Sattar Orangi

The Moving Spirit of An Ideological Cult

Rajavi is the ideological leader and the moving spirit of his cult in both word and deed

The historical warning of the consequences awaiting any group caught up in a certain hate-filled, The Moving Spirit of An Ideological Cult obsessive ideological infrastructure allows it to dehumanize its opponents and to engage in a war that eventually leads to tragedies that await the opponents, itself and the world in general. The insistence of Massoud Rajavi, the ideological leader of MKO terrorist cult, on clearly defining his animus struggle against the Iranian regime as an ideological war is an indication of strongly moving on the path of an obsessive ideological cult. In fact, MKO’s alleged terrorist operations and plots against Iranian people and interests can be viewed as the beginning of an ideological war through the manipulation of terrorism in order to first achieve certain ideological and then strategic goals.

Rajavi’s latest message to his disciples on the first of May contains a fast review of his organization’s atrocious, cultic activities which will be possibly repeated in the future. Is he really serious in what he has said or he only drew a sketch of his organization’s potentiality; his message could give impetus to his followers to actually backfire by reinforcing their ideological commitment. Marking off his antagonism with Iran under an ideological concept he says: “first of all it should be clarified that this [our] war is an ideological one. … In fact, it is a political-ideological war. It can be elaborated as a political-organizational war, but at its peak, it is an ideological one”.

Although indirectly stated, Rajavi tries to insinuate that the outstanding point about his organization is that noting and no act is done and carried on independently and spontaneously in his organization but is provoked just under the influence of a heavily disciplined, pre-planned and pre-organized order. Of course, in most cases and when acting on a political scene before the outside world, the leaders do their best to exculpate the organization of any allegations of having any role in enforcing the perpetrations. However, underlay is an ideological training that has produced a soldier with the organizational conception of duty and self-sacrifice that plays a critical role in the vast machinery of war.

In the course of the widespread self-immolations in some European countries on June 17, 2003 for instance, a number of the group’s volunteered members committed self-immolations in public to protest Maryam Rajavi’s arrest by the French police. According to MKO’s own reports “16 people attempted to set themselves alight in three days in Paris, Berne, Rome, London, Ottawa, Athens and Nicosia”. The human tragedy, however, is reported to have ended with two deaths; two women, SediqehMojaveri, 44-year-old, and NedaHassani, 19-year-old, died because of the self-immolation injuries.

In a post-immolation meeting with Neda Hassani’s family, Maryam Rajavi did her best to persuade the family that Neda’s death was the outcome of her great devotion and commitment to her leader and thus, on the one hand Neda would be the sole responsible for her own death and on the other hand, it would be Maryam who pocketed the merit of her action. Proven as in the letters of the members volunteered for self-immolation and also in the messages of the leaders all these and other similar suicidal operations have been ideologically justified. To be more exact, Rajavi as the ideological leader has been the true spirit behind the atrocities committed by his devoted apostles and followers.

The important point going unnoticed in MKO’s relations with the insiders and the outsiders is that the Rajavis at the lead of the couple-run organization play two poles of the same magnet; while Massoud Rajavi is the chosen ideological leader to whom all insiders are devoted and follow his order blindly, Maryam Rajavi plays the role of the puppet political leader for the outsiders and to either justify the ideologically perpetrated operations or provided a fertile ground for her husband’s ideologically based plans. The husband’s language is to instigate an ideological mobilization for the creation of a new unconventional, eclectic and arbitrary order; the wife’s language is to exploit European-favored democratic slogans and capacities to drive a disguised ideology and strategy as the ends and means of MKO’s foreign policy. For the insiders and for the outsiders as a whole Rajavi is the ideological leader and the moving spirit of a radical solution in both word and deed.

May 16, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MKO’s Dollars Challenging “Material Support”

Policy of spending lavish money for organizational achievements is a top priority within MKO

The gravy train on which some prominent Americans rode seems to be perforce halted in an outstation. The US Treasury Department appears to have begun an inquiry to see whether the speaking fees paid by Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO to its American advocates who have spoken on its behalf are illegal. In an earlier report by The Washington Times, Edward G. Rendell, the former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania and an outspoken supporter of MKO, has been subpoenaed by the Treasury Department. He is asked to turn over information on his relationship with the designated terrorist group. Of course, Mr. Rendell is only one among the long list of former officials, including former directors of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and many more, who have accepted fees to speak on behalf of MKO in Paris and Geneva as well as appearing in online videos and participating in arranged rallies. Mr. Rendell asserts that he has been paid between $150,000 to $160,000 for seven or eight speeches in support of MKO and calling for its removal from the terrorist list.

And it is not the first and will not be the last time that the media expose such scandals and it did not come as a shock for many of those who are privy to the ploys and crafts of the terrorist group. But the importance lays in the fact that it is the first time the Treasury Department reacts and summons an advocate to probe into the case.

For years, the conferences held in European countries as well as expensive newspaper and television advertisements have been organized by MKO’s alias and advocacy groups in the United States, one of which to name is the Iranian-American Community of Northern California. MKO has set a big table of dollars for anyone who cannot resist easy money in exchange to scarify his/er reputation and only to voice the words dictated to him. The spell of the received money and luxurious, expenses-paid trips being broken, few of these loyalists and backers seem to have faith in the nonsenses they publicized and then begin to look for justification of advocacy for the group. In a voice mail message left with the Inquirer Mr. Rendell stated: “I got involved because they asked me. I did extensive research and I looked at the other people who were involved and they were generals and former elected officials. I had great confidence in them”. By these words, one might doubt the legitimacy and efficiency of these personalities in holding sensitive past government posts and policy makings.

The truth many are unconscious is that MKO is an excellent master of crafting slogans to win the hearts of pro-democratic politicians, parliamentarians and activists. It fills their minds with buzzwords like “liberty”, “human rights”, “democracy” “women” and the like to convince them that it is struggling to advocate democracy for Iran and Iranian people. And of course, few of these bipartisan are acquainted with or have accurately studied about its past terrorist careers, crimes and atrocities not only against Iranian people but also against Americans in Pahlavi’s reign and the Iraqi people in Saddam’s dictatorial era.

Frankly speaking, the policy of spending lavish money for organizational achievements is an adopted top priority within MKO and all ranking commanders are fully briefed on the issue. Once in 2007 Mehdi Abrishamchi, Maryam Rajavi’s ex-husband, in a direct TV program stated that “let me tell you frankly that so far as it concerns us [MKO], we never let any of the organization’s political projects come to a halt for financial restrictions”. The dilemma MKO is facing at the time being for sure requires great expenses to designate quota of jobs to be done and words to be voiced by the high-profile European and American supporters. And the offered Euros and dollars are so beguiling that hardly any of them dare to resist.
Sattar Orangi, Mojahedin.ws, March 16, 2012
http://www.mojahedin.ws/en/?p=15829

March 17, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

A Message Addressed to Terrorists

MKO is one of the thirty organizations first designated and put on the US’s FTO list
Mojahedin Khalq Organizatio, MKO, MEK, PMOI, NCR, NLA, is one of the thirty organizations first designated and put on the US’s FTO list in October 1997. Majority of the groups on the list have since been redesignated for sound reasons based on the groups’ history of terrorist atrocities and the previous secretaries of the State put any review of their status out of the question. But it seems that Mrs. Hilary Clinton’s sensibility is bending under the pressure of a number of the terrorist group’s influenced bi-partisans.

Addressing US lawmakers, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, sent the terrorist group a strong signal stating; “Given the ongoing efforts to relocate the residents, MEK cooperation in the successful and peaceful closure of Camp Ashraf, the MEK’s main paramilitary base, will be a key factor in any decision regarding the MEK’s FTO status”.

The truth is that, despite claims of MKO that its first designation was the outcome of a political decision, Americans know well that even if it was a politically-purposeful decision, it was not actually a wrong decision. But it should be reminded that America’s first serious stance against MKO goes back to years before 1997, when the State Department prepared a special and unclassified report on MKO at the request of the US Congress.

Despite the report provoked an angry reaction from the group at the time, MKO never tried to contest the charges at the time as a political decision. Rather, they considered the decision the outcome of an inappropriate, weak research and disregarding the right of the organization to defend itself against the charges. Now more than 24 years after the State Department’s first position, the US seems to have taken a different turn for certain reasons. You can well notice this interest-seeking turn in the speeches of the former senators and ex-security experts talking in behalf of MKO.

Is it a new definition of war against terrorism, or loss of logic, or anything else, one thing is for certain; neither Mrs. Clinton nor advocates of terrorists can ever change the nature of terrorists by some encouraging and promising words even if they do not really mean what they say.

March 5, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Dining with MKO Terrorists

Sitting alongside a number of European and American personalities, whose countries allegedly bear the flag of a global war against terrorism, you can see the leader of a designated terrorist

Supporters of the terrorist MKO are allowed to serve in Congress

group in a conference held in the European Parliament in Brussels on February 7. Of course, all personalities present in the conference, either those occupying an official post or formers, knew well whom they were in her presence, Maryam Rajavi – the Paris based leader of a terrorist cult in the absence of her husband, Massoud Rajavi.

Among them you could see Jim Higgins, member of the European Parliament presided over the meeting, Alejo Vidal-Quadras, Vice President of the European parliament; Struan Stevenson, President of Delegation for Relations with Iraq of the European Parliament; Howard Dean, former Chairman of the U.S. Democratic Party; John Bruton, former Prime Minister of Ireland and former EU Ambassador to U.S.; Patrick Kennedy, U.S. Congressman (1995-2011); and Senator Robert Torricelli (1997-2003. The question raised in my mind is, what kind of relation could these people have with the representative of a terrorist cult still on the State Department’s terrorist list?

I recall a time when Mojahedin, in the early days of Iranian Islamic revolution, reiterate their antagonism with the American imperialism in many published statements and articles in their own publications after the Islamic revolution. In the first two years of the post-revolution, Mojahedin showed no open antagonism against the regime and tried to highlight a coalition with it to inoculate an extreme anti- imperialism and anti-American vision in the Islamic state and among the public. As part of their revolutionary slogans, they called for the establishment of a nationalist, democratic government that they hardly believed in as they consented to no system exclusive of socialism.

During the 9 month post-revolutionary period, from the victory of Iranian revolution in February to the takeover of the American Embassy in November 1979, Mojahedin frequently accused all religious leaders, except Ayatollah Khomeini and mostly for political considerations, and ranking authorities of negotiating and compromising with American imperialism especially after Brzezinski-Bazargan fortuitous, brief meeting in Algiers on 1 November 1979.

The importance of the embassy takeover lies in the fact that the incident turned into a golden opportunity for Mojahedin Khalq to start an extensive political-ideological propaganda. It might be true to say Mojahedin hardly played any role in the occupation of the embassy, but their role to aggravate the situation to turn it into a crisis lasting for 444 days is an undeniable truth. Concerning this fact as a part of the group’s anti-imperialist struggle, in the US State Department’s report of 1994 we read; “As part of that struggle, they assassinated at least six American citizens, supported the takeover of the U.S. embassy, and opposed the release of American hostages”.

But Mojahedin fail to recall that while Iranian authorities tried to achieve a solution to end the crisis, it was Mojahedin who through numerous announcements and messages draw sketches for total annihilation of imperialism, warned against possibly made concession vis-à-vis America’s threats and announced their readiness for nay military confrontation with it. They repeatedly proposed their own logical anti-imperialist suggestions to regime’s authorities to confront America, including seizure and confiscation of American assets in Iran and annulment of all signed contracts and drawing a sketch for total annihilation of imperialism.

Evidences never fail to reveal the truth. There are numerous facts published in Mojahedin’s publications that prove the critical role of the organization in intensifying the created tension and crisis to advance their so called anti-imperialism objectives and to win a public support to initiate an aggressive campaign against the main Capitalist camp, namely America.

Maybe Mojahedin never anticipated that in less than two decades they would have to make desperate attempts to acquit themselves of what they refer to as the accusations and its leaders would sit alongside some retired imperialist fed officials urging them to support the group out of some crises. For sure Mojahedin are the same leopards that have never changed their spots and the American sides are well aware whom they have leashed. But to sit with them at the same table, even if for political interests and causes, seems to be as illogical as unleashing beasts that could well terrorize the world for a mere achievement of trumpeted democracy the group itself has the least faith in. and I hear many people asking: If Mojahedin Khalq is a terrorist group, why are its supporters allowed to serve in Congress?

February 27, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

A Symposium to Betray Democracy

those Americans who supported Mojahedin Khalq, MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult

As reported, several Bush-era officials on the last week of 2010 embraced the opportunity of

those Americans who supported Mojahedin Khalq, MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult

(Captain Lewis Lee Hawkins one of the Americans murdered by Mojahedin Khalq)

flattering the leader of a globally blacklisted terrorist cult in a symposium held in Paris and, being begged already, urged the Obama administration to strike the group from their own country’s terrorism blacklist. Some believe they were really courageous and had guts to demand unleashing of ruthless terrorists, now carrying their arms under smart suits and costumes and roaming the parliaments and statesmen’s chambers and halls freely, on their own nation. And some other insist that they have violated the country’s regulations by giving support to a terrorist group on the State Department’s list. However, what is really shocking about these participants is that they referred to the group as devoted freedom fighters and apostles of democracy for Iran rather than the terrorists that may have repented of their past atrocities.

One of these ex-officials, Michael Mukasey, an attorney general under Bush, had earlier told an audience in a Washington hotel "We should take off the list of terrorist organizations the one group that is devoted to restoring freedom in Iran". John Bolton, one of the speakers at the symposium bragged that MKO was the right movement to be supported because it "has renounced nuclear weapons unequivocally, and because it has democratic aims”. And Tom Ridge, the former Homeland Security director, said "let’s delist MKO and show the world the United States is committed to its own values of freedom”.

those Americans who supported Mojahedin Khalq terrorists,

What are the values of freedom they believe in and were they actually contesting the crimes and allegations attributed to the organization in the strong evidences attested by the very same administration they served? To believe that a terrorist cult that started its opposition via violent approaches has devoted to restoring freedom in Iran through claimed democratic avenues oozes only out simplistic minds. From a historical point of view, almost all of struggling political movements, at least in their mottos and sketch of political objectives, chanted democratic slogans and represented the paradigms of a democratic society as a requisite to encourage supporters and to recruit parties. The history tells that the outcome was the most atrocious model of dictatorship that fought under the banner of emancipating man from class and political totalitarian systems.

Stalinism, for instance, was evolved into one of the most influential liberation movements in half of the world. The contemporary world history recognizes Stalinism as a paradigm of all practiced forms of stabilizing an authoritarian party. It theorized and exercised imprisonment, execution, political assassination, terror, and … in many ideologically justifiable forms not only against dissidents but also against the insiders. In fact, the chief victims were the movement’s linchpins rather than the foes of democracy and freedom. The expenses of Stalinism popped out only after its fall; no one denies Stalin’s role as the most fervent patriot fighting against the Nazism invasion, yet, he is indisputably the most tyrant dictator recorded in history. The paradox is the essence of a theorized ideology evolved with the wear of freedom and democracy. That is to say, the thought dealing with freedom and democracy emerged out of a counter-democratic ideology, a criterion to conduct the extent of internal and external violence. It is the ideology that legalizes the conducts and recognizes its innate terrorism as a blessed act; adherents become devotees of a cause constructed on pillars of freedom and democracy.

These are good historical evidences to prove the simplicity of considering MKO as devotees of freedom and democracy. Discrepancy between chanted mottos and actual practice of democracy is a product of disapproving the democracy itself. To bring off democracy, mottos should tally with practices. Mojahedin’s past modus operandi well depict that the group had taken a wrong direction for the cause of democracy. The autocratic structure of its leadership has depreciated it to a kind of Stalinist dictatorship. Thus, how can Mojahedin guarantee that it wouldn’t adapt claims of democracy for practice of autocracy?

That is precisely correct to say those who struggle for democracy cannot be terrorists because democracy absolutely discards any form of violence. But violence has been an innately distinguished feature of Mojahedin from its very formation. The key solution to accomplish organizational and ideological achievements was believed to be through practice of violence, the lack of which led any struggle for democracy and freedom to total failure.

The advocates of the group, particularly those backers at the symposium, are well aware that Mojahedin is at the pass of a critical juncture and in need of applicable instruments and whoever and whatever help and offer to survive. We do not know if those in the symposium were paid well or had a mission to accomplish, but they, for sure, and we know that the great challenge the world faces today is terrorism and Mojahedin has so far failed to prove any commitment to democracy. Consider that Obama’s Administration put trust in Tom Ridge’s urge to “delist MKO and show the world the United States is committed to its own values of freedom”. But, can he guarantee that MKO will also dedicate itself to democratic avenues that contradict its ideologically leftist inclination?

In representing definitions of democracy, Mojahedin oversteps those of the West. By drilling its exaggeratedly theorized democracy into the West, the group reminds the West that it has a rather more enormous capacity to overshoot the Western adopted democracy. At the same time, it has not the least respect for democracy to practice it, not even in its primitive form, neither for the insiders nor for the outsiders. Nowhere can you find so ruthless methods of brainwashing put into practice under the cover of democracy as within the group. The fact is that Mojahedin is innately a terrorist group and its keeping hold of democracy never washes its hands off its past crimes. The supporters of terrorism must keep it in mind that they too share blame if the rampant terrorists betray their trust, especially when they are walking by the side of terrorists like MKO that is the most disreputable hypocrite among others.

January 13, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

No Court’s Ruling Helps MKO Evade Terrorist Charges

Last Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Washington ruled that the U.S. State Department should review designation of Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO, MEK, PMOI, NCR, NLA) as a foreign terrorist organization. The ruling is the last of a quintuple series of petitions by MKO, out of which only two have been ruled by the U.S. Court of Appeals to remand the case for further proceedings. No Court’s Ruling Helps MKO Evade Terrorist Charges

In the first of the two, decided on June 8, 2001, the ruling stated: “While we determine that the designation was in compliance with the statute, we further determine that the designation does violate the due process rights of the petitioners under the Fifth Amendment, and we therefore remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion”. In the other three cases, however, the court denied the petitions for review.

MKO claims that the decision represents a victory for it and it may give them enough time to convince the Secretary of State that it has long since 2001 abandoned any commitment to violence. But the State Department has since designation of MKO as a foreign terrorist organization been relying on its own classified and unclassified data and has absolutely ignored the organization’s assertions of abandoning terrorism. To know the State Department’s reasoning, as the case required that the Secretary provide a meaningful opportunity for MKO to review the unclassified record on which she relied, one does not need to look for classified information; there are periodically published reports and researches that release up to date information on MKO.

In a research analysis, commissioned by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Status Determination and Protection Information Section, mainly prepared on the basis of publicly available information, you can easily fathom the structure and the true nature of MKO regardless of its claims. The CORI research published on 21 September 2009 publicized Information on the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI) based on the fact that “Every effort has been taken to ensure accuracy and comprehensive coverage of the research issue”. Far from any propaganda, the research delves into the group’s past and current activities covered and made available by the media and authentic sources of information. Interestingly, the bulk of information released in the report concerns the military operations of the organization under NLA alias.

On re-designation of MKO as a FTO, the State Department’s Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism in itsApril 30, 2009 report once more asserted MKO’s terrorist activities done against America: “The group’s worldwide campaign against the Iranian government uses propaganda and terrorism to achieve its objectives and has been supported by reprehensible regimes, including that of Saddam Hussein. During the 1970s, the MEK assassinated several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians working on defense projects in Tehran and supported the violent takeover in 1979 of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran”.

And there is the latest one published by Congressional Research Service dated June 11, 2010 entitledIran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses in which the reason for the designation of the group is referred to. It has a reference to MKO’s made petition against its designation in 2008 and the State Department determination to keep it on the list: “The FTO designation was up for formal review in October 2008, and, in July 2008, the PMOI formally petitioned to the State Department that its designation be revoked, on the grounds that it renounced any use of terrorism in 2001. However, the State Department announced in mid-January 2009 that the group would remain listed. The group remained on the FTO list when the list was reviewed and reissued in October 2009”.

And there are lot more evidences to corroborate the group’s unchanged terrorist disposition regardless of any court’s judgment. How can an organization with proven notorious, bloody history claim that it has been designated unjustifiably and in the absence of due process of law? Being removed from any list or not, however, is a test for the countries on whose lists it was labeled to prove their seriousness in war against terrorism. For Iranian people, it remains a terrorist group as terrorism and militarism is innate in its ideology.

July 24, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization members' families

Families need assistance to stop victimization of their children

Although they are suffering under the hot and scorching winds of the Iraqi deserts, a dozen or so of family members of the residents to Camp Ashraf are settled in front of the main gate of the Camp in a hope to see their children and relatives enslaved by a terrorist cult. Obviously, the only way to overpower the resistance of the organization in refusing to let them meet with their The families’ persistence appears to have had its effects on the residents as well relatives is what they are doing. And it has proved to be since the organization is doing its best, by arranging scattered rallies of trifle numbers in a variety of European countries and as well as the aid of some advocates, to disperses the gathering of the families accusing them to be the agents of the regime and branding them with other names. However, the letters of the families addressed to a variety of humanitarian and peace-seeker organization has left no doubt that they are really families concerned about the destiny of their children.

The families’ persistence appears to have had its effects on the residents as well. What the organization and its advocates call a Psychological warfare employed against MKO sounds to have acted as a waking bell that has already frustrated the overriding cult influences that has developed a family-phobia in members. The increased number of escapes since the settlement of the families indicates that the victimized are being convinced that the best and most secure opportunity to be freed from their chain of slavery is provided and set before them by the families in front of the camp.

Nothing is known about what is just happening inside of the camp, but the leaders’ desperate reaction and their calls to be supported against the peaceful picketing of the families that has blockaded the easy access and traffic to Ashraf presumes a widespread dissatisfaction among the insiders and a possible revolt. The power achieved over the minds of the insiders through inducing them to accept without question is fading away and replaced by the encouragement of the families many of whom they have come to know by name. When they remind themselves whom the people at the gate are and what has brought them from their cool and secure homes to such a dry and scorching desert with the least essential accommodations, for sure something moves within them even if the families have been demonized by the organization. Although MKO has succeeded, to some degrees, to demonstrate as the only embodiment of reason and reality and a legitimate freedom-fighter to bring about the mind-set in the insiders that their highest value has been to become its members, the long years of living under coercive measures and cult-like procedures has proved different and they are being persuaded that the real angels of salvation are the parents bravely withstanding round-the-clock.

So far, MKO has deprived the insiders of their rights to visit the families and has refused the same demand by the families. It has even announced, by providing forged signatures, that the members whose families are at the gate are not willing to see their parents. This is in turn another evidence that indirectly affirms the identity of the families as who they really are and disapproves the made accusations against them. Of course, if the relevant organizations and bodies the families have appealed to intervene and press to have an interview with the members in a milieu uncontrolled by the organization’s rankings, they will assist not only the families but also the enslaved. Will they take any pain to relieve them both? We hope so.

June 13, 2010 0 comments

The MEK; Baath Party Accomplice

Diverse attitudes of MKO terrorist cult

Looking at a nearly two decade-long history of collaboration between a dictator and a terrorist accomplice, it is not hard to speculate about the reasons for MKO’s falling out with the post-Saddam Iraqi Government. From its very first days of escape from Iran and its settlement in France, the organization and Saddam felt close affinity and there started a covert collaboration Looking at a nearly two decade-long history of collaboration between a dictator and a terrorist accomplice, it is not hard to speculate about the reasons for MKO’s falling out with the post-Saddam Iraqi Government between the two and MKO willingly began to accept Saddam’s donations to meet its expenses in France. The first ostensible agreements were reached in the visit between Rajavi and Tariq Aziz, an opportunity to expand ties and to serve Saddam in return for his favors. It is worth knowing that Saddam gave priority to grant MKO’s demands and requests over all his plans and gradually this support was rapidly increasing in quality and quantity.

Rajavi’s flight to Iraq and the consequent meeting with Saddam and then with other Iraqi ranking officials followed with dollar allocations as well as granted military camp and logistics boosted a broad collaboration that lasted until the fall of Saddam. According to existing evidences, MKO received millions of dollars in Oil-for-Food program subsidies from Saddam from 1999 through 2003. In fact, the money that had to help Iraqi people survive was spent to guarantee the survival of a terrorist group to boost and support planning and executing further terrorist operations against the Iraqi and Iranian peoples.

There is no need to assert that the potential terrorists seek to expand their challenge if they receive abundant strengthening support. It was the case with MKO when settled in Iraq. Adhering to a hit-and-run strategy of armed struggle against the Iranian regime, Rajavi once more changed its tactic of overthrowing the regime emboldened by Saddam’s eye-caching aids. In less than a year, Rajavi had a National Liberation Army (NLA) under his command close to Iranian borders thoroughly armed and trained by Saddam. It was not hard to know where the costs of such an army came from.

The things have now greatly changed. There is no more a godfather to rely on but a nationally elected government that is determined to uproot terrorism and terrorists and to spend the country’s resources for their own real owners. There seems to be no rationale for allocating the very same food and fuel quota for terrorist MKO members residing in Camp Ashraf, but the Iraqi Government tries not to be tough for humanitarian causes. But, is the organization grateful?

According to MKO’s released reports, “since 2003, in accordance with a fuel rationing scheme for Iraqi citizens, Ashraf residents had a monthly quota for fuel and other products from the Iraqi Oil Ministry. They paid for and received their quota on a monthly basis”.

“Since the end of 2006, when Ashraf’s fuel quota was illegally cut off on the orders of the Iranian regime, Ashraf residents managed to obtain their required fuel primarily from outside Iraq and open market, facing enormous difficulties and paying several-times the previous prices. However, since July 2009, the Iraqi committee in charge of suppression of Ashraf has seriously hampered the entry of fuel into the camp, and has prevented all fuel entry completely since mid-October.”

The clime is mad at a time when the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Secretary General Special Representative for Iraq, and UNAMI are thoroughly informed of tasks and decisions concerning Ashraf residents. Never recanting for its hostile attitude towards two nations, MKO has adopted the tactic of showing as a martyr of injustice, a tactic that it believes works nicely when there is no effective advocate around to press the government as well as strengthening it in its atrocious, terrorist attitudes.

January 21, 2010 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

A hostile attitude against any legal decision on MKO

The Iraqi government has confirmed that it will transfer the residents of Ashraf Camp to an unknown place in Baghdad or to a prison as the Mojahedin Khalq Organization has made it known through released news. The organization also states that transfer of its Ashraf Camp from Diala province to Baghdad violates all international calls and that it denounces claims of an agreement with the Iraqi government in this regard. Does the Iraqi Government actually needs confirmation of a terrorist group and arriving at any agreement to expel or relocate it to any place to have full control over it? Some may be of the opinion that long nurtured by Saddam Hussein and receiving supports by America after its invasion to recognize its members as refugees has emboldened the group to take a hostile attitude against any legal decision by Iraq.

But it seems that even Americans have lost their interest in the group since they may be accountable for any reaction by the group to protest its relocation as it did in July when the Iraqi police decided to establish a controlling post inside the camp. An evidence to present that US remains impartial, and putting the responsibility all on the Iraqi Government, is when the State Department spokesman in a press briefing gave details about the announcement by Iraqi Prime Minister Nori Al-Maliki of intentions to relocate or deport the Iranian dissidents at Camp Ashraf.

"QUESTION: On Iraq, Camp Ashraf, the Iranian opposition, says that the Iraqis are going to move them next Tuesday, I think. Are you going to try and use your influence with the Iraqis not to move them? The opposition says there’ll be bloodshed if they do attempt to do that.

MR. KELLY: Well, I think what we would do, first and foremost, is to urge the Iraqi authorities to conduct any such relocation with the residents of Camp Ashraf, that it be done in a lawful and humane way. They’ve made clear to us, to the Government of the U.S., that they do plan to do this. And this is entirely an Iraqi planned initiative. And as I said before, we’d expect this be carried out in a humane way.

We have, all along, recognized Iraqi sovereignty over the entire territory of Iraq, including the area where Camp Ashraf is located. And as I think we’ve said before, the Government of Iraq has assured us that they would not deport any of these citizens to any country where they would — if you have a well-rounded fear of being treated inhumanely.

So we — I mean, we’re engaging the Government of Iraq. Diplomatically, we respect Iraqi sovereignty. But of course, we’re making it clear that we would expect these – the residents of Camp Ashraf to be treated well and with respect.

The underlying truth in his response is that the United States deems the Mojahein Khalq a registered terrorist organization on its list notwithstanding its removal by judicial judgments from Britain’s list of terrorist organizations and from that of the EU. And of course it seems that the US has taken the right side since the organization has recently warned about any attempt to force its insiders from Ashraf and the US is among the firsts that were and are well aware of the group’s potentiality in waging violence to counteract moves by the Iraqi Government. Also to influence the public opinion, it has hired people to spread rumors of being relocated to notorious places that might jeopardize the life and security of its members.

Accounted by Allan Gerson, one of the advocates of the organization presently involved with other attorneys in representing it in its efforts to be removed from the U.S. List of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, the group is the subject of an appeal to be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington DC on January 12th. But what is he much concerned about is relocation of Ashraf residents to a place where he reveals to be Neqrat as-Salman, referring to it as a desolate military prison and as Iraq’s most feared prison after Abu Ghraib that has been used since 1921 for detaining mostly political prisoners.

For sure, there is no ambiguity in the case of Mojahedin Khalq; it is a proven terrorist organization and has to leave the country that is determined to remove the last remnants of a notorious dictator whose adherents are still embroiling the country in disorder and civil war that is taking many lives every day.

December 17, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

The UN monitors the situation in Ashraf

Despite of attempts to demonize the Iraqi government to show a strong objection to the decisive decision of its expulsion from Iraq, Mojahedin-Khalq Organization (MKO, MEK, PMOI) seems not to be intelligent enough to realize that it fails to dupe all the world as it has done with its own insiders. There are those who may be misled by its propaganda blitz that the Iraqi government has packed a number of innocent people inside an isolated camp just in the middle of a scorched desert and imposing all kinds of rough and inhuman pressures on them. And there are also those who may come to believe that it has won a great victory against the Iraqi government to press it return back 36 arrested members on many charges that need to be brought a legal court of justice.

And that is what has to be done concerning these terrorist culprits whose file is open to be dealt with. But are the world’s responsible organizations and bodies unaware of what is truly passing and happening in Ashraf? It is not at all as some may think. All the humanitarian organizations have the camp under their monitor in spite of MKO’s strong objection to any interference in its internal affair as it harshly reacted when the Iraqi forces tried enter the camp and to establish a police station within its walls just to monitor its suspicious activities and stop further exploitation of its members. And the United Nation knows all about Ashraf.

In paragraph 6 of resolution 1883 (2009), adopted on 7 August 2009, the Security Council requested the Secretary-General to report to the Council on a quarterly basis on the fulfillment of the responsibilities of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI). On 11 November 2009, the first report pursuant to that resolution was released. Here is the part dealing with MKO’s Camp Ashraf:

With regard to the situation in Camp Ashraf, tensions escalated on 28 and 29 July between Iraqi security forces and the camp’s residents who belong to the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran. When Iraqi security forces entered the Camp to establish a police station within its boundaries, the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran strongly objected and the ensuing confrontation resulted in 11 residents killed and approximately 200 wounded. Iraqi security forces further arrested and detained 36 residents, who then staged a hunger strike in conjunction with another 136 residents. On 7 October, the detainees were released and returned to the Camp, after agreeing to appear before an Iraqi court if summoned and to leave Iraq for third-country resettlement if the opportunity were made available. Subsequently, Iraqi Government officials have called for the closure of the Camp, but have repeatedly given assurances to UNAMI of their commitment to treat the residents in accordance with international humanitarian law and the principle of non-refoulement. In response to numerous requests UNAMI, supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has undertaken monitoring of the humanitarian situation in the Camp as part of an effort to find possible solutions involving various interested parties.

Blacklisted a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) whose activities are banned in the US, the terrorist group was amongst the firsts to come under the US protection rather than the Iraqi people. Emboldened by the given protection, the terrorist MKO is combating versus the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s earlier announced decision to expel it from Iraq according to the Iraqi Constitution and in an attempt to uproot terrorism there.

Evidently, the group’s harsh reactions have even jeopardized Iraq’s internal and national security to some extents. Its own threatening tone and some of its advocates inside and outside of Iraq against the taken decision is just a repetition of MKO’s hostile attitude shown at the inception of its armed phase immediately after it fell out with Iran’s Islamic regim. Regardless of MKO’s potentialities to onset yet another military phase in spite of trying to be taken off the terrorist lists, MKO is doing its manipulating all ploys to force the Iraqi government to consent to its stay in Iraq.
Mojahedin’s presence in Iraq has no rational justification after Saddam’s fall. Getting advantage of the chaotic situation in the region, MKO’s leadership in 1986 moved the organization’s headquarters to Iraq which was considered an opportunistic decision at the time for some reasons and to achieve desired objectives. The main strategic goal for both MKO and Saddam on which the two were making the alliance was overthrowing the newly formed Islamic regime in Iran. The Iraqi soil offered MKO the opportunity to form the Liberation Army so it could stage cross-border attacks at the right time.

Saddam’s fall frustrated their political arithmetic all. The possible regional transformation and Mojahedin’s disarmament on the one hand and Iraq’s internal, political transition as well as the new government’s policy to establish friendly, cooperative ties with the neighbors on the other hand led Mojahedin to isolation to desperately wait an unknown future. But the protected status granted to Mojahedin by the coalition forces offered them a prolonged opportunity to stay in Iraq until a final decision was made or they would be transferred to a third country.

No country has yet accepted to receive Ashraf residents although the group is delisted from the UK and the EU terrorist lists. It is only a matter of legal enforcement and the very same countries are well aware of the group’s terrorist nature and thus, they will actually avoid letting it roam in the streets of their countries to jeopardize their social-political security.

November 18, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts