Articles

West has a duty to take care of its retired terrorists from the MEK

According to the Tehran Times, the IRI has raised concerns that the Americans want to transfer the MEK en masse to a new terrorist camp in another neighbouring country, probably Azerbaijan. West has a duty to take care of its retired terrorists from the MEK

Since these people are in fact too feeble to be actually used for anything, the intention behind such a move would be to antagonise the IRI and increase political tension. Such a move though would also suit others – Iraq, the EU and North America – by enabling them to wash their hands of this intractable problem; send them to a remote desert location where they can rot until death, circumventing the need to find homes for them in western countries.

Even dreaming of such a ‘solution’ would reveal that the dreamers are happy to ignore the human rights of these victims in the name of political gain or simple expediency.

So far European and North American countries have been reluctant to offer to take in the mostly elderly and sick former fighters. They should remember that it is their governments and other Western political pundits who have gleaned the greatest benefit from these victims. The MEK have been exploited relentlessly in the interminable political wrangling against Iran. Most have lost the best years of their lives trapped in the MEK’s Iraqi camps. It is now only fitting for these countries to pay back their debt to these victims by allowing them to retire with some dignity and ease, and with access to health care, in the West.

May 10, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Posed Challenges, a cause of MKO’s uncertain future in the West

MKO’s posed challenges in the Western countries makes its future uncertain

It was just on April 10 that Martin Kobler, Special Representative of the Secretary-General, in his briefing to the Security Council concerning the transfer of MKO’s members residing at Camp Ashraf and the Temporary Transit Location (TTL) to other countries stated that “no country has committed to accept residents. A donor’s appeal meeting also took place the same day seeking to raise 39 million USD fund for the Ashraf project. Only one Member State made a concrete pledge and this falls far behind what we had hoped. Without international support, the process cannot succeed”.

No doubt, the residents stay in TTL is temporary and transitional and that other states are required to accept the resettlement of residents in their countries in line with their international commitments. One would better understand Mr. Kobler when addressing Member States had he specifically made reference to European countries that had already delisted MKO. At least he expects that these countries be the forerunners in accepting the residents if they really believe in removing it off the terror list. At this serious juncture, MKO desperately needs political and financial support of these countries more than any time. But as they have shown the least cooperation, a question raises that what is the reasons behind such procrastination to escape giving shelter to their favorite, de-proscribed group.

For sure, these countries have their own logic and reasons for indirectly expressing their disapproval. A review of the group’s past violent history and anti-social behaviors in Iraq and other European countries, regardless of the atrocities perpetrated against its own fellow Iranian, might well explain why they avoid risking acceptance of the group on their soil. What is just before European’s eyes is the group’s decade long persisting challenge with the Government of Iraq. Once forming close alliance with Saddam against Iranian regime, MKO acted also as his loyal mercenary in suppression of uprising Iraq dissidents. After the fall of the dictator, in a shift of position the group claimed to be standing beside the Iraqi people in a unified front to secure its stay in Iraq. As it is naturally a terrorist group whose strategy of struggle is founded on armed and violent warfare, soon it began to show its real, hostile attitude against the legally elected government and defied any reached legal decision; it preferred to make coalition with Iraqi insurgent groups. MKO in its struggle to survive not only claimed a position similar to that of Iraqi citizens with all granted rights but also postured as being in the vanguard of accomplishing democracy for Iraqi people and began interfering in the country’s domestic affairs.

Notwithstanding the ongoing challenges with the Government of Iraq, MKO has been the subject of many serious challenges and disputes for its defiance of legal and social laws in European countries and particularly in France, where its second headquarters are stationed. Some references to Antoine Gessler’s Autopsy of an Ideological Drift suffices to demonstrate that MKO’s presence in Auvers-Sur-Oise, the main strategic base for Mojahedin, has long been the center of many disputes with the French government. During their long stay there, Mojahedin have attempted to abuse the facilities for the achievement of their cultic and terrorist objectives and according to French D.S.T report, they have established another cultic-terrorist haunt in France. There are some more headlines as concrete evidences of violating and breaching asylum regulations according to Gessler’s.

1. Blatant defiance of the rules

Paris had required that the Iranian refugee leaders sign a written statement, containing the routine text promising to avoid all political activity on French soil. This would be respected for exactly two weeks.

2. Abuse of popular personalities

By hiding behind a broader front, the Mojahedin could manipulate Western public opinion as they wished. They had found the legitimacy that had eluded them for so many years.

3. Abuse of democratic capacities

Dramatizing simple situations, while distorting the facts to meet their own needs, the Mojahedin express their demands, published in press releases designed to create pity among the good people who are media consumers. They warn local authorities by subtle threats against them. In brief, they act in Europe as if they are in a conquered country.

According to our information, the organization does not use illegally obtained funds. On the other hand, the PMOI and some of its members are under indictment or civil action for misallocation of funds. This is notably the case in Germany, where significant sums of German private donations and State subsidies were used, in fact, for the purchase of arms for PMOI terrorists and militants in Iraq.

4. Violent behaviors in West

Yann Richard, researcher at the French Institute for International Relations (IFRI), considered a major specialist on Islam and author of Shi’ism and Islam, states that: “This group could probably be compared to the IRA or the PKK in its methods. These are rabid people who, should they actually come to power, would be worse than the present regime. They are bloody and violent madmen”?

“Concerning democratic freedoms, the sect has not yet accepted any other current of thought or any other identity but its own. In its small world and its international relations, everything is in place to punish its opponents. Prison, torture, secret executions, and dozens of other violations are common and in regular use by them against their ideological opponents. At this end of the 2O” Century, this is a blot on all humanity”.

The DST chief underscored how dangerous the PMOI was. It was more like a sect, a cult of personality for Massoud Rajavi and his wife. In 2001, the PMOI had claimed responsibility for more than 195 terrorist attacks on Iran from its base in Anvers-sur-Oise.

5. Launching attacks against embassies

“The People’s Mojahedin planned to attack Iranian diplomatic missions in Europe, except in France”, stated the Director of French Counter-Terrorism during a press conference.

It was, among other reasons, through fear of serving as a sanctuary for the PMOI’s subversive activities that France decided to strike the group so strongly. As M. Pierre de Bousquet de Florian, Director of Territorial Surveillance (DST), made clear, his agents were not acting on ground they did not know. “Just for 2001, there were 195 attacks and terrorist actions against Iran claimed in statements from Auvers-sur-Oise,” he medicated. He added: “We have learned that they were planning actions outside Iran, aimed notably at Iranian diplomatic missions in Europe. This is a future danger, but a clear one”.

6. Abuse of children for fundraising activities

As stated in the US State Department’s released list of designated terrorist organizations concerning MKO, “In addition to its terrorist credentials, the MEK has also displayed cult-like characteristics”. It also asserted that MKO’s members are required to undertake a vow of “eternal divorce” and that children are reportedly separated from parents at a young age. After separating children from their parents, these innocent children were sent to Western countries to take part in the street fund-raising activities under false pretences of being homeless Iranian children whose parents were executed by Iranian regime.

Reported by the LA Times quoting the FBI, “MKO members in the name of a Charity Committee for the Defense of Human Rights collected money from passengers, mostly Asians, under the false pretenses of helping refugees. They showed the photos of children suffering from hunger and apparently victims of mistreatment and torture in Iran. In this way, they gained the sympathy of passengers by telling them that they want the money to help the refugees.” (Nimrouz, No. 628, March 10, 2000, page 1 and 49.)

7. Establishing an international HQ in West

According to the French intelligence services, the Mojahedin’s aim was to move their “world operational centre” — previously based in Baghdad — to the Val d’Oise. If the searches of about 20 sites in the Val d’Oise did not turn up arms or explosives, the Rajavi’s villa was, nonetheless, ‘a real Fort Apache’. “We were surprised by the security systems,” stated Pierre de Bousquet de Florian. “We found between 8 and 9 million US dollars in cash, as well as systems for coded communications”.

According to an Interior Ministry source, Auvers-sur-Oise had been turned into the Mojahedin’s “International HQ”. Up until March-April [2003], their command structure was in Iraq and only moved with the outbreak of war.

8. Security threat

No European country denies the espionage potentiality of MKO that well threatens the state and social security of any country. The accumulation of sophisticated apparatus in a base where came under the raid of French police needs no further explanation: “Almost 200 parabolic antennas and a hundred computers were seized. Their examination should allow the investigators to sharpen their knowledge of the financial circuits financing the PMOI, which run through several countries and many bank accounts. During their searches, investigators also found radio scanners tuned to police frequencies”.

9. Wounding public emotions

The day after the police operation against the People’s Mojahedin in the Paris suburbs, European and world public opinion were shocked to discover individuals voluntarily turning themselves into human torches.

What level of fanaticism could push seemingly sane and healthy people to such extremes? Moreover, some of the “spectators” tried to block the access of rescue services which could have saved the victims’ lives. The French judicial system could only note the facts and prevent any repetition.

“Two Iranians suspected of preventing the intervention of rescuers while a woman was immolating herself in front of DST headquarters in Paris 011 Wednesday will be brought before an instructional magistrate for their criminal investigation.

French Government spokesperson, Jean-Francois Cope, considered these self-immolations as “obviously, extremely dramatic”. He added, “Alas! It also tells us a great deal about the mindset of their leadership”.

10. Money laundering and financing

One of the big unknowns remains the PMOI’s financing. Must we believe Maryam Rajavi when she flatly claims that the money all comes from fundraising among the Mojahedin and their supporters? This was notably the case in explaining the millions of dollars uncovered during “Operation Theo”. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The PMOI has a lot more at its disposal:

“… Maryam Rajavi rejoiced Thursday when she was freed thanks to the payment of 80,000 euros fixed by the Paris Court of Appeals. The bail was paid as of Thursday morning at the Paris Appeals Court’s administrative offices. Maryam Rajavi has been jailed since 21 June…

As to the 8 million dollars (7 million euros) found in the different homes of Iranian opposition members in Auvers-sur-Oise, Mrs Rajavi insisted that these funds belonged to the Iranian resistance: ‘Not a euro, not a dollar comes from any government or any country,’ she guaranteed, ‘Even if I am not informed of the details, I am sure that the movement can account to the judicial system for each cent’.

This statement is in serious contradiction with the police investigators who all note that large amounts of PMOI money circulate around the world through “dirty” networks.

11. Defying refugees’ rights

MKO has been recognized responsible for a variety of antisocial behaviors against its own defectors living in countries where they have been granted asylum. There are many cases of attacking their meetings and rallies in European countries and injuring them as well as direct and indirect threats. Many of former members have accused MKO of physical and psychological threats after their separation and starting a new life as European citizens.

12. Illegal cross-border travels

Members of the organization used false passports to travel to European countries and raise funds to buy arms and pay for their propaganda.

13. Escalation of costs and surveillance measures

Acceptance of refugees like members of MKO imposes extra costs on any country as has already imposed on France. The boss of France’s Direction for the Surveillance of the Territory (DST), Prefect Pierre de Bousquet confirms the danger posed by MKO:

“But it was the indirect consequences of the American intervention in Iraq that pushed us to accelerate our actions. The concomitant factors of the retreat to Auvers-sur-Oise of its leaders, veteran soldiers and intelligence officers coming to us from many sources were convincing. We could see that the PMOI aimed to establish its new world HQ in France, now that it had lost its Iraqi bases. For reasons of principle, as well as the presence of risks to our fellow citizens, we could not accept these developments”.

14. Operating under aliases

The main problem arises when a group, mostly a proscribed one, comes to operate under a variety of aliases or forms affiliated groups and associations that actually serve to fulfill the objectives of the mother group. MKO is one of the best examples. As described by the US State Department Report on the group: “The MKO’s penchant for aliases has created some confusion. The group’s original Persian name, the Sazeman-e Mojahedin-e Khalq-e Iran, has been shortened and translated into several commonly-used monikers: the Mojahedin-e Khalq, the Mojahedin, the MKO, the Mek, the people’s Mojahedin of Iran, and the PMOI. Currently, the group favors the “PMOI” appellation. The Mojahedin’s deliberate use of the name of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCR) also is misleading”.

MKO’s umbrella associations active only in England outnumbers 20, not speaking of a lot more active in other countries. The fact will reveal the extent of the jeopardy of offshoots of a terrorist organization. None of these organizations and unions was known to be the aliases of MKO when they were permitted to be established.

15. Provoking crises

According to French police, the raid on 17 June 2003 was “one of the biggest undertaken by the DST (French Counter-intelligence) in the last 30 years”. International press agencies reported that it was the result of more than three years of investigation. The post-raid incidents set of one of the serious, unprecedented crisis in France and other European countries. A number of the group’s insiders immolated themselves in public to protest Maryam Rajavi’s arrest. According to reports issued by Mojahedin, “16 people attempted to set themselves alight in three days in Paris, Berne, Rome, London, Ottawa, Athens and Nicosia”. The human tragedy ended with two deaths; two women, Sediqeh Mojaveri, 44-year-old, and Neda Hassani, 19-year-old, died because of the self-immolation injuries.

And there are many more to mention. The European countries as well as other the UN state members have witnessed MKO’s violent reactions to the Iraqi government’s decision to evacuate Ashraf and it agreed to relocate after inflicting many deaths and injuries on the both sides. It might be a scenario repeated in any country where they will be resettled. Besides, Rajavi in his recent message to his disciples has compared them to “ready to launch missiles”. As a result, is it logical in any way to jeopardize the internal security and political relations of a country just for receiving these residents?

The past experiences, at least for the France, has proved that you let some ranking members or leaders of MKO in a country and others will follow and open their way through the abuse of existing gaps in democratic rules and political leverages. While a country that houses them is expected to fully adhere to the principles and regulations and behave them according to international commitments, the group abides by no promise to respect any code of social and political behavior. However, there might be some countries that out of humanitarian concerns and under some external pressures or for political concerns yield and let some to settle on their soil. But they are well aware that they have to bear serious consequences, the first of which will be an angry and strong reaction from the side of Iran that pushes it even to reconsider its diplomatic relations, if it has any. How the public opinion and the opponent parties react is another question.

May 10, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Relocation, A Humanitarian Concern or An Assets Dispute

The humanitarian issue of relocation is different from the material assets dispute

The Iraqi government is reported to have evacuated the fifth group of 416 members of the The humanitarian issue of relocation is different from the material assets dispute Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) from Camp New Iraq, Camp Ashraf, and transferred them to a Temporary Transit Location (TTL) near Baghdad. Unlike the four past groups transferred, overwhelming majority of this convoy were women, 350 out of 416.

In a bid to escape from any accusation of refusing to cooperate to peacefully speed up the process of evacuation, MKO announced it “showed utmost cooperation and agreed to the transfer upon the requests of Mrs. Maryam Rajavi”. But the unnecessary interval of 19 days between the transfer of the fourth and the fifth group was mainly because of MKO’s providing of unreasonable impediments and invention of excuses. In its latest statement delivered a few days prior to transfer, MKO offered new suggestions which clearly indicated that it was walking on a path of delaying the process of relocation and prolonging its stay at Ashraf.

The suggestion it intended to impose on the Iraqi Government stressed on moving a big bulk of utilities and instruments from Ashraf to TTL and selling the unmovable at a big price. However, the Iraqi Government disregarded MKO offers and disappointed it in what the group refers to as “two weeks of negotiations and repeatedly changing the draft agreement with Ambassador Kobler”. The Iraqi Government seems to have learned how to deal with petulant demands of the group and the utility vehicles MKO had prepared to take were stopped at the gate and returned back to Ashraf. Like the previous convoys supervised by the UN monitors nothing but the personal belongings, as stipulated in the MoU signed between the Iraqi Government and the UN, were permitted to pass the inspectors at the gate.

The agreement reached at the present is relocation of Ashraf residents to TTL. The question of properties and holdings MKO claim to possess and insists to take is not so simple an issue to be negotiated simultaneous with the relocation process. The humanitarian issue of relocation is different from the material assets dispute.

May 7, 2012 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Rajavi’s Mansions – Part1

History is loaded with injustice of kings who built their mansions on bodies of deprived, poor While the MKO’s propaganda was all the time speaking of the group’s bad financial situation and the group’s urgent need for funds, Massoud Rajavi was spending millions of dollars to build mansions people. Seemingly the glory and majesty of their kingdom depends on their mansions; purity of their thought and action is revealed in the breadth, beauty and number of their mansions.

Their large ,small, red, green, white, summer, winter, country mansions, were all nothing but a tall wall that distanced them from mass’s poverty, hunger and pain and covered their debauchery and sensualism.

The common aspect of all kings including Pharos of Egypt, Roman Emperors and Islamic Califats was their luxurious lives in their palaces. They treated masses as their slaves who had to work, to even die so that their masters could live a comfortable life in their luxurious mansions.

Whom I’d like to write about here is not among those kings, emperors or Pharos but a power-crazy and delusional personality who has madly imitated those kingdoms and has built a lot of mansions for himself by victimizing and deceiving thousands of innocent individuals who act as his slaves. I write the article to record what I witnessed in the history and to awake those who may still believe in the MKO leaders’ so-called honesty, sacrifice, revolutionary, anti-discrimination and anti-exploitation ideas. They should know that their believe is just an illusion because a revolutionary leader who claims honesty and devotion should live a life like his public; he should be honest to his followers and supporters, but, it’s a pity that no honesty, no devotion and no sincerity is found in Massoud Rajavi’s personal life.

Rajavi’s appearance may not seem like Pharos, Emperors and kings but his interior life is the same as them. He has servants, maids, workers and a queen. He has torturers, prisons and turnkeys. He doesn’t admit any opposite idea and eventually threatens or kills his opponents or systematically destroy their character. He lives in expensive luxurious mansions. He thinks that it is his right to live a comfortable life but his forces should live in difficult situation to maintain their revolutionary spirit!! Maryam Sanjabi

Appreciating my friends’ cooperation, I note that this series of articles on “Rajavi’s Mansions” was authored by the help of a number of my friends who are also former members of the MKO.

While the MKO’s propaganda was all the time speaking of the group’s bad financial situation and the group’s urgent need for funds, Massoud Rajavi was spending millions of dollars to build mansions, houses and safe havens for himself and Maryam Rajavi all over Iraqi territory.

He built various houses in different parts of Iraq regarding the security and protection condition of the place. Some were used temporarily and some were his permanent mansions. I note some of them:

Badee’ Zadegan Base
This base was located near Baghdad and was founded in 1996 and named Hanif Base. It was essentially one of the five military bases established in 1996 and 1997. Since 1997, the base was turned in to the main political and propaganda headquarters. In western side of Badi Zadegan base, about one fourth of the base’s breadth was allocated to Rajavi’s private mansion. The place was built so strongly and decorated so lavishly. During following years more rooms and halls were added to the main building. The green space included a pool and very beautiful trees. The mansion was departed from other parts of the base with very tall walls.

Mohammd Abad Base in Kefri
The base included some trenches and ramparts in Kefri hills which apprently looked like a village and used by the Rajavis during Kuwait War. When the coalition forces attacked Kuwait, the trenches were camouflaged like a village. It was soon equipped for the Rajavis.
Rajavi spent most of that 40-day long war and bombardment in the place while other forces guarding the base had no trenches and had to stay in tents or shelters.
After the war ended, the base was destroyed by the group because they didn’t want the Kurds to reach it.

Forough Base in Karbala
Forough 1 was a villa that was given to the Rajavis by Iraqi Intelligence service to protect them from coalition forces’ bombardment.
As the coalition troops didn’t target religious cities like Karbala, the rajavis moved to the base where an Iraqi Intelligence official always accompanied them. Following the Iraqi shiits uprisings in Southern cities, the Rajavis were forced to flee the base. Some of Rajavis’ guards stayed at the base, they were then killed by people. It was later said that those guards had gone there on mission because they didn’t want anyone to know about Rajavi’s covert base in Karbala.

A Large Base Near Border
There was a large base near Baquba not far from Iranian border. It was turned in to a green zone with elegant buildings that a 5-member team was always guarding.
I went to the base a few times but I could never know about its exact name and address. The base was never used publically and just a few members of Rajavi’s guards had information about it.

Tikrit Palace
As the result of Rajavi’s hard work to gain one of saddam’s palaces, this palace in Tikrit was given to him. Large amounts were spent to make it more luxurious but the base was never used by the Rajavis because of the threatened geographical situation. It only satisfied his greed.
Samira Palace
It was a two-story villa in Samira, called “Agha”. It was used for Rajavi’s pilgrimage time at this religious city. Although it was highly luxuriously equipped, it was not used more than two times.

Alavi Base
The base was originally an anti-bomb trench and the headquarters of Saddam’s Northern front. It had a lot of rooms, a conference hall and an eating place. It was completely reconstructed and furnished but it was destroyed following the American occupation of Iraq. The base had been granted to Rajavi as a gift for the services he offered Saddam Hussein during Iraq-Iran war.

By Maryam Sanjabi ,MKO defector – Translated by Nejat Society

May 7, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Ashraf Properties; Has MKO A Right to Claim?

MKO plans to leave Iraq with abundant sums it has hardly any right in its claiming

The first backlashes of Mojahedin Khlaq Organization MKO against the Iraqi Government’s decision to close camp Ashraf and expel its residents from the country were a variety of violent behavior and threatening tone. The first practical approach was to provoke the Iraqi forces, not acquainted with the group’s self-destructive tactics, to show a violent reaction to the residents’ protests. That was enough for the group to run a propaganda atmosphere in which they could express the members as oppressed victims and accordingly get some global support to put off the deadline for the closure of the camp and expulsion.

Despite inflicting casualties on the both sides, the violent approach proved to be a complete failure. But it did not take long when there came the news that MKO agreed to relocate to a temporary center near Baghdad “to prove genuine goodwill gesture for a peaceful solution”. Of course, it was the beginning of another story, a new round of inventing unreasonable excuses to delay relocation. However, on January 31, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative, Martin Kobler, announced the readiness of the Temporary Transit Location TTL, the new camp, for the transfer of the residents and it was confirmed that the camp met human rights and humanitarian standards to house them. So far nearly half of the Ashraf residents have been transferred to TTL.
And MKO’s devise of the ploys change from day to day. These days it is heavily engaged in making and delivering a variety of statements in a new attempt to have its full control over Ashraf even after the evacuation of the residents. In a new statement, MKO has offered new suggestions which mean forging a compromise rather than making a threat. In a paragraph of the suggestions we read; ”It is necessary that, until arriving at a final solution of the issue, a multitude of individuals remain at Ashraf to safeguard the existing assets and belongings”.
No doubt, under this new pretext Rajavi intends to extend the control over Ashraf to the last days and have it in his possession. The solution of properties and assets at Ashraf is a legal issue to be solved under legal procedures as agreed in the signed MOU in 25 December 2011 and it is not bound to the conditions of agreement to relocation. Under the agreement, “The Government of Iraq permits the residents of Camp Ashraf to bring their individual belongings”. Assessing the real value of properties and belongings of MKO, for which MKO accuses the Iraqi government of not resolving the transferal of property that belongs to the residents of Ashraf, is not so simple an issue as the group has done beforehand. It is a secondary issue to deal with after relocation of residents.
To arrive at a solution of properties it requires interference and supervision of the UN and other concerned international bodies as well as representatives from among the Iraqi people. Not all the claimed properties and assets have a function of legal and civil purpose. Besides, many of the vehicles, instruments and machineries allocated to the group by the ousted dictator belong to Iraqi army and people living in the vicinity. The group should be reminded that it brought nothing when it came to Iraq and all it claims to have owned is out of the bundles of dollars Saddame allocated to it from the pocket of the poor Iraqi people when they needed the sums more than any other time.
It is not fair to let a terrorist cult long fed on Iraqis money accuse their government of seizing millions of dollars its sources and whereabouts are clear. It is not fair to let perpetrators of violence and mercenaries of a fallen dictator have their pockets filled by dollars of oppressed people when expelled and leaving the country. It is typical of the group to get the upper hand in any case. The relocation will end soon but it is already preparing for the next stage, to leave Iraq with abundant sums it has hardly any right in its claiming.

May 6, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MEK and the unspeakable chaos of the rule of law

Via Glenn Greenwald, Daneil Denvir writes about former Governor Ed Rendell trying to explain why he shouldn’t be indicted for providing “material support” to the Iranian cult terrorist group MEK:

One 10-minute speech earned Rendell $20,000, and he frequently flew to Europe to call for MEK’s removal from the terror list. That would appear to fall within the extraordinarily broad definition of “material support” used by theObama administration.

Rendell calls that “ludicrous.” He says, “The only thing we’ve done is spoken out on their behalf. And you certainly can’t in any way encumber free speech in America. You know that ? you’re a journalist.”

I do sort of know that?you shouldn’t be able to encumber free speech. But the Supreme Court did just that, and Muslims have been prosecuted for doing less: a satellite TV salesman sentenced to five years for broadcasting Hezbollah’s TV channel; a man indicted for favorable web comments on shooting U.S. soldiers.

…“Whatever one’s views are on this ruling, it is now binding law. To advocate on behalf of a designated Terrorist group constitutes the felony of ‘providing material support’ if that advocacy is coordinated with the group,” writes Salon blogger and constitutional law attorney Glenn Greenwald. “They’re providing more substantial ‘material support’ to this Terrorist group than many people ? usually vulnerable, powerless Muslims ? who are currently imprisoned for that crime.”

…“If you indict me, [Rendell explained] I hope you know, you have to indict 67 other Americans who did the same thing, including seven generals … [who] served in Iraq. You’d have to indict James Jones, President Obama’s first NSC chief adviser, you’d have to indict former Attorney General [Michael] Mukasey, former FBI Director Louis Freeh … the whole kit and caboodle.” That caboodle is voluminous and high-powered, including Tom Ridge, UN Ambassador John Bolton, Rudolph Giuliani and Howard Dean, among others.

Seriously, don’t tease me…

“You tell me that anyone has the right to restrict my freedom of speech and I’ll tell you you’re dead wrong,” Rendell insists.

I wish I were wrong. The Supreme Court’s three dissenters protested that the decision “gravely and without adequate justification injure[s] interests of the kind the First Amendment protects.” So it does. It’s a frightening law and a horrible ruling that pulverizes First Amendment free speech protections. But as long as political nobodies face prosecution for speech crimes, so should elites. Indict Rendell ? and Ridge, Mukasey, Giuliani, etc. ? or repeal this law.

See here for background on the push inside elite U.S. circles to get the MEK delisted from the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations.

It should be well known that the law simply doesn’t apply to elite members of the American political community. But I just think it’s fascinating that Rendell actually used the argument that, if you indict him, you’ll have to then apply the law to other important people! At least 67 of them! Oh, the unspeakable chaos!

By John Glaser

May 5, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Rendell and Mujahedin Khalq

It’s no surprise that providing “material support” to a terrorist group is against the law. But a 2010 Supreme Court decision, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, concluded it’s not just illegal to

Indict Rendell: Political elites fall on wrong side of bad law

ship grenades or suitcases of cash. “Advocacy performed in coordination with, or at the direction of, a foreign terrorist organization” is also a felony.

Why, then, nearly two months after it was revealed that the Treasury Department is investigating former Gov. Ed Rendell for receiving money from a terrorist group to undertake just that sort of advocacy, has he not been indicted by the Department of Justice?

In recent years, Rendell had delivered speeches in support of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), an Iranian Marxist-Islamist group that resides in an Iraqi desert base and that the U.S. designated a terrorist organization for killing Americans during the 1970s.

Rendell calls that “ludicrous.” He says, “The only thing we’ve done is spoken out on their behalf. And you certainly can’t in any way encumber free speech in America. You know that ― you’re a journalist.”

I do sort of know that―you shouldn’t be able to encumber free speech. But the Supreme Court did just that, and Muslims have been prosecuted for doing less: a satellite TV salesman sentenced to five years for broadcasting Hezbollah’s TV channel; a man indicted for favorable web comments on shooting U.S. soldiers.

Rendell wouldn’t comment on specific cases, but he rightly noted that the First Amendment protected Communist Party activity during the Cold War. So it did, and it does seem incomprehensible that American law could now criminalize speech in support of a war enemy. But as the War on Terror creeps into its eleventh year, presidents Bush and Obama have erected a monstrous national security state and, in the process, rendered American civil liberties unrecognizably feeble.

“Whatever one’s views are on this ruling, it is now binding law. To advocate on behalf of a designated Terrorist group constitutes the felony of ‘providing material support’ if that advocacy is coordinated with the group,” writes Salon blogger and constitutional law attorney Glenn Greenwald. “They’re providing more substantial ‘material support’ to this Terrorist group than many people ― usually vulnerable, powerless Muslims ― who are currently imprisoned for that crime.”

Rendell, however, contends that he’s protected because the funds, as far as he knows, were “raised by individual Iranian expat groups” in the U.S. and Europe.

“Please,” Greenwald tells me. “Iranians who love MEK pay the fees in order to keep a thin layer of separation―any real investigation will find the source of those funds.”

Finally, Rendell says the law should not apply here: The State Department has urged him to dialogue with the MEK. And MEK’s blue-chip American supporters ― could they all have broken the law?

“If you indict me, I hope you know, you have to indict 67 other Americans who did the same thing, including seven generals … [who] served in Iraq. You’d have to indict James Jones, President Obama’s first NSC chief adviser, you’d have to indict former Attorney General [Michael] Mukasey, former FBI Director Louis Freeh … the whole kit and caboodle.” That caboodle is voluminous and high-powered, including Tom Ridge, UN Ambassador John Bolton, Rudolph Giuliani and Howard Dean, among others.

“You tell me that anyone has the right to restrict my freedom of speech and I’ll tell you you’re dead wrong,” Rendell insists.

I wish I were wrong. The Supreme Court’s three dissenters protested that the decision “gravely and without adequate justification injure[s] interests of the kind the First Amendment protects.” So it does. It’s a frightening law and a horrible ruling that pulverizes First Amendment free speech protections. But as long as political nobodies face prosecution for speech crimes, so should elites. Indict Rendell ― and Ridge, Mukasey, Giuliani, etc. ― or repeal this law.

By Daniel Denvir ,City Paper

May 5, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Why delisting the MKO is a threat for peace?

To illuminate the minds of those who wonder why supporting Mujahedin Khalq Organization Why delisting the MKO is a threat for peace? cause danger to the world, we should have a look at various records on the history and current practices of the group. There have been various documented reports on the MKO including reports by RAND Corporation, 2009 and HRW’s “No Exit”, 2005 but recent analysis on the group and its supporters in the West sheds light on the potential threat of harboring a terrorist designated cult.

After the last enlightening article by Seymour Hersh on the American financial and military support for the group a large number of analysts and journalists commented on the issue criticizing the US government for their double standards towards terrorists.

Members of the MKO are so notoriously famous that no country is willing to accept them. Their fate in Iraq is uncertain. Martin kobler, the head of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) warns that finding a place for the group members after they leave Iraq “is the most difficult part of the story”. No country is willing to accept a number of brainwashed, isolated military trained cult-like insurgents. Josh Rogin of the cable also suggests that part of the difficulty of dealing with the MEK is that they have been cut off from the world for years and little is known about their individual histories.[1]
Having been isolated in a Camp in Iraqi deserts, under sever mind control techniques, the MKO have turned into a cult of personality that Jeremiah Goulka truly describes:

“I studied the MEK for the U.S. military and visited Camp Ashraf, the MEK facility 40 miles north of Baghdad. I also interviewed former MEK members. As Human Rights Watch also concluded, I saw that the MEK is a cult. It uses brainwashing, sleep deprivation, and forced labor to indoctrinate members. It segregates men from women, mandates celibacy, forces married members to divorce (except for its leaders), and separates families and friends who must seek permission just to converse.

MEK members must report their private sexual thoughts at group meetings and endure public shaming. In a Catch-22, those who deny having sexual thoughts are accused of hiding them and shamed, too. The cult has but one purpose: to put itself in charge in Iran.”[2]

Goulka concludes that an MEK regime in Iran will bring neither liberty nor justice.

The MKO is often described by as a “cult-like organization” with “totalitarian tendencies”. Former members of the group interviewed by various human rights bodies and journalists explain how they were victims of the totalitarian cult like organization. Owen Benett Jones in recent article on BBC “An Iranian Mystery: just who are the MEK” clarifies the two sides of positions towards the group. He himself wonders who to believe, former members who are either” embittered “or “broken”; or western supporters of the group who are either financially “motivated” or just “naïve”. However, he comes to a conclusion with his dilemma:” in over 25 years of reporting .I’ve been lied to often enough but, as successive former MEK members told what they had been through, their tears seemed real enough to me.”[3]

The MKO has also a four-decade history of violence, assassination and espionage against the Iranian people and authorities, as well as targeting American military and civilians living in Iran in the 1970’s. Tony Cartalucci also strongly criticizes Western support for the MKO as “treason and overt criminality”. He writes about the group’s terrorist acts:

"Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK), has carried out decades of brutal terrorist attacks, assassinations, and espionage against the Iranian government and its people, as well as targeting Americans including the attempted kidnapping of US Ambassador Douglas MacArthur II, the attempted assassination of USAF Brigadier General Harold Price, the successful assassination of Lieutenant Colonel Louis Lee Hawkins, the double assassinations of Colonel Paul Shaffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, and the successful ambush and killing of American Rockwell International employees William Cottrell, Donald Smith, and Robert Krongard.

"Admissions to the deaths of the Rockwell International employees can be found within a report written by former US State Department and Department of Defense official Lincoln Bloomfield Jr. on behalf of the lobbying firm Akin Gump in an attempt to dismiss concerns over MEK’s violent past and how it connects to its current campaign of armed terror – a testament to the depths of depravity from which Washington and London lobbyists operate."[4]

But why is that the MKO can gain such a support from the West although it is literally a cult-like terrorist organization?

Actually, the MKO foists itself as a democratic freedom lover organization. Goulka writes about the MKO’s propaganda and how western figures are trapped by it:

"The MEK presents itself well and is good at running “Astroturf” campaigns. Its NCRI is a self-proclaimed “parliament in exile,” dedicated to the principles of western liberal democracy. Over the years, lots of American civilian and military officials have failed to do their homework and fallen for the MEK’s sales spiel, excited as they were to hear what they wanted to hear. (If something sounds too good to be true…)"[5]

What is the potential danger of harboring a terrorist cult?

As it is widely known by different reports, the MKO is more than a terrorist group, it is a cult of personality, around a disappeared leader, Massoud Rajavi very similar to that of Al-Qaida around Osama bin Ladan, maybe more dangerous. Giving financial and military support to members of a cult of personality with a history of numerous terrorist attacks may hardly endanger the Iranian National security because the cult of Rajavi barely has supporters inside Iran. Most Iranians view them as traitors. But, it will risk the US national security. Removing the MKO from US list of Foreign Terrorist Organization will allow the MKO to act –even more freely– in the US society. Members who are totally obedient to their leaders will not hesitate to run their cause in a western free environment –where they can accelerate the leaders ambitions for power achievement in Tehran. To gain such a goal war with Iran would be inevitable and more American soldiers would go to endless battles and more taxpayers’ dollars would d be spent for the so-called US national security – which is already threatened by the cult of Rajavi. The MKO is a key for war and insecurity not only for Iran and the region but for the US national security.

By Mazda Parsi

References:
[1]Rogin, Josh, U.N. Iraq chief:the countries of the world must take MEK ‘refugees’, The Cable, April26,2012
[2]Goulka, Jeremia, THE IRAN HAWKS FAVORITE TERROR GROUP, Salon.com, March 28, 2012
[3] Benett Jones, Owen, An Iranian mystery: just who are the MEK?, BBC, April16,2012
[4]Cartalucci, Tony, US State Department Hands Terror Cult US Base in Iraq, Infowars.com, March 9, 2012
[5]Goulka, Jeremia, INVESTIGATINS BEGIN INTO MEK SUPPORTERS, Salon.com, March28, 2012

May 3, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

A Lobbyist or a Messenger to Mankind

The predicament of residents at temporary location shouldn’t be tied to MKO’s terrorist tag

I always wondered how the survivor of a human tragedy could be abused for the justification of The predicament of residents at temporary location shouldn’t be tied to MKO’s terrorist tag another human tragedy just taking place before the eyes of the world. Just last year on April 27, Elie Wiesel, a survivor of Hitler’s death camp at Buchenwald, was invited to make a speech at a conference in Paris organized by Mojahedin Khalq Organization ,MKO to denounce a tragic event at Camp Ashraf. In fact, the Ashraf residents had the strict order to provoke bloody attacks since the group needed fresh blood and a few martyrs and wounded people to feed its new round of propaganda against the Iraqi government to maintain the blanket of secrecy surrounding the camp. The provoked attack, however, resulted in thirty-six death and tens more were wounded.

As reported by Washington Times, Mr. Wiesel once more spoke at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum last month. There he illustrated a new profile of himself that besides being a “messenger to mankind” was also on the list of some other American colleagues lobbying for the removal of MKO from the State Department’s list of FTO. In his speech he said: “The thing to do now when it comes to Ashraf and Liberty camp residents in Iraq is simple: Remove the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) from the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. It just takes some principle and spine”.

Mr. Weisel is quoted he had vowed that whenever a human being is persecuted, “I shall not be silent.” But he claims he didn’t know about Ashraf until shortly before the attack, as he asked at the conference, “Why didn’t the world know?” it is our question as well. Why didn’t the world know about hundreds of people enslaved against their will within the bastion of a terrorist cult in the middle of a wasteland in Iraq? And now that you and the world have come to know, why nobody feels a responsibility to help them regain their freedom?

The predicament of residents at Ashraf and temporary location, as they call it Liberty camp, has nothing to do with the removal of their group from a terrorist list. It is not the question of an organization, it is a humanitarian issue. The problem of the members relocated to temporary location has to be dealt with regardless of the group’s entity. The problem is not MKO’s terrorist tag; to remind, it has already been removed from the EU terrorist list but still none of the EU member countries has accepted to receive the residents as the refugees.

And Mr. Weisel has a great responsibility as a “messenger to mankind” to fulfill as he has already vowed that “I shall not be silent.” We deeply believe that he and the world shall not remain silent. Instead of working all your lobbying power to delist a terrorist entity, become the voice of suffering souls crying for freedom, to convince the world to have open arms for them. Nearly half of the Ashraf dissidents have been transferred to temporary location near Baghdad, but none has been relocated since no third country has yet consented to take them as refugees.

By M. Nelson

May 3, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The EU, the discrepancy between words and actions

The destiny of those in TTL lies in the hands of those who de-proscribed MKO

Following an order by the European Court of Justice on December 4, 2008, the European Union removed Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO from its terror list on 27 January 2009. In fact, the court agreed with MKO that the EU did not give sufficient reasons for including the group on the terrorist list, and it ordered the EU to remove the group. At the time, Jesus Carmona, a spokesman for the Council of the European Union, said that: “The court did not enter into the question of defining or not MKO as a terrorist organization. The only thing that the court decided … was that procedures were not respected.”

Was it really for respecting the court’s ruling or for other political and apolitical reasons, the EU immediately removed MKO from its terrorist list. But many were of the opinion that the EU’s questionable decision to take the group off the list was tantamount to encouraging terrorism and criticized the move because it would create an opportunity for terrorists in Europe to commit terrorist acts against European citizens. However, neither at that time nor at the present has the group provided convincing evidences that it has denounced terrorism in any form.

Beside its de-proscription, MKO enjoys a big bulk of supporters and advocates among a variety of European institutions and parliaments. But the challenge it is facing at the moment, when it needs all these advantages more than any time, is that none of the EU country members have so far agreed to receive the expelled members of the group as the refugees on their soil. Their meaningful silence is an indication of the fact that to delist a terrorist group for any political cause is one thing and to let it on their soil with all its threats and terrorist potentialities still in question is something else. None is still convinced that MKO can be trusted on the claims of having denounced terrorism.

Once Alejo Vidal-Quadras, an European advocate of MKO, just in the celebration of group’s removal from the EU list stated that “After the removal of the PMOI from the blacklist, any violation of the rights of Ashraf residents is unacceptable, and we will not accept it. Abusing Ashraf is an abuse of democracy, an abuse of the sacred right of asylum, an abuse of international law, and an abuse of humanitarian values. We will confront all such violations”. Were these words put into his mouth by MKO or was he really anxious about the condition of Ashraf residents? Now more than 3000 expelled residents, most of them victims of the terrorist cult, are waiting in Iraq with uncertainty. And the EU countries as the defenders of human rights have a responsibility to fulfill. If these residents are terrorists, why these same European countries have delisted them? And if they are human beings whom they believe their rights have been violated, then, why are they turning a blind eye to the victims of the modern slavery?

The EU foreign policy towards MKO seems to be more or less like that of the United States. Despite America’s promises of removing the group from its terror list and lobbying efforts to transfer the residents to third countries, neither the US itself nor any of its allies have so far shown a willingness to receive members on their soil. It is also the same with the UN Members States. The words of Martin Kobler, special representative of the Secretary-General in his briefing to the Security Council well expresses how concerned he is about the epidemic unwillingness to accept residents waiting at temporary Transit Location TTL to be processed as refugees: “I reiterate my call to Members States to accept the residents of the Camp in their countries. Now that UNHCR has begun its work, it is high time for the international community to accept eligible candidates and fund the relocation process. The support of the international community is urgently needed. … Without international support, the process cannot succeed.”

It is a proven fact that the Western countries and the US stand behind MKO and voice protection to demonstrate it as a bogy and leverage in their political battle and disputes with Iranian regime. MKO has been a problem more for these countries than for Iranian regime; one day they proscribe it a terrorist group and the next day they remove or threaten to delist it. The real victims are the members; for long they have been the slaves of the terrorist cult played as a puppet in the hands of Western countries and wandering in a variety of countries and in Iraq. Their destinies as humans with a right to live free lie in the hands of those who de-proscribed them. We are waiting to see if political businessmen and investors really believe in their slogans of defending human rights to end the agonies of these suffering victims and come to their help.

May 1, 2012 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts