Articles

Mujahedin Khalq Organization members' families

Loving families offer security and a future for Liberty residents

As usual, when a crisis erupts among the Mojahedin Khalq in Iraq, the world and his dog are ready to jump in and use it as a platform to push their own agenda based on their own interpretation of events.

We have US lobbyists in Washington telling the UN – which is conducting an investigation on the ground – not only who perpetrated the attack but also what to do about it. We have Iran dancing with joy over the ‘elimination’ of its enemies, though more circumspectly adding that Iran itself will pursue vengeance through legal channels.

It’s easy to sit outside the country and talk. It’s easy to hold the Iraqis responsible for everything that happens in their country in disregard of the blatant interference from every side.

The long suffering government of Iraq – which is also conducting an investigation of its own – yet again reminds UNAMI and Western governments that the MEK cannot stay in their country. For thirty years the Mojahedin Khalq has been working there for the benefit of America and western interests; which paid a middleman called Massoud Rajavi for their services. The MEK consequently killed thousands of Iraqis. The country cannot now be expected to continue to play host to such a terrorist group.

But behind all the noise and squabbles of the various political bodies there echoes a profound silence. We never, ever get to hear from the people who are themselves directly involved, the MEK rank and file. Of course, on September 1st, the day of the attack on Camp Ashraf, the MEK leadership almost instantly broadcast its own ‘Hollywood Blockbuster’ version of events, with films of the assailants creeping up on the camp and graphic pictures of the aftermath; images replete with contradictions and inconsistencies.

But what of the victims, those survivors and injured who have now been taken to Camp Liberty? What of the people already in Camp Liberty? We never get to hear how they feel, nor about whether they are worried about being the next targets, nor about how they want their futures to unfold.

For American politicians and lobbyists these individuals are only pawns in a political game which they propose to win at all costs. For the Iranians and the Iraqis these are terrorists who do not deserve a voice. More importantly, as UNAMI officials can confirm, the people in Camp Liberty are being held incommunicado by the leaders of the cult. And as long as the MEK plays its valuable role as a brand on which to hang an advertising campaign then nobody is looking for a solution.

However, America has a moral duty toward these individuals who have done so much for them. America also has an international obligation to the government of a sovereign Iraq after ‘liberating’ the country from former American ally Saddam Hussein and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in the process. America must put pressure on the MEK leaders to finally get out of Iraq, to open up the camp and allow the residents to leave as individuals and not as members of a terrorist group. This of course simply requires quiet, dignified co-operation with the UN and Iraqi officials who are there to oversee and facilitate exactly this occurrence. Even the MEK’s own Iranian supporters in the west are begging the leaders for such co-operation.

Once it is acknowledged that the residents of Camp Liberty are individuals and not pawns to be deployed or destroyed, and the MEK leaders are required to restore their basic freedoms, then solutions as to what can be done with them will not be difficult to find. First and foremost of these is to reunite them with their families. The 52 people who died in Camp Ashraf all had families. The remainder who have been transferred to Camp Liberty all have families, as do all the other residents there. Since 2003 many of these families have sought contact with their loved ones and been denied by the MEK leadership who are afraid of the compassionate influence their presence exerts over their loved ones. In 2009 a determined group of families set up a permanent picket outside Camp Ashraf resulting in the decision of several MEK to leave the camp and return to civilian life; this gradual process of attrition continues at Camp Liberty. Observers on the ground are in no doubt that had families still been permitted to remain there as a normalising presence, then the events of September 1st would not, could not have occurred.

When looking for a permanent solution for the residents, anybody with any sincerity must acknowledge that the involvement of these people’s families can offer the emotional, financial and mental security needed for them to return to normal life wherever they finally settle. Beyond this, the normalising presence of families at Camp Liberty will forestall the opportunity for further attacks.

Middle East Strategy Consultants,

September 18, 2013 0 comments

UN envoy in Iraq urges countries to accept Iranian dissidents

The killing of dozens of members of an Iranian dissident group that the Iraqi government wants out of the country should be ‘‘a wake-up call’’ to the international community, the acting U.N. envoy to Iraq said Friday as he pressed countries to do more to find them homes abroad.

Members of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, which is strongly opposed to Iran’s clerical regime, were welcomed into Iraq by Saddam Hussein in the 1980s during the brutal war with neighboring Iran.

Their fortunes turned sharply with the Iraqi dictator’s toppling in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Iraq’s current Shiite-led Iraqi government, which has strengthened ties with Tehran, considers their presence in the country illegal.

A disputed Sept. 1 shooting at their longtime home in Camp Ashraf killed 52 MEK members — roughly half of the camp’s remaining population.

The dissidents accuse Iraqi security forces of carrying out the killings. Baghdad denies involvement, with officials saying an internal dispute was to blame. It has promised to carry out an investigation.

United Nations representatives traveled to the camp a day after the killing. Although the U.N. has not determined who was responsible, acting U.N. envoy Gyorgy Busztin said the bloodshed highlights the need to protect the residents.

‘‘What has happened at Camp Ashraf on the first of September is a game changer. It should be a wake-up call to all countries who are in a position to help to come forward,’’ he told The Associated Press. ‘‘Resettlement is the ultimate guarantee of their security.’’

The U.N. this week helped facilitate the transfer of the last 42 Camp Ashraf residents to a different camp near Baghdad airport where more than 2,800 of their comrades are staying. That compound is meant to provide temporary shelter while the U.N. works to resettle them abroad.

Busztin said the Baghdad camp, a former U.S. military base known as Camp Liberty, should offer them better security than Camp Ashraf, which is 95 kilometers (60 miles) northeast of Baghdad. It is also physically closer to U.N. offices in the Iraqi capital, making it easier to monitor, he said.

The MEK carried out a series of bombings and assassinations inside Iran in the 1980s and fought alongside Iraqi forces in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. It says it renounced violence in 2001.

The U.S. considered the MEK a terrorist group until last year. Leaving Camp Ashraf was a key factor in reversing that designation.

Busztin urged U.N. member states to do more to relocate the residents safely abroad.

The Baghdad camp where MEK members are now all staying has itself been hit by deadly rocket attacks claimed by Iranian-backed Shiite militants.

‘‘These are human beings. Whatever the government of Iraq says about their past, these are people in need of protection, and we take that very seriously,’’ Busztin said.

The resettlement process has moved slowly because the U.N. is struggling to find countries willing to take them. U.N. officials also say that many residents have been uncooperative with the process, complicating the relocation effort.

A total of 210 residents have left to other countries so far, according to figures provided by the U.N. refugee agency.

Most of them went to Albania, which has offered to take 210 in total. Germany has said it would accept about 100. A small number of residents have been resettled elsewhere.

Seven former Camp Ashraf members are unaccounted for following this month’s violence, according to the MEK. The group claims they are being held by Iraqi forces and will soon be turned over to Iran against their will.

Iraqi Human Rights Minister Mohammed Shiyaa al-Sudani and Georges Bakoos, who oversees the MEK issue for the Iraqi government, both denied Friday that the seven said to be missing are in Iraqi custody.

Busztin, the U.N. official, had no information on their whereabouts.

The U.N. refugee agency expressed concern for the seven reported missing, saying in a statement that they are all known to be asylum-seekers. It called on the Iraqi government to find them and ensure their safety, as well as prevent them from being returned to Iran against their will.

As for the rest of the exiles, Busztin said it is difficult to say how soon they could be resettled.

‘‘I’m optimistic more countries will come forward and the numbers in the camps will be gradually reduced. But for the length of the process, I cannot give you a reasonable estimate,’’ he said. ‘‘What we request from the government of Iraq is to extend them adequate protection until the last one leaves,’’ he added.

Associated Press writer Qassim Abdul-Zahra contributed to this report.

By ADAM SCHRECK

September 14, 2013 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

Self-Annihilation, an Ideological Drift in MKO

MKO cultivates homicidal tendencies with an emphasis on suicidal ones

Showing a disposition towards violence is known to be the supporting one among many fundamental pillars of Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO, MEK, PMOI, NCR, NLA). In fact, violence and death is a working strategy, either killing others or committing self-annihilation. The group’s early booklets explicitly chart the worldview as a basic ideological mentality which is repeatedly referred to in group’s ideological instructions. The members are encouraged to either kill or be killed, and in contrast to the mainstream of similar opposition groups, MKO does not seem the least concerned for the safety of its members that frame the main upholders of its structure.

MKO cultivates homicidal tendencies with an emphasis on suicidal ones in a struggle to counter its adversaries and exclusively invest on the tactics that highly risk the lives of the insiders. Whenever MKO plots to make a stand against some adversary to advance with a heavy hand, the first priority is an aggressive militarism. However, it recoils to typical forms of self-destruction and self-slaughter when some bottleneck blocks its advance. The most common forms recorded are self-immolation and using members as human shields.

Being a product of Rajavi’s own mind-set, the use of unconventional terrorist and violent tactics are what Rajavi concludes his organization has the potentiality to carry out to achieve certain goals. Thus, the member of such organization can easily sacrifice his life when he receives the order. The recruited members are taught from the very beginning to make no distinction between killing others and being killed when they receive an order for an operation. Just in the same way that operators exploit the vulnerability of the victims, they themselves are being made victims.

Before the US invasion against Iraq and when threats were nearing the action, Rajavi was sensitive on two things; defending Ashraf against external threats including closing the camp and expulsion from Iraq and second, adopting an appropriate means to defend Ashraf and resist. He specifically reiterated that Ashraf had to be defended tooth and nail. But the premise developed into more objective form of defense when Saddam collapsed and the suggestion of human shield to protect Ashraf as the beating heart of the organization turned to be a serious option on Rajavi’s table.

In one of his messages to Mozhgan (Parsai), a ranking commanding member in Ashraf, Rajavi recapitulated that the members had to stay, die and bury in Ashraf but never succumb to the threats of being moved. It was a question of resisting or dying if the Iraqis ever decided to transfer members from Ashraf to another location. The human shield was one of the opted options; mass suicides could effectively frustrate any effort that aimed at dismantling the integrity of Ashraf. It included any other threat like forced entry of American or coalition forces to temporarily close or deactivate the camp. The first orders were using non-firing weapons; needless to say that the organization actually made no resistance against the American forces and succeeded to take the control and hegemony of the camp in its own hands. The question of suicide operations and human shield were all directed at safeguarding the entity of the organization and its hierarchical order; it was the red line that could not be crossed and all members had to preserve.

