Iran Interlink Website

Planned MKO violence linked to damning US Terror Report

A series of irreversible setbacks in recent months has apparently sealed the fate of the Mojahedin-e Khalq’s (MKO, aka Rajavi cult) in political circles.

On December 12, 2006 Judgement of the Court of First Instance of the European Court of Justice in case T-228/02 was announced. By pouring money into top legal teams, the MKO had been convinced of a favourable outcome. But British Foreign Minister Margaret Beckett clarified the European position; new legislation has ensured that all the MKO’s assets remained frozen and its proscription as a terrorist entity remained unchanged. The Court did, however, rule that the EC give the reasons for its proscription to the MKO.

The MKO reaction to this setback was to pretend it wasn’t true and to disseminate its own version of the Court ruling. Rajavi sent two MEPs to Camp Ashraf in Iraq to celebrate with the captive combatants ‘the removal of the MKO from the terrorist list’. Rajavi told his followers they would soon be re-armed to resume training in earnest to pursue their twenty-five year quest to overthrow the Iranian regime in its entirety through the National Liberation Army (the front name used for Mojahedin military activity).

The MKO also had its members in Europe, North America and Australia set up any publicity stunt possible, from pickets to petitions to say the Court must abide by its own ruling and remove the MKO from the EU terrorist list – as though the Court was defying the law which itself had just ruled upon.

Links:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=1619

The European judgement was rapidly followed by an equally damning US Supreme Court ruling on MKO fundraising. Then the Iraqi government announced its determination to close (actually to reclaim as Iraqi territory) Camp Ashraf, and have the foreign terrorist MKO expelled from the country.

Links:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=1498

At the end of April 2007, the US State Department published its review of terrorist entities. The report marks the MKO out as a dangerous cult with operatives, trained by the former Iraqi regime in bomb making and weapons use, still at-large.

Link:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2309

Now, the final nail in the MKO’s political coffin has surely been the election of Nicolas Sarkozy as France’s President. France is home to the MKO’s western HQ and residence of co-leader Maryam Rajavi. As Interior Minister in 2003, Sarkozy gave the go-ahead to Judge Brugiere to raid the MKO headquarters in Auvers-sur-Oise during which 160 members were arrested and evidence of planning and financing terrorist activity uncovered. Evidence which is referenced by the State Department report.

Link:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2092

Identified as both a terrorist organisation and as a cult, how are the Rajavis responding to this series of devastating setbacks? Can the group stage a comeback?

The MKO has already closed some websites, stopped live discussion on their TV and refuse to give any reaction to the US report. However, if we take the MKO’s reaction to the EU Court ruling as typical, it is certain we have not heard the last from them. We also know from the reaction to Maryam Rajavi’s arrest in 2003 when she ordered self-immolations to force the French judiciary to release her on bail, that this group will not go quietly.

Significantly, the MKO’s own analysis places blame for the group’s difficulties on its critics. Of these critics, the most troublesome have been ex-members of the organisation who have been outspoken in their exposure of the organisation’s cult activity and its close ties with the Saddam Hussein regime. With ex-members constantly giving the lie to the Mojahedin’s seductive claims to democracy, feminism and popular regime change, it is not surprising that the MKO leaders see these people as the biggest obstacle to their ambitions.

Massoud Rajavi’s plan fourteen years ago was for his wife – whom he nominated president elect – to carry this seductive message to western politicians and media and for her to find western sponsors to allow him to continue the quest he began under the patronage of Saddam Hussein – to somehow engineer the violent overthrow the Iranian regime and to install the Rajavi regime in its place.

It would be easy to assume from this that Rajavi’s efforts to keep Camp Ashraf intact is based on its military capacity. However, with the continuation of the FTO label, if Rajavi agreed to the removal of the Camp and its members, this would allow him to forge ahead with the claim that the MKO has renounced violence. But the Camp has much greater significance to the Rajavis as their ideological training ground. The camp provides the conditions of isolation and de facto imprisonment which are necessary to the imposition of cult mind control and psychological coercion on the members. Without these conditions, members would be free to have contact with their families, and to make value judgements using external points of reference which would certainly result in mass exodus from the organisation.

Rajavi will keep his people in Camp Ashraf at any price. He has employed people to lobby the Defence Ministries of European countries on his behalf. In the UK a minor academic, who has a track record of support for the Rajavis, has been tasked to make overtures to the Ministry of Defence in order to create a bridge for senior MKO members to pressure the department (the threat of mass suicide in Camp Ashraf is just one of those ‘pressures’). The only purpose for such contact would be to beg for the preservation of Camp Ashraf or provision of a similar discreet base in a third country, possibly Jordan.

While this is ongoing, the situation in Rajavi’s western bases is hardly less desperate. With Sarkozy’s election, Maryam Rajavi’s trial on terrorism charges will likely go ahead sooner rather than later. The Rajavis will need diversionary tactics such as the self-immolations staged while she was held in custody in 2003.

To mark the anniversary of her arrest on June 17 the MKO is planning to announce that five million French citizens have signed a petition to have the MKO removed from the terror list. However, this will only work if the ex-members are not able to expose these funny numbers. The aim is to keep them quiet for as long as possible to allow the MKO propaganda machine to work unhindered.

Reliable sources have revealed to Iran-Interlink that the Rajavis have already set in motion a new wave of attacks by Mojahedin cult members, particularly in the UK, aimed to intimidate and silence the ex-members and other critics whom they blame for this situation (the Rajavis never believe their own activities to be at fault). The attacks typically begin with distribution of slanderous colour brochures in the places of residence and work followed by indirect harassment and intimidation. The next step is to send members to physically intimidate the target. Criminal damage and physical harm have been reported previously in several cases, including a Catholic priest who was attacked while coming to the aid of one such ex-member.

The information given to Iran-Interlink ties in with previous attempts by the MKO to undermine the ex-members’ efforts. For years the Rajavis have tried to discredit them with the accusation that they are working for the Iranian Intelligence Ministry. Inside the Mojahedin the ‘crime’ of working for the regime carries with it an automatic death penalty. Whenever this accusation is made the Rajavis are giving tacit permission to MKO members to execute the target.

While this kind of low-level intimidation has become standard for this terrorist group (as with many others), the conditions which it faces now should alert western governments to act quickly to prevent any escalation into violence, even death.

The main consideration with the Mojahedin is that it is a cult. When Maryam Rajavi goes to trial the Mojahedin will, without doubt, respond with a series of orchestrated protests including more self-immolations. But, with their backs now against the wall the Rajavis may have no option but to order more forceful expression to avoid submitting to the course of justice. As a destructive cult, there is no doubt that the MKO will resort to violence in response to outer threat. The MKO will follow the predicted path of all cults and kill its own members as well as killing external threats. This may begin with self-immolations and targeted assassination of its critics. It may even affect a wider circle, including members of the public. Whatever violence ensues, the perpetrators of these acts will be as much the victims of the Rajavis as the targets are.

Iran-Interlink,

PO Box 148

Leeds LS16 5YJ

+44 113 278 0503

http://www.iran-interlink.org

info@iran-interlink.org

Iran Interlink Brief – Iran Interlink, May 2007

May 14, 2007 0 comment

The cult of Rajavi

The Use of the Philosophy of Martyrdom within Religious Cults for Acts of Terrorism

Dr. Massoud Banisadr speech in London School of Economics, May 05, 2007

“Men reject their prophets and they slay them, but they love their martyrs and honour those whom they have slain.” Fedor Dostoevsky (From Brother Karamajov book 6 Chapter 3)

In the Quran we read that on Judgment Day, God will be just when it comes to ruling between Prophets and Martyrs. Quran 39:69

This is interpreted to mean that some martyrs would stand higher than prophets. But which one of them? Before I go any further, let me emphasis more on the meaning of this saying of Quran, and what it means for an ordinary Muslim? It means that an ordinary Muslim through his actions while he is alive – and with the right kind of death – can change his or her status in front of God and the people, from an ordinary person into someone higher than a prophet….

The transcription of Dr. Massoud Banisadr speech in LSC:

http://www.banisadr.info/LSpeech050507.htm

May 8, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Who benefits from America’s support for terrorist MKO

Who benefits from America’s support for terrorist Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (Rajavi Cult)?

It is not a secret that America has recently helped some of the smuggling gangs and terrorist cults, which have been denounced over the years throughout the civilized world, in an attempt to put more pressure on Iran to stop enriching Uranium.

The most recent support for Jondollah, which claimed the recent killings in Baluchestan province of Iran (attacking schools, etc), came in a live interview with Abdolmalek Rigi the head of Jondollah broadcast by Voice of America.

Link to the related article (Persian)

http://www.iran-interlink.org/fa/index.php?mod=view&id=2051

And the comments of American officials about the controversial Camp Ashraf (still run by the Rajavi cult and protected by the US Army in Iraq) given to CNN correspondent, leave not much question about direct support and protection given to MKO (Rajavi cult), which has been responsible for scores of murders across the globe by the order and support of Saddam Hussein.

The article, written by Michael Ware, CNN, April 05, 2007 is titled:

U.S. protects Iranian opposition group in Iraq

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2084

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/05/

protected.terrorists/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Ambassador Javad Zarif (representative of Islamic Republic of Iran in United Nations) was interviewed by Asia Source on April 21, 2007.

http://www.asiasource.org/news/special_reports/zarif.cfm

Part of the interview reads:

"Is Hamas a terrorist organization?

No.

Is Hezbollah?

No. Let ‘s stop here. The majority – you don’t need to ask me this question – the majority of the international community does not regard these two organizations to be a terrorist organization. Now the question that can be asked from the United States is why is it cooperating with organizations that it considers to be terrorists? Now the majority of the world do not believe that Hezbollah or Hamas are terrorist organizations. Hamas and Hezbollah are official political parties with seats in the parliament. Hamas won the majority, which the United States did not like and the United States has boycotted Hezbollah ministers in the Lebanese Parliament simply because it doesn’t like them. Now the US or Israel labeling an organization "terrorist", that organization which is involved in legitimate resistance to foreign occupation, that organization does not then automatically become terrorist. Go look at the international community. This is the problem of the US equating itself with the international community again and again. But the question that needs to be asked is the behavior of the United States vis-à-vis organizations that it considers to be terrorists. Why is it cooperating with them?

Which organizations are you thinking of?

I’m referring to MEK [Mujahideen-e-Khalq], for instance, in Iraq that the United States is actually supporting and signing agreements with. Would the United States accept any country providing the Fourth Geneva Convention protection to Al Qaeda which is another universally recognized terrorist organization? So terrorism should not become a label, a convenient label for dealing with your adversaries. You’ve got to have objective criteria. Apply those objective criteria and deal with them accordingly."

It seems once again the ball has landed permanently in the court of Bush administration to come up with an answer.

Iran Interlink, April 21, 2007

April 23, 2007 0 comment

MEK Camp Ashraf

3,000 Iranian captives held in by US see no sign of quick release

The crisis over the capture of fifteen British Navy personnel by Iranian Revolutionary Guards masked a longer running problem involving 3,000 Iranian captives held by US forces in Camp Ashraf, .

While Iranian treatment of the British marines gave rise to comparisons with the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and questions were raised over whether the US’s capture of five Iranians claiming diplomatic status in Iraq and holding them for over two months could have played a part in the crisis, the humanitarian crisis involving 3,000 Iranian captives at Camp Ashraf received no attention.

The Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK, aka Rajavi cult) which owns the captives certainly did not remain silent when the British marines were captured. This was yet another opportunity for the Rajavi cult to hang its basic demand onto an entirely unrelated issue. But that demand is not for the release of the captives in Camp Ashraf . Rather, Massoud Rajavi, leader of the MEK, is at pains to keep them captive in . His fundamental demand is that they be rearmed by the and that he be allowed to continue with his own version of ‘regime change’ from Iraqi territory. (A position totally at odds with the demands of the Iraqi government which has been asking the US to remove these foreign elements from its territory for over three years.)

On first learning that had captured the marines, the MEK claimed that this had been done in order to pressure the British to keep the group on its terror list.

During the crisis the Mojahedin held a picket outside No. 10 Downing Street asking the British government to stop all relations with and move toward placing all kinds of political economic and social sanctions, including an oil embargo, against and “taking the Mojahedin off the terrorist list”.

After the marines were released, the Mojahedin was shocked and instantly changed tack. The group now said that the marines had been released because the mullahs had become afraid of their picket and the prospect of them coming off the list… even though they had previously claimed that the marines had been taken hostage precisely so that the British government would not remove the MEK from the terrorist list. While everyone else was quick accept that the release of the captives was a result of and directly talking to one another, the MEK’s Hambastegi Meli website wrote on April 7th: “the mullahs retreated after seeing a little bit of firmness.” It continued: “… the best policy against the fascist mullahs in not to … or launch a military attack but to remove the name of this resistance from the list of terrorist organisations…”

The MEK’s efforts to suggest that issues such as Iran’s nuclear programme, the capture of British Navy personnel and the presence of Iranians in Iraq can all be solved by removing the group from terrorist lists are risible, a clear sign of desperation.

If the MEK is serious about being removed from western terrorist lists then it must pay the price; that is, to unequivocally, and unmistakably show proof that it has renounced violence as a means to achieve political aims. The proof of this would be to agree to the immediate dismantlement of its military base at Camp Ashraf and allow the removal of the combatants there to locations of their own choosing – that is, to allow the former military combatants to choose their own futures now that the military wing of the MEK is obsolete.

According to Mojahedin leaders, Camp Ashraf is their ‘strategic’ base and must be maintained at all costs. Even though this directly contradicts the claim to have renounced armed struggle. The former combatants in Camp Ashraf still wear military uniform and perform military training even though the group was disarmed four years ago.

But Camp Ashraf is more than a strategic base for Massoud and Maryam Rajavi. It is the ideological training base of their cult. Without the isolation from the outside world and complete control over the lives of its inhabitants which the camp offers them, they simply cannot exert the level of psychological manipulation and coercion on their followers which guarantees their total submission and willingness to sacrifice their lives in suicide missions.

Iranians worldwide are entitled to ask why, in spite of its vociferous demand to be removed from the terrorist lists, no efforts are being made by the US to resolve the humanitarian crisis at Camp Ashraf and free these former military personnel from their captivity. The average age of the internees is around 45 years old – this is no longer a viable fighting force. What benefit does this cult have for the in ?

The British Navy personnel were held for two weeks without consular access. The Iranian ‘diplomats’ were held for two months without contact. But the people in Camp Ashraf have been held incommunicado for four years. This is surely not acceptable behaviour by coalition forces which claim to have invaded to bring democracy and to fight terrorism. (President George W. Bush named the MEK as one of the terrorist groups supported by Saddam Hussein; one of his reasons for attacking Iraq).

In spite of UN Protected Persons status, for four years these individuals have been denied free and unfettered contact with their families. They are also denied the freedom to choose whether to remain as members of the terrorist group or not. A large minority have previous residence rights in third countries, whether as citizens, refugees or having relatives in those countries. These individuals are still denied the right to leave the Camp and take up residence in third countries.

In one example, the husband and daughter of a Camp Ashraf resident travelled from Norway on three occasions with an entry visa to so that she could join them there. At no time did the forces responsible for the group facilitate a private visit with her family. She was always accompanied by Mojahedin minders of whom she was clearly afraid. Families from the UK and Cananda have reported similar experiences.

In this context the MEK’s vociferous efforts to demand its removal from western terrorist lists cannot possibly be taken seriously. Either the group must acquiesce willingly to the dismantlement of its military wing, or coalition forces who purportedly hold them captive in Iraq must take positive steps to do this.

While it is well known that psychological coercion is being used to keep the residents in Camp Ashraf enthralled to the leader Massoud Rajavi, apparently the significance of this is either barely understood or not appreciated. Let us remind ourselves that the cult members, who burned themselves to death in London and Paris on the order of Maryam Rajavi in June 2003, were trained for suicide missions at Camp Ashraf .

There is no shortage of expertise to advise how to dismantle a dangerous, destructive cult. Without intervention the Rajavi cult is rapidly disintegrating from within. The self-destruction of a cult is a dangerous phenomenon. The Rajavi cult has already hinted at mass suicide – through bombing, self-immolations or other means. The members have only recently been required to give fresh written guarantees to obey such an order when the time comes.

The US should be aware that unless these particular captives are given a way out, the consequences of not doing so could be every bit as serious as events at Jonestown or Waco .

Iran-Interlink,

PO Box 148

Leeds LS16 5YJ

+44 113 278 0503

www.iran-interlink.org

info@iran-interlink.org

Iran-Interlink – April,2007

April 12, 2007 0 comment

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Mojahedin Khalq have no legal right; Iraqi chief prosecutor.

Baghdad, Monday 02 April: The chief prosecutor of Iraq " Jafar Al Moosavi" heading the delegation of the high court investigating war crimes and crimes against humanity told journalist today: "Members of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (Rajavi cult) enjoy no special judicial or legal immunity".

Talking to the Iraqi daily "Al Motamar", Mr. Al Moosavi said that the investigations against the terrorist group (MKO or Rajavi cult) has not yet started but he emphasised that "in order to start the judicial process, the prosecution office has started gathering information against the accused".

Mr. Mossavi added: "Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (Rajavi cult) stayed in Iraq during the time of Saddam Hussein as his guest and their presence at this moment is neither legal nor acceptable".

Mojahedin Khalq leaders are accused of massacre of Iraqi people in 1991 and 1996 by the order of Saddam’s along side Iraqi secret services and Military. They are also accuse of wasting Iraq’s wealth along side Saddam Hussein.

Iran-Interlink. Baghdad , April 02, 2007

April 4, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

MKO hired actors for demonstration in Brussels: German news magazine

The MKO (Mojahedin Khalq Organisation) terrorist group (Rajavi cult) hired extras for a demonstration in Brussels on March 8 in a bid to cover up the small number of protestors, the weekly Focus news magazine reported Monday.

Around 60 Iranian actors and actresses who were not informed beforehand about the action, were paid the usual 50 euros per day fee to take part in the recent demonstration in Brussels where the MKO was protesting its continued blacklisting as a terror group by the European Union.

The extras were hired by a German casting agency, named ‘House of Extras’, which transferred them via two busses from Cologne to Brussels.

According to Focus, most of the side actors and actresses were duped into believing that the MKO demonstration was part of a movie and not a real event.

Once the extras arrived at the scene of a demonstration they were shocked and most of them broke away from the other demonstrators.

Meanwhile a representative of the German casting agency said that extras were also hired for another MKO demonstration in New York in fall 2005.

Jochen Cerff confirmed that 50 actors and actresses were hired in Hamburg and Leipzig to take part in a New York rally in front of the UN building.

The extras received reportedly a one-week complimentary trip to New York.

The MKO had also paid poor European-based immigrants from Africa and the Middle East, most of them social welfare recipients, to attend demonstrations in Berlin.

Several of the paid African demonstrators were told by the MKO that they would go on a sightseeing trip to Berlin.

The MKO was earlier found guilty of massive social welfare fraud in Germany throughout the 1990s.

Link to the original article by Focus.de

http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/gekaufter-protest_aid_51864.html Iran-interlink, cologne, April 2, 2007

April 4, 2007 0 comment

British claim on the captured marine in Persian Gulf discredited by allowing Rajavi terrorist cult to act as its spokesman

The new diplomatic conflict between Iran and Britain over the capture of 15 navy personnel by the Iranian border guards has prompted the UN Security Council and the European Union to interfere to resolve the crisis.

The Iranians claim that the incident occurred in Iranian waters, while the British government insists that its troops were in Iraqi water and have never crossed Iranian territorial borders.

While diplomatic efforts, together with wider western pressure, are being used to resolve the crisis, the British Government’s position was discredited by allowing an interview with the Mojahedin Khalq Terrorist organisation (Rajavi cult) representative, Hussein Abedini (Mojahedin Khalq Organisation or National Council of Resistance of Iran) in London .

Hossein Abedini, a member of the Mojahedin’s alias the National Council of Resistance, in an interview with Sky News TV on March 29, in response to the suggested fact that the British navy personnel “have admitted trespassing into Iranian territorial waters”, says:

Well, this is what the mullahs say, but all the indications and all information proves that the British personnel, navy personnel were abducted at gunpoint and they have been taken to Tehran forcibly and they are being interrogated. So, we have information that this was a carefully concocted plan by the Revolutionary Guards and these plans always carry the seal of the highest political and military authority of the Iranian regime”

(http://www.mojahedin.ws/news/text_news_en.php?id=1133)

The claim of having information from Iran (where the group is hated for their cooperation with Saddam during Iran-Iraq war) is not new. ABC News reported the terrorist group’s representative in Washington as claiming:

"The Iranian regime is secretly engaged in the organization and training of large Iraqi terrorist networks in Iran to heighten insecurity and instability and force the coalition forces to leave Iraq, which would in turn pave the way for the establishment of an Islamic Republic in Iraq," Jafarzadeh said.

The same report adds:

"There was no independent confirmation of the latest information. The U.S. Mission to the United Nations had no immediate comment.

"His statement today is a public announcement that this group has been the source of allegations which officials are making about Iranian intervention in Iraq ," said Mohammad Mir Ali Mohammadi, a spokesman for ‘s U.N. Mission"."

(http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2968501&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312)

The group which remains on the terrorism lists of the US (1997), UK (2000), European Union (2002) and Canada(2005), has been used to discredit any information which has come out against the Iranian government.

http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=1114

In 1994 the US Department of State gave a report about the Mojahedin Khalq Organization, which is permanently headed by self-appointed cult leaders Massoud and Maryam Rajavi. It gave the most up-to-date and researched report in 40 pages describing the nature of the Mojahedin; their internal relations as well as their involvement in killing Kurds, Iraqis, Iranians as well as Americans. The report revealed their total dependency on Saddam Hussein.

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

In May 2005, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a condemning report on the abuse of human rights by leaders of the Mojahedin against their own people in . Human Rights Watch also brought to light the way they have been using psychological methods to keep hold of their members against their will.

http://hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/iran0505/

It is widely believed that the Iranian Government has benefited the most from the freedom given to this terrorist organization in Washington and London . The Iranian Regime by refusing to accept any opposition except the Mojahedin Khalq (Rajavi cult) has long convinced the people of Iran that the alternative to the Islamic regime would be an Islamic Cult (Rajavi cult) which has been working for the enemy during the 8 years war with Iraq and which is now under the control of Neo-conservatives and Israeli right wingers who are pushing for a military confrontation between the west and Iran. Iran has also frequently used the claim that the terrorist organization is ‘the only source of western intelligence from Iran and thereby discredits and rejects all these accusations by default.

After the fall of Saddam and the disintegration of the Mojahedin’s military base in Iraq (disintegration of Saddam’s private army in 2003), it is clear that the presence of the cult in western capitals has now shifted the problem of Mojahedin Terrorism from Iran and Iraq (where they were working as an annoyance to the Iranians and Iraqis) into the heart of Europe and America.

The group, which orchestrated mass suicide and self-immolations in June 2003 in the capitals of western countries, has now openly threatened the west with more suicide attacks if they refuse to take them off the lists of Terrorist entities and allow them to continue their activities as a destructive cult.

Iran Interlink, March 31, 2007

April 4, 2007 0 comment

Update on Mojahedin Khalq Organisation in Europe

A number of British MPs in the House of Commons discussed the issue of Iran’s nuclear program.

In the meeting, the report of which was published by British Parliament’s website, UK Foreign Office minister Kim Howells responded to some MPs’ request for lifting MKO from terror list: "On the proscription of Mojahedin-e Khalq, the Home Office rejected an application for de-proscription last year and that is, strictly speaking, a matter for the Home Office."

"The MEK is proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000 and its involvement in violence means that it has little support in Iran. The MEK claims to support human rights and democracy, but it is hard to square that with its authoritarian structure and claims by respected human rights non-governmental organisations of serious violations of the rights of its own members," he added.

In response to protests on terrorist designation of MKO, Mark Pritchard said:

"All solutions on Iran, whether by the international community or Iranian exiles, should be peaceful. They shouldn’t be aimed at weakening the position of current regime."

"I believe that we should respect Foreign Office’s decision to band the MKO".

"Mojahedin-e Khalq organization remains on EU’s terror list," French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said.

In an interview with Iranian reporters in Paris, he added: "In France, this organization is still under prosecution."

"Prosecution began in 2000 and led to the detention of 165 members of MKO in 2003 and the trial of Maryam Rajavi," he said.

"French officials act in the framework of law and there’s no flexibility in dealing with the MKO."

In response to a question on France’s instance towards Hizballah and whether it was on EU’s terror list, Blazy said: "No, Hizballah is not on EU’s terror list."

"In our view, Hizballah has members in Lebanon’s Parliament. We like it to turn to a political movement from an armed one."

The European Parliament, in a meeting Tuesday, clarified that a European court ruling on the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) in December referred to procedural matters and in no way changes the status of the MKO as a terrorist group.

Belgian Foreign Minister Karel de Gucht has reportedly said that he will use his veto power in the EU Council to stop any attempt to remove the MKO from the EU’s terror list.

The EP’s Committee for Relations with Iran held a meeting on "the MKO and consequences of the judgment of the European Court of First Instance of 12 December’ to unfreeze the assets of the MKO. EU put the MKO on its terror list and ordered continued freezing of its funds in 2002.

"It is not a ruling on substance. It is a procedural decision stating that the EU Council did not provide the right to a hearing.

So it is a procedural shortcoming," German MEP Michael Gahler, who is also vice-president of the EP’s Foreign Relations Committee, told the meeting.

He said that the EU had sent a letter to the MKO stating the reasons why the group should be kept on the terror list.

"So it’s not correct to believe that there was any other reason.

The problem lies in a procedural error. The MKO will try again and appeal against a final decision, but I am quite sure that the Council will not go along with the ruling (of the court) at the end of the day," said Gahler.

A legal advisor to the EU Council also explained that the European court ruling had reference to procedural matters relating to the obligations to justify the reasons and give the MKO the right to a hearing, but it does not affect the common EU position to maintain the MKO in its terror list.

Josy Dubie, Belgian senator and a former war correspondent for a Belgian TV channel, condemned the MKO as a terrorist organization.

Dubie told the meeting that he covered the eight-year imposed war in the 1980s from both sides, that is, Iran and Iraq, and witnessed MKO fighters launching attacks against their own country (Iran).

"What I discovered was a sect, a group of men and women completely and irrationally devoted to their leader, Masoud Rajavi, which shocked me deeply. I had a feeling that I was among a group of fanatics who followed the orders of their leader blindly," he added.

Dubie, since 1999, has been a member of the Belgian Senate and vice-chair of its Foreign Relations committee. He said he has been recently visited by some MKO members.

"They target people they consider to be important and try to influence them. They try to convince these people that they are a democratic movement fighting for their country. But that is the opposite of what I saw," said the Belgian senator, who also clarified that he had no sympathy for the current regime of President Ahmadinejad.

"So when I received them in my office, I told them what I had seen and they did not contact me again because when they `realize it is not going to work they abandon you and look for somebody else,’" he said.

When Maryam Rajavi was invited by certain members of the Belgian Senate, they (MKO) claimed they had been officially invited to the senate.

"I deny this propaganda. The Belgian Senate itself refused to receive Maryam Rajavi," he said.

Some individual members of the Belgian Senate, including its President Anne-Marie Lizin, received Rajavi, who lives in Paris, last October. "A large number of senators protested, including myself," said Dubie.

Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht asked the senate about this matter and said he was very sore about this meeting and regretted that she had been invited by some senators.

De Gucht reportedly told the senate that the MKO had been responsible for hundreds of attacks in Iran and elsewhere, practiced torture and used emotional blackmail.

Dubie said he asked De Gucht in the senate about the court ruling on the MKO and whether the minister was in favor of removing the MKO from the list of terrorist groups.

According to Dubie, the Belgian foreign minister’s answer was:

"My answer to your question is very simple. I am in favor of keeping the PMOI on the European list and any decision to lift them or not to lift them requires the decision of all of the EU member states.

Belgium has a veto here and is prepared to use it."

"I can reassure you that the council has no intention of taking the MKO off the list," said the minister.

Mohammad Hossein Sobhani, a repentant MKO member and an author, related his long and bitter experience with the terror group in Iraq — how he was arrested and kept in solitary confinement for eight years in Asharf Camp and then in Abu Ghraib.

He asked the European parliamentarians not to use the "violations of human rights in Iran" as an excuse to support criminal terror groups such as the MKO.

Portugese MEP Paul Casaca, who organized the pro-MKO group ‘Friends of a Free Iran’ in the EP, had objected that since no MKO member was invited to speak, Sobhani should also not be allowed to talk in the meeting.

German MEP Michael Gahler said the agenda should not be changed.

"A voting of MEPs took place and the agenda was approved as it was." The chair of the EP’s delegation from its Committee for Relations with Iran, Angelika Beer, said she decided not to invite the MKO "because the information provided to me told me that the MKO has not been deleted from the list of terrorist organizations and therefore I did not find it correct to invite them."

March 11, 2007 0 comment

The cult of Rajavi

Cults and Terrorism – A Case Study

Psychiatrists and Sociologists who are experts in this field, broadly agree on a general principle which is that a terrorist group that systematically utilizes violence to reach its goals will also be utilizing some specific aspects of cult modus operandi according to contemporary definitions of cults [1]

What this means is that an organized entity which, for any stated reason, attempts to physically eliminate its opponents (as opposed to engaging with them in any other way) will be assumed to be employing mind control techniques (often referred to in common parlance as "brainwashing") in order to attract, recruit and maintain its recruits and to exert power over every aspect of their lives. Again, many scientists of human and social studies who have extensively studied this phenomenon agree that any cult, because of its unique characteristics, is potentially capable of using violence and physically eliminating not only its own members but also its opponents if it deems this necessary. Any cult will, in theory at least, believe this to be an absolute right.

Examination of a documented example in this regard is used here to open up this issue. In the following we first describe three interlocking circles of the structure and operations inside one clearly defined terrorist cult:

In the First Circle there stand the people who are trained to carry out terrorist activities and to ultimately destroy their own lives and those of the others. These individuals are proud of their terrorist acts and consider this, within the framework of their ideological system, to be the highest pinnacle of purity and sacrifice. This ‘ideological’ framework is significant because of course the direct perpetrators of terrorist acts are themselves the prime victims of terrorism but unfortunately are quite unaware of this bitter fact. It is due to this framework that the fact that some suicide bombers do not inflict casualties as a result of their own deaths does not stop others from following them.

In the Second Circle there stand the people who play the role of intermediates between the leader of the organization and those who are tasked to act in the actual scene. It is these individuals who put into practice a specific process of psychological manipulation or mind control which will prepare the people in the first circle to carry out terrorist operations. These individuals are so thoroughly dissolved in the system of the organization that they are capable of sincerely and uncritically imposing these mind control techniques on others.

In the Third Circle there stand the leaders of the cult who have developed a mask to portray freedom and humanity to the members of their cult and beyond this to the outside world where their purported advocacy of democracy and human rights is designed to distance them from the actual victims of terror on both sides. Cults are not what they show. Cult leaders are expert at covering their actual nature and easily show a different face from their actual one to those who do not know them.

Now we describe a documented example using the framework of those connected circles which comprise the structure of a terrorist cult. The case study has been chosen from the Mojahedin-é Khalq Organization (MKO). This organization according to current sociological definition is a destructive cult. [2]

First Circle

Around March 2001, three individuals named Garshasb Soleymanian, Mas’ud Bakhshi and Amir Gudarzi, who had been trained militarily and ideologically in the MKO camps in Iraq under the hegemony of Saddam Hussein, were sent to a city inside Iran to perform a terrorist act. They were eventually killed in a street clash with law enforcement officers. The news relating to this clash along with their biographies was published in Mojahed, a Persian language newspaper, the main publicity organ of the MKO at that time. From the text and tone of their letters to their commanders and their wills, we can derive the kind of preparation that all three underwent for the mission and identify the specific psychological manipulation which takes place under the heading ‘Internal Ideological Revolution’. The mind-set of all three is that they are acting as saviours by conquering the city and freeing the people. They apparently believe that all these people are waiting for the arrival of their commanders after they have cleared the way for them. Such evidence of psychological manipulation, which often also includes forms of coercion, which is imposed on the operational individuals in the ‘first circle’ can be found in most cults. It is this which guarantees the operation being performed whatever the price might be and that the next individuals with the same mental mechanism get ready to finish the unfinished task of their previous colleagues. In this regard, the cult attaches specific, value laden attributes to their operatives which are highly significant: “the proud hero of the scene of commitment and bearing responsibility, the courageous Mojahed-é Khalq commander, with the will like steel, the heroic Mojahed, the young blood of the sun . . .” (The sun is often used in the MKO as an analogy for cult leader, Maryam Rajavi)

(Memorize the three photos of the three persons above)

Garshasb Soleymanian writes in his letter to "Sister Maryam" (Maryam Rajavi) that: "I thank God thousands of times particularly when I see that I would have not reached the values of your revolution (the MKO’s Internal Ideological Revolution [3]) elsewhere. If you had time, please pray for me that I be able to fulfil the commitments of being your soldier with my maximum assault against the enemy". The lexicon of cult indoctrination embodied in this letter clearly demonstrates the cultic relationship of the devotee to the leader.

Second Circle

We mentioned that the people who commit acts of terror are the prime victims of their own actions, but at the same time are proud of killing and maiming and they are convinced that their action is holy and divine. This mind-set is strikingly at variance with that of ordinary, un-indoctrinated people in every society who would not be proud of launching mortal shells on a city. Quite to the contrary, when hearing of such acts of terror people become fearful and disappointed. So, how is it possible that some can shed the blood of others and be proud of their deeds?

The person standing in the second circle is instrumental in converting normal people into killers. How do they think and what techniques do they use?

Ms Sediqé Hoseyni, currently First Secretary of the MKO in Iraq and in the Ashraf Camp, met up with the team identified as First Circle members above just before they embarked on their terrorist mission. In the meeting she conveyed to them the message of their Spiritual Leader, Maryam Rajavi, in order to boost their morale. This was the farewell meeting between the followers and the messenger of the guru in order to prevent the individual having any doubts about what he is about to do. He must prove with his operation that he has reached a high level of obedience to Maryam Rajavi. At the same time, as the go-between, Sediqé Hoseyni sincerely believes in what her recruits are about to do.

(Sediqé Hoseyni in her last visit with the operational team)

Third Circle

Now we move to the top of the pyramid of the cult in order to examine the practical mechanism of cults and to better understand their true content. The recruits into a cult are indoctrinated into worshiping the cult leader – in this case the Spiritual Leader, Maryam Rajavi. All members of the MKO are equal in only one aspect and that is their adoration of the leader and this is their only right within the cult. Indeed, the value of an individual inside the cult is measured solely by the mental, emotional and moral proximity they have to the leader. (Interestingly, if the recruit did not want to stay or could not do so in the determined framework, the very same person would within a day become, in the language of the cult, a traitor, defector and mercenary of the enemy.)

Ms Sediqé Hoseyni has proved the extent of her ideological faith in the spiritual leader by successfully passing all the phases of the Internal Ideological Revolution and being able to to indoctrinate others in it. In this respect she has passed all the stages of submitting to the demands of the cult leader. It is for this very reason she has now been chosen and introduced as the First Secretary of the MKO.

(Maryam Rajavi and Sediqé Hoseyni in a military workshop in the NLA in Iraq)

Allocation of rank or position in a cult is not done according to the capabilities, abilities, or personal talent of the individual. The main factor is the extent of dependence on and submission to the cult’s leader. For the individual member, this is a difficult matter to prove. Other members of the cult must be able to testify that that particular person has dissolved into the system and denied their own identity and has replaced it with the identity of the leader. They must have become a ‘transparent’ person and most important of all must be judged to have reached the fullest understanding of the absolute spiritual leadership. In the MKO, one of the ways to prove that is the success of the teams trained by the person and how effectively they have learned to either kill or get killed.

Remember that the leaders of the cult adopt a peaceful appearance and present democratic and liberating slogans. However, a cult exists in direct conflict with the outside world (‘us’ and ‘them’) and through a process of psychological manipulation or mind control can convert even the most honest peaceable of persons into terrorists and murderers to defend itself as an entity.

Mr Ali Moradi a former member of the MKO cult returned home to his family after the fall of Saddam Hussein’s dictatorial regime. He writes about Sediqé Hoseyni as follows:

"She gradually rose in the ranks of the MKO. After a while, Sedeqé became the deputy commander of Axis 3 of the National Liberation Army (NLA) [the Mojahedin’s military wing]. She was then moved to Centre 11. After a while some young people who had recently been deceived into the organisation moved to her part and underwent the brainwashing processes. After a year at Centre 11, Sediqé became the deputy and then the commander of Centre 17. This was about the same time that an agreement was reached with the former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to send teams inside Iran to undertake sabotage activities. Then Sediqé moved to the city of Kut in Iraq as the Chief of Staff of Centre 5. She was chosen to guide and control the teams who were nominees to be sent to Iran since she was very stubborn and inflexible. The Mehran, Shalehabad, and Dehloran regions were the areas that her teams were to perform their operations. In this base she managed to brainwash many teams with the aid of some well known MKO torturers and interrogators such as Assadollah Mosanna, Naqi Arvani, Mohammad Reza Mohaddes, and Kamal Niknami and to prepare a few terrorist teams. These teams were first settled in separate compartments and were shown made-up films and were given special training and education in order to be able to kill without mercy inside Iran. One of masterworks of Sedeqé was to convince the team members to use cyanide pills if they are about to face any danger.

In this period the team of Abdolkarim Mahmudi and his companion and the team of Gashtasb and Mas’ud Bakhshi and their companion and some other teams were sent to perform terrorist operations which resulted to their deaths. Also the clashes in the region of Chilat which resulted to the death of Allahmorad Chaghaleh and Shahram Juyandeh and their companion were the works of Sediqé Hoseyni. There were several teams which were trained and sent to Iran under the command of Sediqé of whom there is no trace of their destiny whatsoever. In this period Sediqé, played a decisive and active role in training and sending terrorist teams to Iran and she was totally obedient to the desires of Rajavi the leader of the MKO. She always used to say that a successful commander is the one who would not care about the lives and safety of his/her recruits since this sort of consideration would create an obstacle to complete missions. Therefore since her way of accomplishing tasks was quite desirable to Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, she was appointed to become the Commander in Chief of the Fourth Army of the NLA. In the army she showed her total compliance until was appointed to be the deputy of Mozhgan Parsayi [at that time First Secretary of the MKO].

But another era of Sediqé’s struggle which appears to be the main factor for her ascending was her suppressive role in the process of family visits to Camp Ashraf after the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. She introduced a new thesis and gave the formulae: Family = nest of corruption and Family = anti struggle, which she wrote on the board. She held several sessions before any meeting with the family to indoctrinate the members who were about to face their relatives with these formulae. She used to say that we must be firm against the nest of corruption and anti struggle and against our family and oppose them. Therefore before any meeting she used to hold compulsory sessions for those who were about to meet their families and Sediqé used to brief them that the families have come on a campaign and therefore we must either fight them back when we meet them or do not go to the meeting at all. People were instructed not to receive photographs, not to embrace or kiss each other, not to cry, not to show emotions, and not to divert the political discussions to emotional ones. She used to instruct people so as to finally leave them with a cold and impassive attitude. She wanted them to prove to their families that they are the children of Massoud and Maryam. Anyone that Sediqé suspected to be anxious to visit their family was prevented by using different excuses from meeting with the family.

This reference to the words of Mr Moradi is not to deal with the personal character of Ms Sediqé Hoseyni since we must believe that she is herself a victim of the cult before anything else, and she has been a victim of mind control in the system of the cult in such way that she is capable of brainwashing others with absolute sincerity. Certainly any member in her position would have acted in the same manner. The aim of this article is to expose a connection between the two phenomena of terrorism and cult by analysing the two inseparable principles of ‘armed operation’ and ‘current operation’ which operate in the MKO. The term armed operation refers to the principle of using violence to achieve the aims of the cult. The term current operation refers to the necessity for all members at all levels to undertake ongoing psychological manipulation through ritual daily confession and repentance sessions.

In the above example of one specific terrorist organisation, the connection between its internal cult relationships (mind control – or psychological manipulation and the total submission to the cult leader) and its external relationships (committing acts of violence against its own members and the outside world) are clear. With even a general understanding of the nature of cults, Ali Moradi’s description above of the behaviour of the MKO’s current First Secretary Sediqé Hoseyni can leave no doubt that the MKO is a cult. Beyond this, his testimony exposes the underlying connection between cult methodology and terrorism in an organisation having the three above mentioned interconnected circles.

According to the teachings of the MKO cult, the recruits of the organisation must be devoid of any emotional feelings toward their beloved ones and their families. They must stop their contacts with them in order to become good tools to carry out terrorist acts. Again according to the teachings of the cult, the recruits must mentally reach a point at which they truly believe that they are absolutely nothing and they are of no value whatsoever and their lives are only to be sacrificed for their leader in a terrorist operation. Those who have submitted totally and can pass this value to others and turn them into robots who can perform the terrorist operations better, will rise higher in the system of the cult. These known methods and techniques are not used solely by the MKO. Nearly all terrorist organisations and even mafia type gangs utilize these psychological techniques, otherwise they would not be able to persuade their members logically and with open discussion to endanger other people’s lives as well as their own and ask them to carry out blind armed operations and blow up a hand grenade in their own belly or to take cyanide pills.

The role played by Sediqé Hoseyni in the family relations of cult members as described in the testimony of the member returned from Iraq is a common characteristic of all cults. Basically, one of the most underscored points of differentiation between cults and lawful organisations is their viewpoint on the family and family values. All established religions and popular parties and groups would look at the family as a valuable establishment which must be at least respected if not encouraged. On the contrary, cults, in any form that they might take, ultimately consider family relations and its values as their enemy. Cults only tolerate family connections in two ways. One is to recruit potential members and the other is to gain money from them. Accepting family values and terrorism do not match together. An individual who is tasked to take the lives of other people must initially suppress their own civilizing and humane behaviours. An individual indoctrinated by a cult into evacuating themselves of any feelings would not have any qualms about planting bombs in public places and taking the lives of innocent people.

The direct relationship between a terrorist act and the cultic relationship is the basis for this article and it is hoped this example will provide a starting point for further investigation into this link.

Notes:

[1] There are several generally accepted definitions of what differentiates a cult from other similar entities.

The late Margaret Singer, clinical psychologist and once Professor of Psychology at the University of California, Berkeley was the preeminent cult expert of the 20th Century. She counseled and/or interviewed thousands of people affected by controversial groups often called cults. Dr. Singer offered meaningful definitions of unsafe groups or cults in her book Cults in our Midst.

According to Dr. Margaret Singer, unsafe groups or cults can generally be defined by three factors:

1. The origin of the group and role of the leader.

2. The power structure, or relationship between the leader[s] and the followers.

3. The use of a coordinated program of persuasion, which is called thought reform [or more commonly, ‘brainwashing’].

A more specific definition can be taken from the Cult Information Centre:

Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following five characteristics:

1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members;

2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society;

3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma;

4. It believes ‘the end justifies the means’ in order to solicit funds and recruit people;

5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society. [2] The term destructive cult refers to a cult which poses a danger to its own members and/or the outside world.

HOW TO DETERMINE IF A GROUP IS A DESTRUCTIVE CULT

Q) Anybody can unfairly attack a group they disagree with by calling it a cult or saying they are using coercive mind control. How does FACTNet prevent this type of problem and determine fairly whether or not a group is a cult?

A) FACTNet uses specific criteria to determine if a mind control system has been used, and does not suggest organizations are destructive or dangerous cults without careful research and determination that the evidence fits definite criteria. These criteria are threefold.

The first set of criteria comes from the groups’ use of a specific set of mind control tactics. Please see "A technical overview of mind control tactics" at http://www.factnet.org/rancho1.htm for details or see http://www.factnet.org/coercivemindcontrol.html for a shorter version. These two documents are derived from the work of Dr. Margaret Singer former professor emeritus at the University of California at Berkeley, the acknowledged leading authority in the world on mind control and cults.

The second set of criteria has to do with defining other common elements of mind control systems, as defined by Robert Jay Lifton’s eight point model of thought reform. Please see "Robert Jay Lifton’s Eight Point Model of Thought Reform" also at http://www.factnet.org/rancho1.htm. If most points in this model are being used in a cultic organization, it is most likely a dangerous and destructive cult.

The third set of criteria have to do with defining common elements of destructive and dangerous cults. The following section will help clarify what some of those specific elements and criteria are.

Common Properties of Potentially Destructive and Dangerous Cults

The cult is authoritarian in its power structure. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority. He or she may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to the leader’s wishes and roles. There is no appeal outside of his or her system to greater systems of justice. For example, if a school teacher feels unjustly treated by a principal, appeals can be made. In a cult, the leader claims to have the only and final ruling on all matters.

The cult’s leaders tend to be charismatic, determined, and domineering. They persuade followers to drop their families, jobs, careers, and friends to follow them. They (not the individual) then take over control of their followers’ possessions, money, lives.

The cult’s leaders are self-appointed, messianic persons who claim to have a special mission in life. For example, the flying saucer cult leaders claim that people from outer space have commissioned them to lead people to special places to await a space ship.

The cult’s leaders center the veneration of members upon themselves. Priests, rabbis, ministers, democratic leaders, and leaders of genuinely altruistic movements keep the veneration of adherents focused on God, abstract principles, and group purposes. Cult leaders, in contrast, keep the focus of love, devotion, and allegiance on themselves.

The cult tends to be totalitarian in its control of the behavior of its members. Cults are likely to dictate in great detail what members wear, eat, when and where they work, sleep, and bathe-as well as what to believe, think, and say.

The cult tends to have a double set of ethics. Members are urged to be open and honest within the group, and confess all to the leaders. On the other hand, they are encouraged to deceive and manipulate outsiders or nonmembers. Established religions teach members to be honest and truthful to all, and to abide by one set of ethics.

The cult has basically only two purposes, recruiting new members and fund-raising. Established religions and altruistic movements may also recruit and raise funds. However, their sole purpose is not to grow larger; such groups have the goals to better the lives of their members and mankind in general. The cults may claim to make social contributions, but in actuality these remain mere claims, or gestures. Their focus is always dominated by recruiting new members and fund-raising.

The cult appears to be innovative and exclusive. The leader claims to be breaking with tradition, offering something novel, and instituting the only viable system for change that will solve life’s problems or the world’s ills. While claiming this, the cult then surreptitiously uses systems of psychological coercion on its members to inhibit their ability to examine the actual validity of the claims of the leader and the cult.

http://www.factnet.org/rancho5.htm

[3] Internal Ideological Revolution

Introduced at the time of the marriage of Massoud Rajavi with Maryam Azdonlou in February 1985. Rajavi declared himself the self-appointed ideological leader of the Mojahedin, or spiritual leader – a role taken over in public by his wife Maryam Rajavi since his disappearance after the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Along with this role he introduced ‘phases’ of the Internal Ideological Revolution which would in his terms lead the members to a full understanding of his ideological beliefs. The phases included daily reporting of thoughts and feelings; forced marriage followed by forced divorces; separation of children from parents; confession of sins including erotic dreams and fantasies. The aim of these phases is to connect the member to the leader with nothing between them in an exclusive relationship of total submission to the leader’s will.

Iran interlink, February 2007

March 11, 2007 0 comment

Richard Armey

A letter from Mr. Sobhani to Mr. Richard Armey

Dear Mr. Armey,

For more than 2 weeks the websites of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation has been issuing propaganda about your support for the group. It was surprising for me.

I would like to introduce myself before anything else.

I am an ex member of the Central Committee of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (MKO). This can be verified from their own propaganda outlets including Mojahed Publication (Special Edition, Autumn 1992) which mentions my name as a Deputy Executive Committee member.

In 1992 I became an outspoken critic of what is know as the “forced divorces” and of what is known as “armed struggle”. More than that, I criticised what was apparent about the special relations between the organisation and Saddam Hussein, the ousted dictator of Iraq. I was imprisoned for a few months in solitary confinement inside Ashraf camp and over all spent about 8 years in different prisons. I was captured once when I tried to escape prison and reach the office of the UN in Baghdad in August 1999. This resulted in capture in a joint operation involving Mojahedin and secret services of Iraq and I ended up again in solitary confinement. In December 2000, after one year of imprisonment and physical and mental torture, the Mojahedin handed me over to the secret service agents of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad and after spending 35 days in their special prisons, they turned me over to Abu Ghraib prison where I was held for more than a year. Perhaps I should mention here that my younger brother had been a Mojahedin activist who was executed in 1989 in Iran. My wife Mrs. Afsaneh Taherian is now in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Mojahedin Organisation separated my daughter from me and my wife during the so called “forced divorces” period and sent her to Denmark in 1991.

Dear Mr. Armey,

As you can see, my family has been destroyed for no reason except the continuation of cult like and terrorist policies of the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation. The mother is kept in Iraq, the father now in Germany and the daughter in Denmark, not mentioning my brother who has been executed. This of course is not limited to me as a disaffected member of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation. I have given you one example from hundreds of ex members and critics of MKO who have gone through the process of imprisonment and torture practiced by Mojahedin Khalq Organisation.

Dear Sir,

I urge you to look at the issues mentioned in this letter from a humanitarian point of view before judging it as a political issue.

Why should people get wrapped up in the culture of terror and violence? Do you really think that an organisation with a clear Stalinist ideology could be pushing for freedom?

Do you know that the right to marry is set out as one of the basic rights of human beings in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights? And the same right has been denied inside Mojahedin Khalq Organisation. Do you know that Mr. Ali Naghi Haddadi, Central Committee member of the organisation was executed only because he criticised the policies of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation?

The Hambastegimeli website (official site of terrorist group MKO) has quoted you on November 18, 2006 that:

“We, as many others, believe that regime change should be achieved through supporting organisations who are working to spread of democracy in that country. One of these organisations is Mojahedin Khalq Organisation of Iran.”

I don’t know if they have quoted you correctly or not, but if correct, do you really believe that Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (which is listed as a terrorist organisation by the United States of America and the European Union), or the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), (which is also listed as a front name for a terrorist organisation) is a “democratic organisation”?

Do you really think that Mojahedin Khalq Organisation after two decades of deep involvement in Saddam’s crimes in Iran as well as the massacre of the Iraqi opposition during the dark days of Saddam is a “democratic organisation”?

Have you ever done any research on the points of view of the opposition groups against Islamic Republic of Iran towards the Stalinist Mojahedin Khalq Organisation? Do you know that all opposition groups including the Monarchists, Republicans, Secularists, Nationalist and all independent personalities see the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation as a totalitarian dictatorship?

The Hambastegimeli site also quotes you on November 18, 2006 saying that:

“As a result of deep and widespread research carried out, we now believe that there is very strong argument for taking the name of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation and National Council of Resistance of Iran off the list of terrorist organisations produced by the State Department”.

Dear Mr. Armey,

Please excuse me for asking you a simple question. What is your very strong argument that has convinced you the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation is not a terrorist organisation? While tens of highly specialised and respected research analysts all over the globe have come to the conclusion that it is a terrorist organisation?

Would it not be reasonable to expect your good self to answer the following questions at least to satisfy your own conscience? And please ask the leaders of the organisation, once and for all, to give a clear open and official statement on these questions.

1- Is the organisation (MKO) still committed to “armed struggle” or not? A short statement would perhaps clarify the situation.

2- Are the members of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation allowed to choose a partner and get married according to Article 16 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights? This could be announced publicly together with the reasons as to why, for the past 17 years, there has been no marriage or births among the members of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation.

3- Would the leader of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation allow a faction to exist in the organisation – as happens regularly and normally in every political party all over the world – which would perhaps be critical of the leadership of the organisation? Or do all critics and disaffected members face imprisonment and isolation?

Mr. Armey,

To get hold of real evidence about Mojahedin Khalq Organisation; please try to get some concrete answers to the above questions. I now work as a human rights activist and an analyst on Iran and Iraq with speciality on Mojahedin Khalq Organisation. I am ready (of course with personal safety guarantees) to go with your good self to Iraq and Camp Ashraf to show you first hand the prisons, solitary confinement cells, the graves of disaffected members who have been killed by Mojahedin and much more.

Yours sincerely,

Mohammed Hussein Sobhani,

Cologne,

November 7, 2006

December 12, 2006 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts