In short, the U.S. covert operation would need local Iranians not burnt-out ex-patriots. In addition, the MKO has become so heavily infiltrated, and not just by the Iranians, that it is hard to see how such a plan could be even formulated without Iran becoming forewarned of it.
I’m not sure who’s behind the strange US Alliance for Democratic Iran (Brownback?), but it’s worth noting that they support the use of the MEK, as do Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson:
Can the MEK be useful? Yes. Western spy agencies are short on "human intelligence" – meaning spies on the ground in Iran, as distinct from eyes in the sky. Coalition military commanders should seek out the MEK for information on the Iranian’ agents in Iraq. The MEK can also supply key information on developments in Iran – where, despite a tendency toward exaggeration, it has had some major scoops. Its information in mid-2002 about Iran’s nuclear program, for example, was better than what the International Atomic Energy Agency knew, thereby leading a shocked U.S. government to kick off an investigation that confirmed just how far advanced the Iranians are toward building a nuclear bomb. […]
…I’ve also seen it regularly alleged in the press that "officials in the Defense Department and Vice President Dick Cheney’s office" support the use of the MEK but haven’t seen any names attached to that. For the record, Dr. Ledeen is officially opposed.
Now here’s the ironic part of the Jamestown piece:
While Iran lined up with the United States to push for the January 30 elections to go ahead, the MKO struck a defiant tone, effectively adopting the same rhetoric as the neo-Baathists, Salafi Islamists and other insurgent forces that are desperate to derail the election process. But despite its vociferous criticism of the elections, the MKO has no power or mandate to influence the outcome of the electoral process. Implausibly, the organization claims a constituency of support among Iraqi Sunni Arab tribal leaders (especially in Diyala Province) which contrasts strangely with its inability to show any meaningful support inside Iran. The emergence of democratic institutions in post-war Iraq will severely undermine the MKO, as it will lend popular legitimacy to calls for their immediate expulsion. In short, the United States will not be able to ignore the wishes of the new elected government as it ignored the wishes of the unelected IGC back in December 2003.
Hmmm.
… one thing I forgot to mention: what Clawson and Pipes want to do (which may or may not be what we are doing at this point) just gives another pretext for a clampdown on regular Iranians. Why would anyone support that?
Comment:
Submitted by Eric Martin on February 9, 2005
"MEK was added to the U.S. State Department’s list of foreign terrorist groups in 1997 and to the European Union’s terrorist list in 2002 because its attacks have often killed civilians."
http://www.terrorismanswers.org/groups/mujahedeen.html
Also from the same site:
What major attacks has MEK been responsible for?
The group has targeted Iranian government officials and government facilities in Iran and abroad; during the 1970s, it attacked Americans in Iran. While the group says it does not intentionally target civilians, it has often risked civilian casualties. It routinely aims its attacks at government buildings in crowded cities. MEK terrorism has declined since late 2001. Incidents linked to the group include:
-The series of mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids during 2000 and 2001 against Iranian government buildings; one of these killed Iran’s chief of staff
-The 2000 mortar attack on President Mohammad Khatami’s palace in Tehran
-The February 2000 “Operation Great Bahman,” during which MEK launched 12 attacks against Iran
-The 1999 assassination of the deputy chief of Iran’s armed forces general staff, Ali Sayyad Shirazi
-The 1998 assassination of the director of Iran’s prison system, Asadollah Lajevardi
-The 1992 near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian embassies and institutions in 13 countries
-Assistance to Saddam Hussein’s suppression of the 1991 Iraqi Shiite and Kurdish uprisings
-The 1981 bombing of the offices of the Islamic Republic Party and of Premier Mohammad-Javad Bahonar, which killed some 70 high-ranking Iranian officials, including President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei and Bahonar
-Support for the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by Iranian revolutionaries
-The 1970s killings of U.S. military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran
And this from the State Department’s website:
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2002/html/19991.htm
Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK or MKO) a.k.a. The National Liberation Army of Iran (NLA, the militant wing of the MEK), the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI), National Council of Resistance (NCR), the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), Muslim Iranian Student’s Society (front organization used to garner financial support)
Description
The MEK philosophy mixes Marxism and Islam. Formed in the 1960s, the organization was expelled from Iran after the Islamic Revolution in 1979, and its primary support now comes from the Iraqi regime. The MEK’s history is studded with anti-Western attacks as well as terrorist attacks on the interests of the clerical regime in Iran and abroad. The MEK now advocates a secular Iranian regime.
Activities
The worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorist violence. During the 1970s, the MEK killed US military personnel and US civilians working on defense projects in Tehran and supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran. In 1981, the MEK detonated bombs in the head office of the Islamic Republic Party and the Premier’s office, killing some 70 high-ranking Iranian officials, including chief Justice Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei, and Premier Mohammad-Javad Bahonar. Near the end of the 1980-88 war with Iran, Baghdad armed the MEK with military equipment and sent it into action against Iranian forces. In 1991, it assisted the Government of Iraq in suppressing the Shia and Kurdish uprisings in southern Iraq and the Kurdish uprisings in the north. Since then, the MEK has continued to perform internal security services for the Government of Iraq. In April 1992, the MEK conducted near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian Embassies and installations in 13 countries, demonstrating the group’s ability to mount large-scale operations overseas. In recent years, the MEK has targeted key military officers and assassinated the deputy chief of the Armed Forces General Staff in April 1999. In April 2000, the MEK attempted to assassinate the commander of the Nasr Headquarters—the interagency board responsible for coordinating policies on Iraq. The normal pace of anti-Iranian operations increased during the “Operation Great Bahman” in February 2000, when the group launched a dozen attacks against Iran. In 2000 and 2001, the MEK was involved regularly in mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids on Iranian military and law-enforcement units and government buildings near the Iran-Iraq border, although MEK terrorism in Iran declined throughout the remainder of 2001. Since the end of the Iran-Iraq war, the tactics along the border have garnered almost no military gains and have become commonplace. MEK insurgent activities in Tehran constitute the biggest security concern for the Iranian leadership. In February 2000, for example, the MEK launched a mortar attack against the leadership complex in Tehran that houses the offices of the Supreme Leader and the President. Assassinated the Iranian Chief of Staff.
by praktike – February 9, 2005
The British government is adopting a cautious diplomatic approach towards peacefully resolving disputes with Iran that has the support of US, according Foreign Office Minister Lord Triesman.
"Cutting links with Iran will do nothing to advance those objectives. The United States, which has no contacts with Iran, continues to urge us to maintain our contacts with Iran to try to keep some dialogue going," Triesman said.
"These are difficult circumstances and we must all in the Security Council work together for a peaceful resolution of those issues before the situation spills into a worse one," he said during a brief debate in the House of Lords Tuesday.
The debate on recent comments made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Israel was raised by Labour peer, Lord Corbett, a renowned supporter of the Mujahiden-e Khalq terrorist group, who urged the UK government to treat the outlawed group as a "friend." But the Foreign Office minister rejected the call, saying that the MKO was proscribed under the country’s Terrorism Act 2000 and that the government had "no plans to carry out such a review."
"Its claims to be a democratic party, fighting for a better Iran, are hard to square with its history of violence and authoritarian acts," he said.
A similar call made by Conservative MP Brian Binley, a self- confessed paid supporter of the MKO’s front-group, the so-called National Council of Resistance, was also rejected by Foreign Secretary Jack Straw in the House of Commons Tuesday.
Triesman said the MKO has "a long history of involvement in terrorism in Iran and elsewhere and is, by its own admission, responsible for violent attacks that have resulted in many deaths." He admitted that relations with Iran was "difficult" that there was no "quick or easy resolution," but emphasized that "all means" must be deployed to keep lines of communications open.
"When one looks at the range of options before us, it is a matter of building carefully with those who are our friends in Iran, who are part of the future of Iran, and not finding ourselves in an escalating position where the steps that we take generate more conflict, rather than making an attempt to resolve matters by peaceful and diplomatic means," Triesman told his fellow peers.
London, Nov 2
The British government has dismissed a call from a leading supporter of the so-called National Council of Resistance (NCRI) to provide backing to deproscribe the anti-Iran Mujahedin-e-Khalq as a terrorist group.
"We have no such plans. The Mojahedin-e Khalq (MKO) is proscribed in the UK under the Terrorism Act 2000," Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells said in a written parliamentary reply, published Tuesday.
"It has a long history of involvement in terrorism in Iran and elsewhere and is, by its own admission, responsible for violent attacks that have resulted in many deaths," Howells told MPs.
The minister was asked by Conservative MP Brian Binley if the UK government would make representations to both the US and the EU to remove the MKO from its list of debarred organizations.
But Howells said that the MKO is listed in the US as a foreign terrorist organization and it is on the EU’s asset freeze list and that his government "welcomes this."
Last month, Labour MP David Amess revealed that he accompanied Binley on paid trip to the UN General Assembly last month to rally support for the NCRI as a front group for the MKO.
London, Nov 1
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw Tuesday rejected a call from a supporter of the MKO terrorist group to start talks with Iranian opposition groups to overthrow the country’s government.
"Regime change in Iran is not part of the policy of Her Majesty’s government, nor do I think it would be wise," Straw told MPs.
The foreign secretary was urged in parliament by Conservative MP Brian Binley, who was paid by the so-called National Council of Resistance to travel to the UN General Assembly in New York in September to rally support for the MKO’s front group.
The rejection came after Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells dismissed a call from Binley to back his campaign to deproscribe the MKO as a terrorist group.
"The Mujahideen-e Khalq Organization (MKO) is proscribed in the UK under the Terrorism Act 2000. It has a long history of involvement in terrorism in Iran and elsewhere and is, by its own admission, responsible for violent attacks that have resulted in many deaths," Howells said
London, Nov 1