On occasion, MKO has issued statements warning the outbreak of human tragedy in the case of any attack against the camp. The statements conveyed a different meaning for the insiders; they implied that the real human tragedy happens when members began to display their self-annihilation potentialities for defending Ashraf. The transfer of the control of Camp Ashraf to Iraqi forces since 2008 and the Iraqi government’s determination to make a decisive decision about the residents of Ashraf enraged the group’s leaders and soon MKO propaganda machine initiated an intensive campaign against the Iraqi government. MKO’s first reaction was arranging a series of suicidal operations. On July 29, 2009 there was a report of deadly clashes between hundreds of Iraqi police forces and the members of MKO residing in Camp Ashraf that left 11 members dead and scores injured from the both side. While the reasons for the clash was said to be unclear at first, few knew that it was a pre-organized self-destruction plan by a number of Rajavi’s devotees to provoke Iraqi forces to trigger the clash that was well videotaped and broadcasted by the organization itself. The clash, however, was not the last but the beginning.

At least through the past three years and since the implementation of decision by the Iraqi government to relocate members from Camp Ashraf, MKO has proved to be determined to preserve the insiders as human shields to construct a secure bulwark against a national and global decisiveness. And through a few clashes, leaving many casualties from the both sides, with the Iraqi forces who had the responsibility of controlling Camp Ashraf, MKO proved it really means what it says. The recent clash that broke out on September 1, is known to be the most tragic one and a real demonstration of a terrorist cult’s potentiality of causing a human tragedy. 52 out of the 100 remaining members of MKO have been killed in Camp Ashraf.

The bloodshed is condemned but the responsibility is mainly on MKO’s leaders. The provoked clashes never stop unless practical measures are adopted to rescue members from the instilled cult mentality of self-sacrifice and dying for the cause of organization. Nearing the end of its life in Iraq, what MKO needs at the present to fuel its propaganda machine for a full move is sacrifice and multitude of martyrs. Where else can MKO leaders find a better slaughter house than Camp Ashraf or Liberty to make as high as about 3000 martyrs? To condemn this and that and to put all responsibility on the Iraqi authorities, grappling with the intensified wave of internal terrorism, provide no solution. The only way to stop similar human tragedies is a global decisiveness to help MKO members to survive and recover from the cult’s mentality.

By Sattar Orangi, September 11, 2013

http://www.officialwire.com/news/self-annihilation-an-ideological-drift-in-mko/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=self-annihilation-an-ideological-drift-in-mko

September 12, 2013 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

Prepare for more mystery deaths of MEK members

Since yesterday the MEK propaganda machine and its related resources have been on overdrive to claim that Prepare for more mystery deaths of MEK members the seven people who the MEK claim are missing from Camp Ashraf are in the custody of the Iraqis. Before this they had been on overdrive to claim that the 1st September attack on Camp Ashraf had been carried out by the government of Iraq. Both allegations have been repeatedly dismissed as completely unfounded by Iraq, but this has not silenced the MEK’s propaganda machine.

There is strong evidence that the aim of the attack on Camp Ashraf was to capture or kill Massoud Rajavi on the understanding he has been in hiding there. If that is the case, then the seven missing people, who have been identified as Rajavi’s close inner circle, have been part of a pre-planned manoeuvre to rescue him in the event of such an attack. The other members have been there to resist any incursion to allow Rajavi and his protectors time to run away.

Apparently inside the MEK there is currently an internal indoctrination message which compares the dead in this situation to the circumstances when Prophet Mohammad moved from Mecca to Medina and used Imam Ali who slept in his place as a decoy so that when they came to kill him they found Ali there instead. If this scenario is right then after Rajavi has saved his own skin from Ashraf, the last thing he wants is to be in the presence these seven known people. But he can’t let them go either because of the information they carry. The untenable MEK claim that these seven missing people were in Baghdad and have now been transferred by helicopter by the Prime Minister’s office to the south of Iraq indicates that there is some kind of plan behind it – governments do not work like this. The strongest possibility is that these seven people will be eliminated and the government of Iraq will be blamed. This is a typical MEK ploy to disguise the mysterious deaths of unwanted people, something they have done frequently.

In this case it is entirely possible that following this build up, these seven are discovered dead in the next few days, perhaps handcuffed and executed as the others were.

Certainly, for a man who basically can’t stop talking, the silence from Rajavi since the attack on Camp Ashraf makes it all the more likely that he is on the run and heading for a safe residence out of the country.

September 12, 2013 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Massoud Rajavi victimized Ashraf residents

The raid on Camp Ashraf on September 1st that resulted in the killing of 52 residents is a matter of concern and sorrow.

To probe the situation and the main causes of such an incident, it is crucial to review the mutual quadra agreement signed by the American and Iraqi governments, the United Nations and the Mujahedin Khalq Organization ( MKO).

The relocation of about 3000 members of the MKO to Camp Liberty – while 100 members remained in Ashraf – was part of the process to expel the group out of Iraqi territory. The Iraqi government was responsible to ensure the security and safety of the MKO forces for a specific period of time, until they would be transferred to Iran or third countries.

However, the strategic aim for the leader of the MEK cult, Massoud Rajavi was to return to Ashraf and to reinstall his entire forces there after sometime. For Rajavi Camp Ashraf had turned into a strategic notion or even an ideological one.

Actually the evacuation of Camp Liberty depends on third countries’ willingness to accept them. Third countries have not welcomed such a plan and so far a few numbers of residents have managed to move to Albania and Germany. Obviously, the cult leaders have never been willing to let members leave the MKO in groups or individually (in absence of the cult’s regulations and influence).

On the other hand, the MKO had to leave Iraqi territory up to December 2011, regarding numerous warnings by the Iraqi government and rulings of the Iraqi courts and also according to the MOU signed between the MKO and the UN.

The case of the MKO forces in Iraq got very complicated because the group leaders want to maintain Camp Ashraf. They make a number of members stay there under the pretext of taking care of and selling the group properties in an unlimited period.

Due to the disorders taking over the entire Iraqi soil, the Iraqi government has not obtained complete control over insecurities. Considering previous attacks on the group’s camps, the MKO leaders were well aware that sooner or later their camps would be attacked again. If the MKO leaders cared about the safety and security of their members, they wouldn’t ask them to defend to the death Camp Ashraf so members could leave the camp and disperse. In fact, Massoud Rajavi is responsible for the killing on his forces. Iraqi government has the right to abstain from keeping them in their territory although it has to provide safety and security for the residents of Ashraf and Liberty.

In photos released on Camp Ashraf incidents, dead bodies are shown, shot in the head and handcuffed behind their backs. Regarding the fact that dead bodies and photographs both belong to the MKO, itself, the reality cannot be simply verified. Nejat Society is not pleased with victimization of the imprisoned members of the MKO who are abused by Massoud Rajavi’s evil manipulative system and his ill-minded ambitions. The victims of the MKO are not able to realize the conditions they are stuck in so they can not liberate themselves from the bars of this horrible, criminal cult.

The residents of Camp Liberty should be able to choose their future path with their own free will. They should admit that the “Cult of Rajavi” has no right to stay in Iraq.

Iraqi government is also responsible to investigate the case and find the perpetrators of the attack to be brought to justice.

Nejat Society

September 10, 2013 0 comments

Maryam Rajavi

Does she still want to return to Ashraf ?

The attack Sunday September 1st on Camp Ashraf ended with the killing of 52 high ranking members of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (the MKO). Those members had been remained at the Camp to allegedly watch Back to Ashraf; Back to disaster the group’s properties. The attack was reportedly the most bloody of the several mortar attacks on MKO camps in Iraq. However, the MKO leaders and supporters view “return to Ashraf” as the best solution to guarantee the security and safety of MKO members!

The news on the recent attack on Camp Ashraf is controversial. No credible report has been published on details of the incidence except those released by the group propaganda but one thing is sure: Camp Ashraf is not a safe place for former partners of Saddam Hussein who aided him in operations to suppress Kurdish and Shiite uprisings during the 1990’s. Iraqi people have sought to expel the MKO from their territory since the collapse of Baath regime but the MKO leaders’ unyielding position was to stay in Iraq. The group leaders have urged to return the members to Camp Ashraf since February 2013 when the majority of members were transferred to Camp Liberty, a former US military base near Baghdad airport.

In February 2013, following a much slighter attack on Camp Liberty –only five people were killed – Maryam Rajavi claimed that there was no guarantee of protection and safety for the residents at Camp Liberty and “the only way to prevent further killing is to compel the Iraqi government to return 3000 defenseless residents of Camp Liberty to Ashraf, their home for 26 years”.

Since then, running the agenda of “Return to Ashraf” became a nonstop approach to prolong the group’s stay in Iraq. Advocates of the MKO among European MPs including their long-time sponsor Struan Stevenson also emphasized on “return to Ashraf” as “ the first step “ to rescue Liberty residents before their relocation to third countries. Stevenson and his peers state that Ashraf is “much more secure” against attacks.

Besides European sponsors of Maryam Rajavi, a delegation of her advocates in the US congress including Ted Poe who visited her at that time tried to appease her by saying that “the full protection of the residents of Camp Liberty can only be ensured by moving them out of the harm’s way and returning them to their home for 26 years at Camp Ashraf.”

The so called “home for 26 years” is actually a part of Iraqi territory granted by former Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein to foreign insurgents – the MKO members. Iraqi nation do not want the MKO as the remnants of the former dictator in their soil anymore.

Why do not the MKO leaders and their Western supporters “emphasize” on the residents’ urgent relocation to third countries?

Regarding the fact that previous attacks on Ashraf (April 2011 and July 2009) and Liberty (February 2013 ) were warnings for the group leaders to act more seriously to transfer residents out of Iraq and to cooperate more willingly with the UN. Nonetheless, Maryam Rajavi and her disappeared husband, Massoud Rajavi are so reluctant for the relocation process that one can conclude that they benefit more from staying in Iraq than leaving it ! Their agenda of “Return to Ashraf” is now considered absolutely questionable. The process of martyr-making out of attacks on the MKO camps using them to draw the World attention to the group or at least to gain their sympathy provides more fuel to the group’s propaganda machine. Bad for the group leaders, this time the world’ attention is focused on Syria.

By Mazda Parsi

September 9, 2013 0 comments

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest – 20

++ Nearly all the news, posts and comments in both English and Farsi this week relate to the 1 September events at Camp Ashraf. Reports from Nejat Bloggers, AFP, Anti-War, Press TV, and the Tehran Times gave sometimes conflicting information, but it has been established that 52 had been killed and of the 42 remaining residents over twenty were injured while seven people (Massoud Rajavi’s personal security detail) are still missing. The Mojahedin press office issued press releases and photographs of the scene including the dead, and claimed that Camp Ashraf was attacked by an Iraqi SWAT team. The government of Iraq and military and security officials denied any involvement in the events inside the camp, but said MEK activists attacked soldiers outside the gate killing two.

++ The United Nations, European Union, European governments and the US all issued strong condemnation of the violence and offered condolences to the victims’ families. None assigned blame for the deaths and all asked that the Iraqi government launch an investigation into the event. Amnesty International noted that the events were “disputed”, and called for an impartial inquiry. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki set up an inquiry into the deaths, and on Monday 2nd a UN team visited the camp to try to establish what happened.

++ Iran’s Revolutionary Guard announced itself delighted at what it called ‘divine vengeance’ and congratulated the children of the Iraqi nation, pointing to the MEK’s role in suppressing a Kurdish uprising in 1991 on behalf of Saddam Hussein, as well as many assassinations carried out by the MEK in Iran.

++ In Farsi, writers expressed condemnation of the killings and expressed their condolences for the families of the victims. At the start of the week many were repeating the MEK’s claim that Iraqi forces attacked the camp, but by mid week there was no doubt in anyone’s mind that Iraq did not do this. However, almost all of the writers blamed Massoud Rajavi for creating the conditions which led to these deaths. The gist of most posts and articles was, ‘You [Rajavi] have said for the past ten years that Nouri Al Maliki is an agent of the Iranian regime, so why are you keeping the members there? Let them go. Why are you there anyway, and what did you expect would happen?’

++ Interestingly the MEK use this event as the basis to continue its belligerent verbal attacks on defected members as though it was their fault that it happened.

++ The titles of some articles are interesting. In an article titled ‘Gentlemen come dine, the blood is ready’ Mohammad Razaghi explains how he believes the members were kept in Camp Ashraf to be killed. Ghorbanali Hosseinejat’s article is titled, ‘Yet another Ashura for the Mojahedin without Imam Hussein’. Arash Rezai’s article in Nimnegah details why the ideological leadership of a cult like the MEK needs blood.

++ Hossein Bagherzadeh, a respected human rights activist, wrote in Iran Emrooz. He examines various scenarios and describes how the event unfolded. He points out that if anyone criticises the MEK they become their enemy. But, he says, my writing is not about that, it is a serious reminder to the Mojahedin Khalq leaders that in a case when people are killed in cold blood, other Iranian opposition activists cannot refrain from expressing their views about the MEK and while condemning the killings, will also emphasize how much the MEK are hated by Iranians. Bagherzadeh says that up until now, anyone expressing that view would be labelled an agent of the Iranian regime. But he says ‘today I want them to look at themselves, what they have done and see that this is the result.’ He warns, ‘ I want them to look at themselves and change because tomorrow is not going to get any better than today’.

++ Behrouz Setudeh, a famous activist, writes for Iran Global. He asks how many times this kind of thing has to happen before the leaders of the MEK wake up. He reminds Rajavi of when he was in university with him 45 years ago and says, ‘you should remember international law, and you will see how silly and sad it is that in a country which has been at war, and whose government has changed, a group of foreigners sit tight and refuse to accept the order of the new government to leave their country. Even more ridiculous is that you are demanding that whatever you got from the old regime, the new government has to leave it for you… While you were working for Saddam Hussein your self-declared mission of ‘fighting the Iranian regime’ doesn’t change international laws and norms; you were still working for the Saddam regime.’ Setudeh concludes by suggesting that beyond all this, Rajavi should do one honourable thing and let the remaining MEK members go.

++ 139 people signed a letter condemning the attack and asking those in charge to follow up to make sure it cannot happen again.

++ A. Minoo Sepehr writes in response to this letter to remind the signatories how events unfolded and warns them not to fall into the trap of accepting MEK propaganda. He gives the example of the films of the alleged attackers saying they have no helmets or proper masks and no proper equipment. He also reminds them to look at what the MEK have shown as handcuffs which on the bodies are metal, but the unused ones also shown are plastic handcuffs. He highlights many similar discrepancies. Sepehr concludes by saying ‘yes, everyone is against this violence, but don’t think the version of events you heard from the MEK is the whole thing’.

++ Karim Gholami’s article titled ‘Did they have a second chance?’ explains that among those killed are some who tortured him while he was an MEK dissident. He says he wasn’t happy about their deaths because nobody deserves that kind of death. He says, ‘I had a second chance, I ran away and am now happy, but they didn’t. They took part in the torture but then they stayed and were killed as well’.

++ Among the dead is Amir, the son of Hadi Shams Haeri who died before being able to see his son in spite of years of campaigning for this right. Many people were deeply affected by this. Some consoled themselves by saying that according to their belief, whatever happened in this world, father and son will be reunited after death.

September 6, 2013

September 7, 2013 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Were the Camp Ashraf victims bait for a more sinister goal?

It appears there are two ways to respond to the September 1st attack at Camp Ashraf. One is the normal approach taken by the United Nations and Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, the governments of America and Europe, the European Union, and Amnesty International ; condemnation of the killings, condolences for the

victims’ families and demands that the government of Iraq conduct an investigation and bring the perpetrators to justice. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki set up an inquiry into the deaths, and on Monday 2nd a UN team visited the camp to try to establish what happened.

Then there is the approach of the Mojahedin Khalq (aka MKO, MEK, NCRI), sympathetic media and lobbyists; immediately blame your enemies (in this case the host country) and build a strong verbal and pictorial narrative to support that assertion. Less than a few hours after the event strident press releases and graphic photographs of handcuffed, executed bodies were being sent to media and political circles claiming that the government of Iraq had massacred the camp residents. Iraq’s security forces denied having entered the camp.

But, after a day or two of drip-feeding such images it began to resemble a Hollywood film; initial shocking pictures of the dead, then a back-flash to the moment the ill-equipped but masked attackers covertly crept up on the camp. (Carefully filmed by the victims themselves; if you saw this would you not run away or at least grab a gun rather than a camera!) This also begs the obvious question, ‘why would the Iraqi forces brutally murder half the residents then leave the remainder free to film the victims, send the films to the MEK HQ and allow these pictures to be distributed to the world?’ What possible motivation would they have?

No, the mystery surrounding these killings can begin to be unlocked by looking at some facts behind the MEK’s propaganda campaign, and by examining Massoud Rajavi’s disgusting, inhuman and sickening behaviour. Firstly Rajavi reneged on his agreement with the UN and insisted on retaining 100 people in Camp Ashraf while the remainder were transferred to temporary transit camp Liberty. This meant hundreds of Iraqi security forces were unnecessarily tied up in ‘protecting’ people illegally squatting the land and who are regarded in Iraq as terrorists, while Iraq’s civilian population are under constant threat of bombing and shooting in the rest of the country. While there they refused to allow anyone to enter the camp, declaring it an extra-judicial enclave to which not even the UN was granted access. And they endlessly whinged about the poor conditions while demanding that they stay put. They also refused to deal with the so-called possessions which they had supposedly remained there to sell. Certainly if the MEK were in any way immersed in normal society, even if the families of residents had been allowed to remain outside the camp to make contact with their loved ones, this kind of covert attack would not have been possible.

So, why were they really there and who was behind this attack? Although Iranian rightwingers and Revolutionary Guards hailed it as a victory for the Iraqi people, whoever was behind this tragedy was certainly an enemy of the government of Iraq.

There has been speculation that the MEK left behind in Camp Ashraf were there to protect Rajavi who was hiding in the camp, although it is also highly doubtful that he would risk remaining in the camp after he saw what happened to his benefactor Saddam Hussein. Since the MEK released the names of the recent victims it has emerged that nearly all of the 100 people who remained at Camp Ashraf had been indicted for various terrorist crimes. Most of those killed were old and disaffected members but were unable to leave the MEK as they were marked for arrest by law enforcement agencies. They were, in effect, Rajavi’s hostages to do with what he wanted. Interestingly, the people who are missing are all members of Rajavi’s personal security team, including the head of his security team Mahboubeh Jamshidi. How did it happen that they were not among those killed and where are they now? More to the point, where is Massoud Rajavi?

In August this year Rajavi surprised everyone when he announced that he had washed his hands of the MEK members who for thirty years have devoted their lives to him. He told them, “I am only in charge of your Day of Judgment and no one knows the date of the collapse of the regime”.

But if Rajavi wants to reduce or discontinue the MEK’s activities, give up his political ambition for regime change, then retire and attend to his personal life, he will have two essential needs. One is that he must somehow convince the United States to provide a safe retirement residence somewhere in Europe or the Middle East, and the second need is to get rid of the 3000+ people in Iraq. In this respect Rajavi could cut a deal to offer these 3000 people as mercenary forces to push the western agenda in Iraq and Syria; for example chemicals, bombing, poison or similar activities. His best case scenario would be that they die in situ through mortar attack or similar so that he could blame the Iraqi government for killing them. The Iraqi government would probably then be forced to offer some kind of compensation to the Americans and in return the Americans could be persuaded to give him, Rajavi, a place in Europe where he can be kept pickled for a day when he may be useful again.

Although it may seem far fetched to imagine the MEK itself or some collaborative group arranged to kill these individuals and leave some alive to film the events, Rajavi’s own track record for exploiting the blood of his followers, whether in war, assassinations, self-immolations, suicide missions, etc, sadly speaks for itself. Did Rajavi offer up the unwanted residents of Camp Ashraf as irresistible bait?

September 7, 2013 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

From Facts To Propaganda: Events Behind The Tragedy At Camp Ashraf

From early morning on Sunday 1st September, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), the western Events Behind The Tragedy At Camp Ashraf shop front of the Rajavi cult in Paris, started issuing statements one after another claiming that armed Iraqi forces had carried out an attack, killing some of the remaining people in Camp Ashraf while they have been handcuffed. international media started broadcasting this news and a flood of condemnation and sympathy resulted. It is unfortunate that the original source of this news has been the Mojahedin Khalq (aka MKO, MEK, NCRI), the dangerous, destructive Rajavi cult. The Mojahedin Khalq also distributed pictures which have also been broadcast worldwide, eliciting even more sympathy from various quarters. The speed at which this self-reporting was carried out and the wide circles to which it was distributed clearly shows some amount of readiness in this respect.

The Iraqi government denied any military involvement in Camp Ashraf, and various Iraqi officials condemned this attack no matter how and by whom it was carried out. They have all asked for the intervention of the United Nations and a thorough investigation into this issue. But apparently the Rajavi cult’s side of the story was a more desirable and acceptable one for the western media. Among these western media, the Associated Press coverage is most interesting as it reports on the contradictions among the statements by different Iraqi authorities. When you read the report, it is obvious that all the officials interviewed who have been named by AP have condemned the attack and have asked for international organisations to intervene. But an “unnamed” local police officer has apparently claimed that the Iraqi forces were involved! Later on we find that the so-called “unnamed local police officer” is of course the Rajavi cult itself which has pushed this claim through their connections and friends inside the Associated Press.

We have recently written about Massoud Rajavi answering the question “when will the regime be toppled?” by saying “I am only in charge of your Day of Judgment and no one knows the date of the collapse of the regime”. We put this reply to an expert on Iraq and the Mojahedin Khalq and asked for his opinion. His analytical reply on September 24, 2013 (by emails which can be made available) was that:

“If true, and if he (Rajavi) wants to reduce the [MEK’s] activities, discontinue the [group’s] current situation and give up political activities to retire and attend to his personal life, then he will have two essential needs. One is that he has to somehow convince the United States to sort him out and keep him safe somewhere in Europe and the second need is to get rid of these 3000+ people (in Iraq). As far as I know Rajavi, he is probably planning to expend the lives of these 3000 people for the American secret services to somehow push forward the American agenda in Iraq with their lives; for example chemicals, bombing, poison or similar activities. At the end of the day he would need to get rid of them for good and blame the Iraqi government so that the Iraqi government would be forced to offer some kind of compensation to the Americans and in return the Americans would accept to give him, Rajavi, a place in Europe where he can be kept pickled for a day when he may be useful again”.

Since responsibility for Camp Ashraf was transferred from the American forces to the Iraqis, the Mojahedin Khalq’s line of action has consistently been to engage in violence with whatever means possible face to face with the Iraqi forces in charge of the security of the camp. The Iraqi government has for years tried to pursue the peaceful transfer of this destructive cult from the country with the utmost care and patience. The transfer of Rajavi’s forces from Camp Ashraf to Camp Liberty, a transit camp, only started after the intervention of the United Nations and Hilary Clinton, then US Secretary of State, who at that time promised the MEK that if they accepted to be transferred peacefully, the United States would remove them from its list of terrorist groups. This was the first step toward transferring them to 3rd countries according to the agreements drawn up between the UN, the Iraqi Government and the MEK. But Rajavi, acting against all that he had accepted, kept some of the forces in Camp Ashraf with the excuse that they should remain to sell any MEK belongings which remained in the camp. At the same time Rajavi every day rejected all and every proposition from potential buyers and then started demanding that his forces be brought back from the transit camp to Camp Ashraf. It is noteworthy that this camp was originally call “Khalis Garrison” and belonged to the Iraqi army under Saddam Hussein, who had illegally given it to Rajavi who later on forcefully confiscated the agricultural lands adjacent to the camp and added them to the garrison.

The Iraqi government has tried to resolve the problem of Camp Ashraf peacefully and according to the agreements made and according to court judgements which specify that the land of the garrison should repossessed, but the leaders of cult have prevented Iraqi officials from entering the camp and declared it to be their property in spite of the court rulings. It is worth mentioning that Camp Ashraf is the only place in Iraq that after 10 years still belongs to Saddam Hussein and has not been entered and investigated and is not under the control of the Iraqi government. It is also worth mentioning that Rajavi has forbidden his forces from using the words “transit” and/or “3rd countries” even though these were part of his own agreement with the UN and its representative Martin Kobler. Rajavi later accused Mr Kobler of being an agent of the Iranian regime.

As the negotiations between the Iraqi government and the leaders of the Mojahedin Khalq were continuing, we at Sahar Family Foundation warned repeatedly that many people have been affected by the crimes committed by this cult, that many people have lost their land and many have lost families and children and are after revenge. We have repeatedly emphasised that Iraq is not a safe place for the members of this cult and they should be cooperating with the United Nations to be taken out of Iraq. Rajavi knows all this but deliberately wanted to keep them in Iraq and especially in Camp Ashraf, which is of course much more unsafe than Camp Liberty. He needed their blood.

The Mojahedin Khalq leaders have repeatedly emphasized that in order to keep Camp Ashraf they need blood. In the April 8, 2011 incident, when Iraqi forces entered the north part of the camp, the leaders had told the members that they should not worry or be afraid and they should go forward and attack the soldiers with whatever they could because the army had not brought any live bullets with them and the bullets they do use are blanks. They deliberately wanted the number of casualties to increase. Survivors of the cult can testify that the leaders of Mojahedin Khalq constantly emphasize that they need blood and constantly encouraged members to create conflict.

What should we expect from a cult and its leader who deliberately sends his follower to their deaths, looks upon them as disposable soldiers, gives them orders to burn themselves and sends them to war without training and arms? In July 17th 2003 when they gave the order for self-immolations , they had promised the victims that they would intervene and extinguish the fire once it was started. But they didn’t, they stood aside and took films. According to many who have managed to escape the cult, they killed many of their own disaffected members by shooting them from the back and then registered them as martyrs from during the bombardment of the coalition forces.

Pictures of this latest incident distributed by the Rajavi cult show how the residents have been handcuffed from behind and then murdered. If it was the Iraqi government, would it not make sense that they would finish it all and not leave someone to take pictures to send to the H.Q. of the cult so that they would broadcast it within such a short time all over the world? Is it not the case that the picture taking and other facilities were prepared in advance?

The reasons behind this can be deduced from recent events in Iraq’s political situation and the Iraqi government’s stand in front of the Americans’ aggressive policies in Syria. That the Mojahedin Khalq leaders kill the members is not a new phenomenon. Killing disaffected members and adding them to the list of martyrs is not new.

The Iraqi government had notified the Rajavi cult that they are running out of patience and will have to take back the camp but Rajavi has acted in advance and this massacre is with no doubt his work and the work of those on his payroll. To place the Iraqi government under international pressure was a favour to the Americans and he also now has fresh new blood to feed his propaganda machine.

If Rajavi dies and comes back to this world a thousand times, it is not enough to pay back what he has done. The first victims of any cult are its own members; individuals who have wasted the last 3 decades of their lives for Massoud Rajavi now have become the victims of a joint cultish and imperialistic game.

We again ask all international organisations to intervene to save the lives of the hostages taken by Rajavi and prevent more bloodshed in future.

Translated by Iran Interlink

September 4, 2013 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

MKO’s Adopted Means to Promote Democracy

MKO adopted violence as a necessary means for bringing about democracy

The likelihood of finding principles of democracy practiced within the terrorist cult of Mojahedin Khalq, as the group claims it is adhering to after its de-proscription, is much lower than expecting a Palestine–Israel peace treaty. History is about remembering and no tide of history can wash away the countless records of terrorist deeds perpetrated by the most hated terrorist MKO. Now on the anniversary of one of its most heinous terrorist operations inside Iran, blasting the Iranian Prime Minister’s Office, MKO has to be reminded of the bloody deed it deemed necessary for bringing about democracy! Can recorded evidence of this most ruthless terrorist operation be washed away when strongly and repeatedly asserted in the documents of a government aiming to take it under its protection? As asserted in the report by the US Department of State in 2007:

“In 1981, MKO leadership attempted to overthrow the newly installed Islamic regime; The MKO instigated a bombing campaign, including an attack against the head office of the Islamic Republic Party and the Prime Minister’s office, which killed some 70 high-ranking Iranian officials, including Chief Justice Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei, and Prime Minister Mohammad-Javad Bahonar.”

On 30 August 1981, MKO set off a bomb in Iranian Prime Minister’s Office at 3 pm where the National Security Council was holding a meeting. The blast killed the new Iranian President, Muhammad-Ali Rajai, and his recently named Prime Minister, Mohammed Javad Bahonar. Now nearly three decades after the terrorist perpetration, it can be studied from different aspects. The details of the bombing exposed in the media abroad well suggested the role of MKO although the group refrained to directly accept the responsibility for the operation.

The terrorist act, one of the most outrageous and blamable form of terrorism in the world history, was somehow endorsed by the West when they deliberately preferred to remain silent on the act that would trigger a global tension if it happened in a Western country. At the same time, none of the Western countries approved use of terrorism as a means of implacable determination to achieve undemocratic and ambitious ends. Oddly enough, it was committed at a time when MKO was plotting its terrorist plans in its Paris safe-haven under French protection.

Bombings perpetrated by MKO not only arouse outrage and anger among the Iranian people, but also were condemned by a global consensus on the issue. That is true that some countries for certain political motives and interests hardly respect the principles of combating the truculent phenomena of terrorism, the global consensus to combat terrorism in no way justifies use of terrorism in any form.

An analysis of any terrorist deed with the cost and impact imposed on the society among whom it has been committed illuminates dark aspects of the reason behind the deed. In fact, any terrorist act carries indirect messages from its perpetrators to the target societies. In other words, it can be said that any terrorist act is an abrupt undemocratic reaction against democratic and legal practices within a society. MKO’s terrorist deeds that plagued Iran following its defeat in post-revolution political and social fronts each carried coded messages. In fact, MKO’s terrorist acts directly targeted the vote of people rather than being enraged by the leading figures of the regime themselves.

MKO issued no immediate announcement to accept the responsibility of the operation and took no clear position. However, in a telephone interview reflected in some Western newspapers at the time, Massoud Rajavi said that the fatal bombing at the prime minister’s office was carried out “by the legitimate resistance movement”. But his further explanation made it explicit who he meant by the ‘resistance movement’: “I am not informed at this time exactly who planted the bomb, but it was the resistance movement and I do not deny that the Mujahedeen make up the majority of that movement”.

MKO claimed to have committed the crime as a legitimate resistance on behalf of the nation, but there is no record of when and where people voted to recognize the legitimacy of a self-proclaimed resistance that possessed no patience to fit social disobedience. It is common in most democratic countries that struggle for power is conducted through free, democratic elections and no loser engages in aggressive, violent activities to revenge his defeat. Being great losers in political scene, MKO’s terrorist, violent deeds imply that the group in no way respected the democratic principles exercised by people.

The message of the August blast conveys is that MKO never stands for any legitimacy; if MKO were to receive no political recognition to assume power, then, neither could the legitimacy of any election be recognized nor the votes of the very same people whose legitimate right decides for the legitimacy of any power structure. Actually playing no decisive role in Iranian revolution, MKO later came to arrogate the right of the leadership. The flight of Rajavi and Bani-Sadr to France, from where they conducted the terrorist operation of blasting the prime minister’s office in Tehran, approves a fact that they could never distinguish justification from legitimacy, that democracy can never be achieved through violence.

August 31, 2013 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts