Articles

Iran Group to Stay on U.S. Terror List

WASHINGTON — The State Department has decided to keep Iran’s largest opposition group, Mujahedin e-Khalq, on its list of terrorist organizations, according to U.S. officials.
The decision, which could set up a legal battle in the U.S., came before the European Union on Monday removed Mujahedin e-Khalq, or the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, from its own roster of terrorist groups.
Some Middle East analysts say the State Department’s Jan. 7 ruling could assist President Barack Obama in efforts to hold direct negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program.
In Brussels, the Iranian opposition group pursued the same dual strategy of lobbying and legal action within the EU that last year succeeded in removing it from the United Kingdom’s terrorist-group list.
In 2008, Britain’s government lost a long-running legal battle to keep MEK on its list of terrorists after a London court found the government had "no reliable evidence" on which to base a finding that MEK continued to be a terrorist group or intended to commit terrorist acts. MEK waged another court battle in the EU to be removed from the roster of terrorist groups.
The MEK is pursuing similar legal and lobbying campaigns in Washington. An MEK official said the organization plans to appeal the State Department ruling in a U.S. court by Feb. 11.
The new U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, reaffirmed Monday that Washington is seeking "direct diplomacy" with Iran as it pushes for an end to Tehran’s nuclear program.
The State Department’s ruling was approved by then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. U.S. officials said Monday they didn’t expect another review of the MEK’s status soon under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Iran’s spokesman at the United Nations, Mir Mohammad Mohammadi, assailed the EU’s removal of MEK from its list of terrorist organizations.
Javier Solana, the EU’s foreign policy chief, said, "What we are doing today is abiding by the decision of the court," according to wire services.
The U.S. has charged the MEK with assassinating senior Iranian officials and bombing overseas Iranian missions.
MEK leaders say the group has renounced violence and is working to promote a democratic Iran. It says the U.S. is using the terrorism designation as a political tool to spur negotiations with Tehran.
"The most important part of a changed policy in the U.S. is to set aside the appeasement of the mullahs and taking the terror label off" the MEK, said Maryam Rajavi, the organization’s leader.
Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com
By JAY SOLOMON, Wall Street Journal,JANUARY 26, 2009

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123301682580817775.html

January 28, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Europe may find itself providing refuge for MKO Terrorists

EU removes Iranian group from terrorism list

The new status of the Mujahedin Khalq organization, which seeks to overthrow the Iranian government, is likely to complicate international diplomacy with Tehran.
Reporting from Paris and Beirut — The European Union on Monday announced the removal of a high-profile Iranian opposition group from its list of terrorists, a victory for a movement that European governments have described as a dangerous sect and prosecuted on terrorism charges.
The change in the status of the Mujahedin Khalq organization, or MKO, which seeks to overthrow the Iranian government, is likely to complicate attempts by the international community to reach a diplomatic settlement with Tehran over a range of issues.
The decision, announced at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, results from recent legal and diplomatic developments combined with intense lobbying by the group, whose leader, Maryam Rajavi, lives in France.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement decrying the ruling as a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373, which requires governments to freeze the funds and halt the activities of those involved in acts of terrorism.
"The MKO’s hands are stained with the blood of thousands of innocent Iranians and non-Iranians," said the statement, according to the Iranian Students News Agency. "The delisting is invalid and condemned."
Analysts said European leaders probably acted out of diplomatic expediency because of the impending expulsion from Iraq of nearly 3,000 members of the opposition group’s military wing, who once fought against their homeland on behalf of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Europe may find itself providing refuge for some of those fighters, and could not do so if the terrorist label persisted.
Iran quickly signaled that the move could complicate deliberations with the West, which wants Tehran to curtail sensitive aspects of its nuclear program and rein in support for militant groups opposed to Israel.
"The EU plans to use the MKO as leverage against Iran in the nuclear talks," said an editorial Monday in the conservative daily Politics of the Day. "The EU should tell the world why it blacklists Lebanese and Palestinian resistance groups fighting Israeli aggression but clears the MKO, which has committed countless crimes in Iran and Iraq."
Protesters in Tehran gathered around the French and German embassies to denounce the decision, according to the official Islamic Republic News Agency, demanding the "extradition" of MKO members "who have killed many of our children and families."
Opposition leader Rajavi in turn described the decision as a "stinging defeat for the European policy of complacency" toward the Iranian regime. "The inscription of the Iranian resistance on the blacklist has helped prolong the regime of religious fascism in Iran," she said, according to a report by Agence France-Presse.
The MKO remains on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations, a designation it acquired in 1997. European leaders made it clear Monday that they do not view the organization as fully rehabilitated. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and several colleagues warned that the MKO could be again designated as a terrorist group depending on its activities and on a French appeal of a Dec. 4 decision by an EU court to unfreeze nearly $9 million of the group’s assets.
The MKO was founded in the 1960s as a radical and often violent guerrilla group opposed to the U.S.-backed monarchy of Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi. It took part in the 1979 revolution that ousted him.
But the group quickly fell out with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the rest of the country’s clerical leadership. Many of its supporters were jailed, and the MKO launched a campaign of bombings against leaders of the revolutionary government.
During the 1980s Iran-Iraq war, the group fought alongside Hussein’s troops against the Islamic Republic, a move that earned it the anger of many Iranians. Iraqi Kurds allege that the MKO helped crush an uprising against Hussein after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
Several thousand members live in Camp Ashraf, a desolate patch of desert and tumbleweed near Baqubah, Iraq. A 2005 report by Human Rights Watch said the camp was rife with abuse, citing evidence of "prolonged incommunicado and solitary confinement" as well as "beatings, verbal and psychological abuse, coerced confessions, threats of execution, and torture" against members who don’t conform to the group’s sometimes bizarre rules and rituals.
Its blend of Islamist and Marxist ideologies alienates both supporters and opponents of the Islamic Republic. Iran watchers in Europe and the U.S. say the organization has little public appeal. But it mounted an all-out lobbying campaign that won over legislators, especially in Britain, according to Farhad Khosrokhavar, an Iranian French expert on Islamic extremism.
"They have been very successful at giving a positive picture of themselves in Europe," Khosrokhavar said in a telephone interview. "I think many people have been duped by them, especially in the British Parliament."
Khosrokhavar predicted that the EU decision would only increase Iran’s animosity toward the West.
"The Islamic Republic will be stronger in its suspicion of the West and European Union," he said. "My guess is they will be angry, and the one issue where they will be even more inflexible is the nuclear issue."
Rajavi and other leaders were arrested in 2003, when more than 1,000 police officers raided their compound outside Paris. France’s top anti-terrorism judge charged that they were involved in terrorism in Iran and plotting violence in Europe as well.
The investigation, which was assisted by the FBI in the United States, did not turn up powerful proof. A lawyer for the group said Monday that prosecutors should throw out the still-pending case.
"One finds oneself confronting a judicial dossier that is empty of substance after the removal from the list," said the lawyer, Patrick Badouin, according to French reports.
daragahi@latimes.com
Times staff writer Sebastian Rotella in Madrid contributed to this report.

By Achrene Sicakyuz and Borzou Daragahi

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-opposition27-2009jan27,0,1790285.story

January 28, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Iranian Resistance Group a Source of Contention in Iraq

During his speech on New Year’s Day to celebrate the official transfer of Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone to Iraqi control, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki declared Jan. 1 the “day of sovereignty” and congratulated his compatriots for having waited so long. He also warned that an Iranian resistance group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), would no longer be able to have a base on Iraqi territory.
To some Western observers in Baghdad, it seemed like an odd thing for al-Maliki to mention, given the more momentous theme of the day. The MEK is an obscure group known for launching attacks on Iran in the 1980s and ’90s, when Iraq and Iran were bitter, warring enemies. But since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the MEK has been stripped of its weapons, confined to its base at Camp Ashraf about 80 miles north of Baghdad and guarded by U.S. troops. The group is hardly an immediate threat to Iraqi security, or even particularly relevant to the challenges Iraq faces under the new U.S.-Iraq security pact.
But when the U.S. military formally transferred control of Camp Ashraf back to the Iraqi government on Jan. 1, the MEK’s fate suddenly became an issue. The group is a source of contention for Iran and the U.S., Iraq’s two biggest allies, who are increasingly vying for influence as Baghdad’s post–Saddam Hussein Shi’ite government asserts its independence. All three countries label the MEK a terrorist organization. Iran wants the group handed over for prosecution. But the U.S. has pledged to ensure the group’s rights under international law.
The question now isn’t just what to do with the 3,500 Iranians at Camp Ashraf — it’s also who decides their future. Past U.S. ties to the group suggest that the Geneva Convention isn’t the only reason Washington might not want to throw the MEK to the wolves just yet. But how deeply is Washington invested? The answer may lie in how Baghdad chooses to deal with the group.
Founded in Iran in the 1960s on an ideological platform merging Marxism and Islamism, the MEK worked alongside followers of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini to overthrow the shah in the 1979 Islamic revolution, and assisted in the ensuing U.S. embassy hostage crisis. But they clashed with Khomeini in the years that followed, leading to the killing, imprisonment and exile of thousands of the group’s members. In 1986 the MEK set up a base at Camp Ashraf, located in Iraq’s eastern Diyala province, and began receiving funding and protection from Saddam to launch attacks over the border into Iran.
Despite its position on the U.S. terrorist list since 1997, and reports by former members of abusive and cultlike practices at Ashraf, the MEK has gathered support from some surprising places abroad — especially since the U.S. invasion — by pitching itself as a viable opposition to the mullahs in Tehran. “They have been extremely clever and very, very effective in their propaganda and lobbying of members of Congress,” says Gary Sick, a Persian Gulf expert at Columbia University’s Middle East Institute and the author of All Fall Down: America’s Tragic Encounter With Iran. “They get all sorts of people to sign their petitions. Many times the Congressmen don’t know what they’re signing.” But others, Sick adds, “are quite aware of the fact that this is a designated terrorist organization, and they are quite willing to look the other way for a group that they think is a democratic alternative to the Iranian regime.”
The group’s Paris-based umbrella organization, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, has held fundraisers in Washington. One of the group’s former spokesmen, Alireza Jafarzadeh, now serves as a Fox News foreign affairs analyst. From Paris, the group’s leader, Maryam Rajavi, has waged an effective p.r. campaign, gathering a following of European MPs to support removal of the group from the E.U.’s terrorist list and to oppose Ashraf’s closure.
Even some Iraqis see value in keeping the camp intact. “We have many differences with Iran, and Iran is very deeply involved in Iraq, so I don’t think it’s wise to end the Iranian resistance,” said Salah al-Mutlaq, a Sunni member of parliament from the Iraqi National Dialogue Front. “For the Americans, surrendering the Mujahedin-e Khalq file to the Iraqi government is a big mistake.”
For the most part, however, the MEK is no more popular with the Iraqi population than it is with the central government. In his speech from the Green Zone on New Year’s Day, al-Maliki made it clear that the MEK would lose its protected status. “This group has been labeled a terrorist organization,” al-Maliki said. “It can no longer operate in Iraq after today because it has caused a political crisis that contradicts the constitution … We will never force any of these people to go back to their country … but Iraq cannot be a base for these people.”
The move to oust the MEK was anticipated, but the promise not to deport them to Iran was a welcome relief for the group’s supporters and human rights organizations. For months, the National Council of Resistance of Iran has led demonstrations in New York, Paris, Geneva and Washington to protest the possible transfer of Camp Ashraf’s residents to Iran. Al-Maliki’s decision not to hand them over may indicate a small U.S. victory.
While the U.S. government has remained relatively quiet on the Ashraf issue lately, Washington’s approach isn’t entirely passive. In a Jan. 1 press release, the U.S. embassy in Baghdad said an unspecified number of U.S. troops have remained at the camp since the formal handover of control to Iraq. “U.S. forces will maintain a presence at Camp Ashraf and will continue to assist the government of Iraq in carrying out its assurances of humane treatment of the residents of Camp Ashraf,” the release stated. The Iraqi government provided written assurances that the group would be treated in accordance with Iraqi law, and the U.S. government would remain involved in resolving the group’s future, according to the release. U.S. embassy officials declined to comment on what that future might look like.
Just two days after making his declaration to the MEK, al-Maliki left for a scheduled diplomatic visit to Iran — his fourth since taking office. The Iraqi Prime Minister was expected to try to ease fears that Iraq might be used as a base to attack Iran. He has pledged that won’t happen. But it remains uncertain as to what is in store for the MEK.
— With reporting by Mazin Ezzat / Baghdad

By Abigail Hauslohner – time.com

January 27, 2009 0 comments

Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

A Different Definition of Human Rights

In so lovable a world that even animals enjoy their own rights to be protected against man’s savagery, why should not terrorists have their own protectors to defend them against threats that might be of any harm to them? There are those who believe that the only way to achieve their goals is through the force of violence and perishing other fellow human beings. We may call them terrorists. But there are others who believe that it is an idea for itself and they are also human beings that deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of having shown no respect for others’ rights and the life of their victims.
The advocates of the terrorists reason that according to the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights they are human beings and thus, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” and that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance”. But, do they deserve to be dealt according to the same rights and rules that non-terrorists do?
There come situations when the same terrorists whose atrocities have stained the history of a nation adopt a new tactic to pose as non-terrorist and pro-democratic, believing that the new generations have totally forgotten what they have done in the past. Or find an opportunity to be cared by some who, for political interests, forget their globally chanted slogans of “combating terrorism” and pretend to be concerned about the spread of violence against their own nations. For them, the enemies of their enemy, even if they themselves would already call them terrorists and hold in leash to curb their threat, are not terrorists with no conscience and spirit of humanity; suddenly they turn to be human beings whose rights have been disregarded and they consider it a responsibility to take a valiant effort to defend them.
The EU’s decision to remove, if the EU foreign ministers reach the conclusion, the terrorist cult of Mojahedin Khalq from its terrorist blacklist will not change the group’s terrorist nature at all. The Iranian history has countless instances of bloody chapters depicted by brutal atrocities of Mojahedin Khalq terrorists, not speaking of their evil conspiracies against Iraqi people when they came to collaborate with the ousted dictator.
The EU foreign ministers are to meet on Monday in a bid to make the final decision on the group’s status and possibly take the group off the 27-nation bloc’s list of terrorist organizations. It happens just at a time when the group is reported by the Iraqi government to have plotted suicide attack against the Iraqi security forces protecting the group’s main resident camp, Camp Ashraf.
I do believe that majority of those members held in Camp Ashraf are no more part of the terrorist group since they are held against their will and are ready to leave if the opportunity is granted. They are also victims of a terrorist ideology that the leaders never consent to change. For sure, even if the EU wins the consensus to take the group out of the terrorist list, they can never change the ideology upon which the group is founded. They have to explain for the public opinion that how is that some of their allies sent forces to Iraq to confront terrorism but discuss to exonerate a terrorist group settled there of the charges for which the Iraqi government is determined to expel them. Whose rights are really being violated; the victims or the victimizers? Who knows, maybe they have developed a different version of defining human rights!

January 27, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Accepting Iranian Ben Ladan batters European Council Legitimacy

Never accept Iranian Ben Ladan in the European parliament to batter the popular legitimacy of the European nation’s House. Undoubtedly, Maryam Rajavi Accepting Iranian Ben Ladan batters European Council Legitimacy (Iranian Ben Ladan) the leader of the People Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI) is more dangerous and vicious than Afghan Ben Lad an. The west should be on a high alert not to be decoyed by her new sham guise as an advertisement released via her recently under the title of “the ten- point platform for future Iran” in US daily news paper, the Washington Times in January 14 issue. Mr. President, please pay attention to my reasons as a live witness and her victim during last twenty years who has been under her authority and cage in Ashraf garrison situated in Iraq. Meanwhile, I have been separated from Mojahedin cult a year ago and came to France.
In her advertisement, she tries to express her dreams and illusions for “future Iran” with the ill-usage of the international norms and conventions. But, fortunately, she has even no place in her former Ashraf garrison, so, how she intends to make the history of Iran!?!
Let me explain an Iranian maxim which is appropriate for her conditions to make everybody snicker for a while. “A villager person was not allowed to enter the village, but she asked the address of the village bailiff home”. No doubt, Maryam Rajavi has the same story of the villager with her perpetrated crimes and deceits. So that, she has no permission to settle down in any state either USA or Europe, however, she has been indicted by international and local tribunals as such France and Iraq.
To know and understand her serial fobs and illusions, let’s focus on her contradictions in practical fields and her ten- point platform. To save time, let me compare only two of these articles of her platform with her present and past activities and thoughts. In the article 7 of her platform, she claims, ‘we are committed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and…’, but, the question arises how she interprets and replies the articles 12 and 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in comparison with her inhuman activities e.g. forceful ideological divorces of thousands impeccable men and women as well as wrecking and shattering the family foundation and….
Article 12: “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, or to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”
Article 16: “(1) men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.” “(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.” “(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state.”
Mr. Mirek topolank, please ask Maryam Rajavi to answer the human conscience and the public opinion of the West regarding forceful and dictated divorces and illegal marriages in her cult by her husband Masood Rajavi who is the lifetime leader of the PMOI. I think a particle of her above mentioned crimes regarding dictated divorces and marriage is enough to prove high contradictions between her false platform and her practical activities.
Mr. President, please let’s check the article 9 of her platform to discern her mock intentions and goals regarding international problems and disasters, “our foreign policy will be based on peaceful coexistence…” as a matter of fact, as a live witness, I got shock of observing such a scene at the time of the occurring of “the September 11 disaster” when Masood rajavi made such speeches, “this is reactionary Islam did such an action, thus, we, the revolutionary Islam can do much better than them. And worse than such a sentence which exposes the nature of the Mojahedin cult’s ideology and thought, was that Maryam Rajavi confirmed his speeches with nodding and smiling.
Now, the question is that is it fair and justice and a just decision to stain the scene of parliament via her presence in the nation’s house?
Yours truly
Hamid Siah Mansouri, Paris, January 25, 2009

January 27, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

PMOI terror cult a much bigger threat to Eu than al-Qaeda

Europe: Safe Haven For Terrorists
The European Union routinely accuses Iran of sponsoring terrorism for their support of the military wings of Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, forgetting to mention that these are the armed wings of legitimate and democratically elected political parties, who have a legal right to resist Israeli occupation under internationalal law, and are only designated as terrorists organisation by the EU for political reasons – i.e. the EU supports Israel. But what is rarely reported is the extent to which the EU supports terrorist groups. It has reportedly been agreed by EU states to remove the anti-Iranian Mujahedin Khalq Organisation (MKO) from the designated terrorist organisation list in the near future, which makes an absolute mockery of the EU supposed objection to terrorism.
The MKO cult is notorious for committing countless atrocities in Iran and Iraq. In Iran alone, their terrorist attacks have claimed over 12,000 deaths and in Iraq, as well as committing war crimes against the Kurds under the Saddam Hussein regime, they are accused by the current Iraqi government of carrying out terrorist attacks and destabilising the country, despite supposedly being in US custody. The Cult also stands accused of assassinating and torturing dissidence and human trafficking. They have also used self-immolation (suicide bombing!) as a tactic to protest against their designation as terrorist organisation in Europe.
This is why America, Canada and the EU have previously refused to remove the MKO from their terror lists, and as recently as the 12 of this month, Condoleezza Rice announced that the MKO group would remain on the US terror list. So why the change in the EU position now?
Since 2003, Camp Ashraf, the MKO HQ, which is located in Iraq’s Diyala province, along with its 3,400 inhabitants have been under American military control – the Bush regime wanted to protect the 3,400 known anti-Iranian terrorists from being taken into Iraqi custody, so granted them protected status – but since beginning of January control of the base and its inhabitants legally passed to the Iraq government, who have ordered the base closed and all MKO cult members to either return to Iran or select a third country to be deported to.
Obviously it would be politically difficult, if not impossible, for any EU state to open up its borders and welcome 3,400 designated terrorists cult members with open arms, and Obama defintely isn’t going to do it. So quietly the EU has been dropping its resistance to MKO under the pretense that the cult has been disarmed. And the group has one a series of barely contested legal cases. Now that they no longer have a presence in Iraq, it will be easy to argue that they pose no threat to Iraq or Iran, and that might well be true, but this terror cult will be a much bigger threat to Europe than al-Qaeda ever was.
The MKO is committed to the violent overthrow of the Iranian government and enforcing their own brand of fascism, despite the fact that Iranian government was democratically elected (a point often forgotten) and the MKO is universally loathed in Iran and has a long history of anti-western violence as well.
stephiblog.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/europe-safe-haven-for-terrorists

January 25, 2009 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

The role-play of catalysts in the Cult of Mojahedin

In order to draw a clear picture of cultic groups, it is necessary to have a better understanding of the personality features of cult leaders due to the absolute dependence of cultic relations upon leadership. Almost all In MKO, a notorious cultic group already blacklisted as a terrorist cult, a number of experienced early members play the role of catalysts. psychologists and researchers in this era are unanimous that the main part of this understanding is to be concerned with personal as well as psychological features of leaders that play a crucial role in all cults. Evidently, psychology is the science that may prepare the ground for acquiring a comprehensive knowledge of various aspects of cult leaders. In this regard, it has been written:
A cult cannot be truly explored or understood without understanding its leader. A cult’s formation, proselytizing methods, and means of control "are determined by certain salient personality characteristics of [the] cult leader….Such individuals are authoritarian personalities who attempt to compensate for their deep, intense feelings of inferiority, insecurity, and hostility by forming cultic groups primarily to attract those whom they can psychologically coerce into and keep in a passive-submissive state, and secondarily to use them to increase their income. 1
Of these fundamental aspects is the leaders’ egocentric personality and unquestionable control over members. This kind of relationship is developed first as a result of leader’s charisma rather than the exercise of power and in itself requires some catalysts and incentives to convince followers of the leader’s charisma. Now the question arises, how cult leaders exercise their hegemony over followers and put them under effect. Clearly, cultic relations depend on members’ persuasion and absolute submission, however, going through this phase needs the preparation of required background, internal motives and incentives to the extent members get convinced of leader power and charisma and consent to participating in cultic activities. Most cultic groups recruit members under the disguise of educational, medicinal, and social services and then expose them to the process of persuasion yet political groups grab hold to different approaches.
In order to come to an appropriate answer, we can rely on the data and results obtained in recent studies on cults. In the book “brainwashing” the role of catalysts has been referred to but not elaborated on. Looking at the instances of political cults in the contemporary world and their cultic relations, the role of the factor of catalysts may well be clarified. Catalysts are, to a number of cult members, who play a key role in the formation and development of cults:
Cultic groups usually originate with a living leader who is believed to be "god" or godlike by a cadre of dedicated believers. Along with a dramatic and convincing talent for self expression, these leaders have an intuitive ability to sense their followers’ needs and draw them closer with promises of fulfillment. Gradually, the leader inculcates the group with his own private ideology (or craziness!), then creates conditions so that his victims cannot or dare not test his claims. How can you prove someone is not the Messiah? 2
Organizational hierarchy present in all cults implies the presence of a minority group within cults that are of a key role in stabilizing the power of the leader to the extent that their absence in cultic relations may lead to the disintegration of cults. The function of these catalysts is different in different cults depending on the approach and policy taken by the leader.
The writer’s emphasis on the god-like status of cult leaders in the eyes of their followers is due to the fact that almost all cults have metaphysical beliefs rooted in their religious inclinations. Even the leaders of leftist groups opposed to metaphysics, in practice resort to the instrument of metaphysics as is evident in the reviewing of the last moments of the life of Stalin. There are a number of cult members who have a key role in the qualitative development of cults called catalysts and are traceable almost in all cultic groups.
In MKO, a notorious cultic group already blacklisted as a terrorist cult, a number of experienced early members play the role of catalysts. In the phase of the ideological revolution of Mojahedin, they played a key role in stabilizing the status of Rajavi as a leader. Their so-called letters of ideological revolution addressing MKO members had a dual role. On the one hand, they elaborated on the contents of the ideological revolution and Rajavi’s determining role in the history of MKO and on the other hand, they convinced members to follow the catalysts in recognizing the cultic and ideological leadership of Rajavi.
The statements of MKO’s political bureau issued and signed by these catalysts, who were in fact the speakers of the leader, implied their critical role. Mehdi Abrishamchi in his lecture on the ideological revolution which lasted several hours did nothing but honoring and praising Rajavi. He would state that the organization and its members need Rajavi’s leadership to understand the reality of the ideological revolution. Maryam Azdanlu, divorced from Mehdi Abrishamchi to remarry Rajavi, had also an effective role in raising the status of Rajavi. The main point focused by these catalysts was to make the leadership of Rajavi believable. They insisted to make members believe in the charisma and leadership of Rajavi. Their main duty, in Hoffer’s terms, was to undermine the power of thinking on the part of members and replace it with an absolute submission to cultic leadership of Rajavi. As Hoffer puts into words:
It is obvious, therefore, that in order to be effective a doctrine must not be understood, but has to be believed in. We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand. A doctrine that is understood is shorn of its strength. Once we understand a thing, it is as if it had originated in us. And, clearly, those who are asked to renounce the self and sacrifice it cannot see eternal certitude in anything which originates in that self. The fact lat they understand a thing fully impairs its validity and certitude in their eyes. 3
Therefore, looking at the role catalysts play in cults may clarify how leaders manage to exercise their authority over members. Reviewing the history of MKO since the execution of its early founders and intra-prison control of organization by Rajavi and his catalysts may clarify the determining role of these catalysts.

References:
1. Madeline, Tobias and Jania Lalich, Captive hearts; Captive minds, Halter House, 1994.
2. ibid
3. Hoffer, Eric, the true believer, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1951, p.76,77.

January 25, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Threat of suicidal operations never ceases

In a letter released in POAC’s ruling on November 2007, the UK Secretary of State is quoted saying “Mere cessation of terrorist acts do not amount to MKO sent one of its members on a mission of suicide operation to target Iraqi national security forces in charge of the camp. renunciation of terrorism. Without a clear and publicly available renunciation of terrorism by the PMOI, I am entitled to fear that terrorist activity that has been suspended for pragmatic reasons will be resumed in the future”. And he is right since just on 17 June 2003, two years after the claimed date that MKO had conducted no military activity of any kind since August 2001, the group’s members launch a series of most appalling self-suicide operations.
It began when Jean-Louis Bruguière, France’s anti-terrorism investigative magistrate at the time, first targeted the terrorist cult of Mojahedin-e Khalq (MKO, MEK, NCRI, PMOI, NLA), officially designated as terrorists organization by the US and the European Union, in a European country since its settlement there and issued warrant for the arrest of Maryam Rajavi and a number of her accomplices for a multitude of terrorist charges. The officials in DST, French counter-intelligence, were well aware of the group’s terrorist nature when its HQs were raided. But hardly anybody expected that the group would engage in immediate cult-like reactions against the arrest of its she-guru.
Although the case is still under investigation by French justice system for a final judgment, those who are familiar with the nature of cults and their techniques of brainwashing were neither shocked nor surprised by the widespread self-burnings of MKO’s members, male and female, that left two deaths and others deformed. It was all done as a cult order to protest the arrest of the she-guru Maryam Rajavi who is steering the cult in the absence of her husband whose whereabouts is still unknown. And it worked well, since soon the French police surrendered to the wills of the protesters and set the leader free.
Not only has the group failed to present evidences to acquit itself of terrorist charges, distribution of new evidences such as reports of abusing its own insiders, repeated assertion of its re-designation in the US and the EU terror lists, its failed lobbying efforts to be removed from the terrorist lists, legal complaints of defectors and families to prosecute the organization for its anti-human activities against the members, and its glorification of terrorism are all proven facts that convince any country, where its members are settled, to take precautionary measures against any possible terrorist plots.
Intrinsically a terrorist organization, MKO has never denounced violence and terrorism publicly. In fact the group’s glorification of violence and terrorism remains as a major security threat and an appropriate means of accomplishing its cultic ends and safeguarding its HQs. In a few messages delivered from his hideout in the past recent years, Massoud Rajavi has particularly provoked continuation of suicidal operations as an emergency exit from the raised crisis. The self elected leader of Mojahedin has mainly focused on the preservation of two cult dynamics as the strategic guidelines in his messages, namely, Maryam Rajavi and Camp Ashraf. Rajavi in his message of March 25 stated:
At the present, it is a national duty on any Iranian and especially on our victorious opposition forces throughout the world to preserve two things which have turned to be two sides of the same coin. On one side rests a portrait of Maryam and on the other side, a perspective of Ashraf. I urge you one by one to struggle like Maryam and along with her day and night to mint the coin and achieve the end. 1
The expulsion of MKO from the Iraq and Nouri al-Maliki’s reiteration that the group is no longer welcome in Iraq following the expiration of the UN mandate for the international forces is of the greatest crisis the group has ever faced. It has to do something to come out and as usual, application of violence seems to be the best choice for the organization. In the past there came the order for the members to self-immolate for Maryam. Now it is Camp Ashraf that is under threat of being closed down and they already have the orders what to do.
According to an issued statement by the Iraqi national security adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie, MKO sent one of its members on a mission of suicide operation to target Iraqi national security forces in charge of the camp. The operation came to absolute failure when the attacker turned himself in to Iraqi security forces and disclosed the details of his mission.
As it is typical of MKO, it denied claims stated by Iraqi officials that a member of the group was planning a suicide operation. But one thing is right for certain that the group has to leave willingly or unwillingly. It can no more beguile Iraqi government as it did with France through the push of its suicidal operations. For sure it is good news for the camp residents who have long been looking forward to being released from the bonds of the abusive cult.

January 22, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Masud Rajavi – the pattern of violence continues

We are only half way through January and the EU terrorism list (from which the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation has been removed) has still not been announced but the MKO (aka the Rajavi cult, MEK, NCRI, NLA) has been unable to refrain from showing its true nature.
Iraq’s National Security Advisor has reported the arrest of an MKO member who is currently in custody after surrendering himself to an Iraqi security unit. The man, who is a resident of Camp Ashraf, was about to perform a suicide mission, but could not go through with it. According to a statement from the office of the National Security Advisor, the MKO member has claimed the MKO use severe torture and brainwashing on its members. He claims that: “I was sent with a clear and precise plan to perform a suicide mission in this Iraqi base”.
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=5720
This news will come as no surprise to those who know the MKO. Looking at Massoud Rajavi’s track record over thirty years, nothing more or less than this could be expected. While he was able to send over 2,000 civilians their deaths back in 1988 in the failed Eternal Light operation, he has since then sent numerous smaller groups to perform suicidal terrorist attacks in Iran with the added instruction that if captured the person should use their cyanide pill to kill themselves. More recently, MKO were instructed to set fire to themselves to protest the arrest of Maryam Rajavi on terrorism charges in Paris. Two died and several others sustained serious injury with their permanent disfigurement and disability a direct result of Rajavi’s order.
Massoud Rajavi who owns the MKO also owns the blood of the members and will spill it whenever he needs to. In this case to rescue himself from the mess he has made in Iraq. The MKO members are his capital which buys him power. They are expandable assets which have been used and reused shamelessly by western agencies who have found this a useful and cheap resource in their ‘regime change’ armoury. It is clear that the neoconservatives and Zionists are using the MKO against the Iraqis, and are helping them by facilitating the impunity enjoyed by MKO leaders at the cult’s headquarters in Europe.
This latest fiasco in the Rajavi saga is surely the result of negligence and apathy of the European Union toward the MKO which apparently couldn’t summon the energy or interest to properly investigate the MKO and deal with it accordingly. A feat which has been assiduously performed by successive US Governments since 1994 and which has resulted in the MKO retaining its terrorism designation to date with the added information that the group is a cult. However, the Bush Administration has also proved itself to be overly greedy in wanting to have their cake and eat it. The US army has ‘protected’ this ‘terrorist’ outfit for five and a half years in Iraq in spite of repeated demands by the Iraqis for removal of this known FTO, which collaborated with the former regime, from Iraqi territory.
It is surely time for the international community as represented by the UNHCR and UNCHR to to help the Iraqis ensure that all the individuals held captive in Camp Ashraf are accorded their basic human rights. Rajavi’s victims must be given the opportunity to renounce violence and to leave Camp Ashraf for third countries or to accept voluntary repatriation to Iran. Any delay in dismantling this notorious cult is to condemn the inhabitants to enforced membership of an illegal paramilitary terrorist group.

January 21, 2009 0 comments

The Ideology of the MEK

An ideological schism with no parting edge

The ideological schism of 1975 constitutes one of the critical phases of MKO. Following the mass arrests of 1971, the leadership cadre found it necessary to review the past events to find the reasons underlying the strategic failure of the organization. Since two ranking members of organization, Taqi Shahram and Bahram Aram, were converted to Marxism this review led to the overall ideological shift of MKO to Marxism. However, one of the organization activists, Dr. Karim Rastegar, informed Rajavi, already in prison, of the conversion of the organization leaders. Not only did Rajavi desist to make any reaction to their perversive activities but also accused Rastegar of cynicism and fundamentalism up to the time when the ideological shift of the organization was declared openly through Marxism wing manifesto.
This event influenced the imprisoned members to a great extent and many more converted to Marxism and declared it openly. Although after the declaration of the Marxism wing Rajavi falsely made a promise to make his best to modify and revise the ideological principles of MKO, he failed to do so and instead held grab to ideological and political purging of those prisoners who were in favor of religious leadership in Iran. The consequences of the declaration of the Marxism wing inside and outside prison necessitated it for Rajavi to deny having any relation and inclination to Marxism since the past history of Marxists in preventing social movements of Iran like the destructive activities of Tudeh party in the course of nationalization of oil industry and betrayal of Shahram and Aram led to the intensification of the sensitivity of religious prisoners toward Marxists. Then, Rajavi was expected to revise organizational principles taking a firm position against Marxists and in favor of religious prisoners.
However, all those trying to find the roots of the June 1981 crises are unanimous that the position taking of Rajavi in this phase was intentionally aimed at keeping distance from religious forces and especially clerical leaders while inside prison. They acknowledge the fact that his twelve-point declaration, first distributed orally from inside the prison, formed the main pillars of his position taking and he acted amateurishly in demarcating with the ideological shift of the organization and its founders. Two out of the twelve points were more effective in intensifying the crises between Rajavi and religious prisoners. One pointed out that the organization would keep its previous position toward Marxists. In other words, it considered the converted members as an opportunist group not real Marxists so there would be no change in the organization relations towards them. The second and the most important point was triggering a more intense reaction on the part of religious members calling them reactionaries.
It is evident that jailed Mojahedin under the leadership of Rajavi considered Marxist members as their ideological allies and even preferred them to members with religious inclinations. These events as well as Rajavi’s declaration letter intensified the crises inside prisons even more. Saeed Shahsavandi, already an intimate friend of Rajavi, putting the contents of the twelve-point letter in writing expounds on the course of events after the declared manifesto of Marxist Mojahedin. Almost all members except Rajavi believed in the necessity of revising the ideological principles of the organization at that particular period of time. According to Shahsavandi:
I dare say that almost all high rankings but Rajavi came to the conclusion that the organization had made some mistakes in the past that were to be modified and these modifications were to have religious and in political terms rightist inclinations. 1
He further refers to the internal and external trends inside prison trying to revise the fundamentals and principles of MKO and revive Mojahedin making them free from dualistic views replaced by pure religious position and Rajavi’s opposition to these trends by issuing his twelve-point declaration. As he puts into words, almost all political trends and individuals were to find the roots of MKO schism and also a solution to terminate the crises. Yet, Rajavi paid no attention to the existing conditions and issued his twelve-point “declaration of MKO position toward leftist perverted opportunist trend” worsening the conditions.
It has to be pointed out that some prominent figures outside prison like ayatollah Motahari wrote a letter to ayatollah Khomeini, at the time living in Najaf in exile, referring to the deviation and schism of Mojahedin asking him to find an immediate solution for their challenges:
Marxist views have been slinked into some political groups like Mojahedin. They were primarily a political group and are gradually turning to a religious sect with their own ideology and interpretations from Islam. They claim to have come to a point where they no longer need religious instructions and teachings. They respect both Marx as Shiite Imams and also claim to be true Muslims. Others have converted to Marxism declaring it openly. 2

References:
1. The interview of Saeed Shahsavandi with the voice of Iran, part 38.
2. A review of the life of ayatollah Motahari

Research Bureau – Mojahedin.ws – January 18, 2009

January 19, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts