Articles

Personality Cults

Throughout history, there have always been numerous cults of personality which are often found in dictatorships. As we have studied the stories of the pharaohs of ancient Egypt or Roman Empire, etc. the kings had a divine right and they were sometimes considered or in better words worshiped as god-kings.

Also, in our time, personality cults are common in the monarchist, totalitarian systems with revolutionary opinions such as Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler and Pol Pot of Cambodia who all slaughtered a lot of innocent civilians during their ruling period.

The leader of the cult of personality usually seeks to minimize the public power and influence. The members of this type of system gradually loose their power of thinking, choosing and acting instead they submit to the absolute obedience to the person on the head.

In Mujahedin-Khalq Organization (the cult of Rajavi) as well as many other destructive cults, the leaders Masud Rajavi and his third wife Maryam Rajavi have turned the group – which was only a guerrilla force against Iranian regime – into a cult of personality where the members are manipulated to worship their leader as the messenger of God who gets his instruction directly from God. These members who are the victims of a destructive cult are so seriously brainwashed who are always ready to scarify themselves for the leaders by committing self-immolations and suicide terrorist operations. The examples of those operations are simply found in the history of MKO personality cult.

The heroic image that MKO shows to the members to provoke their praise and admiration have turned the group from an armed guerrilla opposition into a terrorist destructive cult which is much more dangerous. When a fighter of an armed guerrilla struggles for his cause he is likely to suffer some physical difficulties but when you are a captive of a cult of personality you are always under mental and physical torture and likely to become an anti-social person who might violate social norms without any sense of guilt or regret.

January 10, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

A Rally for What?

Reported by AFP, a number of sympathizers of the terrorist MKO demonstrated in Paris on 6 January asking for the removal of the group from the European Union’s terror list. The report evidently states that MKO is “the main Iranian armed opposition group, took part in the 1979 Islamic revolution but then took up arms against the Islamic republic”. Interestingly, the report is widely covered by MKO-run sites but none of them denounced the group’s renunciation of terrorism when it was referred to as “the main Iranian armed opposition group”.

Although never announced publically, the group claims that it has denounced terrorism since 2003. Neither the US nor the EU are convinced that it is sincere in its claims since the group is still running with its military platform in Camp Ashraf in Iraq where nearly 3500 members are held against their will. Furthermore, the demonstrators are reported to have been carrying a banner reading: “France has to apply the four verdicts of the European justice court and remove the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran from the European Union’s list of terrorism”.

In its latest judgment on 4 December 2008, the European Court of First Instance ruled that it:

1. Annuls Council Decision 2008/583/EC of 15 July 2008 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2007/868/EC, in so far as it concerns the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran.

2. Orders the Council to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran.

3. Orders the French Republic and the Commission to pay their own costs.

Thus the court has never ruled removal of the group from the terror list as MKO claims. Besides, how can a terrorist group be removed from the proscribed list while is enjoys being called an armed opposition group and glorifies terrorism?

January 10, 2009 0 comments

The MEK to launch Armed Struggle

MKO’s Unproductive Means of Struggle

In Iran’s contemporary history, Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO,MEK, PMOI, NCRI, NLA) is the exact illustration of a political movement that strongly advocated a strategy of armed struggle that has proved defeated and unproductive. A review of its function in the course of all these years well depicts the clear and basic controversy between its organizational instructions and that Iran’s social-political conditions. They were moving on a wrong path from the very beginning but kept pretending an avant-garde of a struggle manner that people disapproved. It is always people, however, who have paid the heavy price of the factions’ deviation and dogmatism in the accomplishment of their ambitions.

Nearly four decades ago, Mohammad Hanif-Nezhad along with a number of other students, formerly active in National Front, came together to establish an organization that has so far moved in a struggle path totally different from other previously established armed movements like Sazman-e Cherikhai-e Fedaye Khalq (People’s Devoted Militia Organization). Approved by the leaders of many pro-Marxist militias, none of the armed struggle moves in the process of Iran’s political and social fluctuations has proved to be productive and MKO has been no exception. Compared with its parallel armed groups, MKO seem to have suffered a more pitiful and deplorable destiny after selling itself to liberalism and imperialism.

The group’s past history is intermingled with a variety of different and controversial phases. It received two devastating internal and external blows, namely, the ideological split and mass arrests by monarchical regime’s notorious SAVAK. In both circumstances, the organization nearly lost 90 percent of its insiders, but a passing look over its activities, from its inception to the Islamic revolution, evidentially indicate that it had had no influential impact on social milieu and ambiance.

In contrast to the group’s baseless analyses claiming to have played a crucial role in Iran’s contemporary political history, in many cases it acted as a deterrent trying to misconduct the justly guided march of people to achieve their right wants. The armed move that MKO announced against the will of nation to overthrow the Islamic Republic proved to be a total failure; the outcome was a bloodbath targeting many innocent civilians and officials.

The MKO’s first attempt to create a military spectacle the same as Fedayan’s daring operation of Siahkal failed, that is to say, its plan to disrupt the 1971 celebrations surrounding the 2500th anniversary of the Persian monarchy. In fact, although it was an attempt to win the control and leadership of the armed struggle, but the armed strategy in itself was in no way justifiable. The historical necessity of the armed struggle at the time was still a big question; yet, the important point was the influence of the rising tide of the guerilla struggles.

Mojahedin were imitators of Fedayan militia who also imitated the guerilla and armed activities of other countries like Algeria, Cuba, and Vietnam. The strategy heavily influenced by the struggling experiences of the guerillas in those countries was in absolute contradiction to Iranian social, cultural, and religious context.

Moreover, Fedayan were under the heavy influence of Marxism and were running on a path to corroborate the theoretical and philosophical aspects of Marxism while Mojahedin believed they were holding an ideological supremacy over other leftist rivals. Mojahedin were basically formed according to the left parties’ structure. Ideologically, the organization was under the heavy influence of the National Front’s scientific theory. Thus, Mojahedin and other active rivals advocating armed strategy against Shah, actually distanced from the main objectives of the armed struggle aimed to prepare a background for the masses to rise and join the struggle. The armed struggle, under the pretext of fighting against Shah’s tyranny, turned into a battle of the ideologies. Well aware of the fact that they were all walking in a wrong path, none of the sides dared to make a rational critique of the strategy; the discouraging factor was being labeled as compromisers. That is to say, if anyone made an appeal to justify that the objective conditions were inappropriate for revolution, he would be labeled a compromiser, reformist, opportunist, and lacking the needed political courage.

Disregarding the role of people in struggle and insistence on armed strategy as well as imposing its ideological dogmatism has raised big questions, after the Islamic revolution, over its formation and the cause for its existence. The motivation and the real objectives of the main founders, among whom faithful, devoted ones existed, have also encountered a big question mark. Mojahedin’s change of guideline aiming to assume power at all costs led it to an absolute ideological drift and, consequently, to the precipice of being dependant on imperialism. The heavily advertised glories of its past military achievements evaporated soon after its collusion with Saddam, an archenemy of Iran, its transmission into a cult, and its direct beg of support from the US to overthrow the Islamic Republic.

January 8, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Cult leaders accountable to nobody- Part 2

Cult leaders grab at all means and levers to stabilize their position within cults in a manner of unaccountability to members; a feature leading finally to fascism and individual leadership. Religion and religious beliefs of followers are factors at the hands of cult leaders to be excused of accountability. In fact, they legitimize all their wrongdoings and egocentric decisions based on religious tenets and ideological concerns in a way not to be challenged by outsiders as well as insiders.

Identification of the same features in MKO and on the part of Masoud Rajavi necessitates taking a closer look at his activities and statements. Keeping this issue into mind may give us a better understanding of the reasons why Rajavi introduced his ideological revolution as a manifestation of an exalted truth and unique value in terms of ideological and political concerns. He did so to conceal the apparent contradiction between the fulfillment of ideological objectives of Mojahedin as reflected in the early organizational principles of MKO and the consequences of his self-fabricated ideological revolution.

Of the consequences of the ideological revolution elaborated on by Rajavi as well as his catalysts is introducing Mojahedin leadership as a phenomenon beyond challenge and criticism, a timeless issue and one that is no longer selective and democratic. The result of this consideration is a wide gap made between the status of the leadership and that of the rank-and-files as well as minimization of organizational hierarchy.

Rajavi and his theoreticians made use of religious levers as well as scientific theories like Einstein’s theory of relativity to justify his self-appointed position at the top of MKO. Rajavi was much eager to follow footsteps of Hitler and Stalin in making use of religion, science and ideology to stabilize a status of unaccountability. He held grab to his ideological revolution, based simply on a divorce (that of Maryam Azdanlu and Mehdi Abrishamchi) and remarriage (that of Maryam Azdanlu and Masoud Rajavi), in order to achieve his egocentric objectives. The reaction of the outside world and a leftist party in particular to this action may suffice to show the feedback of the world outside to this dishonorable event:

The news on the marriage of Masoud Rajavi and Maryam Azdanlu, ex-wife of Mehdi Abrishamchi,aroused the complaint and aversion of revolutionary forces and public opinion

The news on the marriage of Masoud Rajavi and Maryam Azdanlu, ex-wife of Mehdi Abrishamchi, in recent weeks has aroused the complaint and aversion of revolutionary forces and public opinion. This action that is contrary to revolutionary morale and convention of the socity…surely leads to public complaint and hate… since this indecent and immoral activity is justified in a 14-page statement signed by the organization’s The news on the marriage of Masoud Rajavi and Maryam Azdanlu, ex-wife of Mehdi Abrishamchi,aroused the complaint and aversion of revolutionary forces and public opinion leader who has a long history of revolutionary struggle and claims to lead Iranian revolution against the current oppressive regime. The significance of this issue has its roots in the fact that while the act is a scandal offending woman and distorting the meaning of leadership, it is introduced as an ideological revolution aiming to esteem the status of women. 1

Despite all the negative consequences of the ideological revolution, it led to the irresistibility of Rajavi to inside challenges. The factor of surprise caused by the initiation of the ideological revolution under the issue of Rajavi had paradoxical results inside and outside MKO. While the world outside refused to recognize the legitimacy of Rajavi’s initiated ideological revolution, he managed to turn it into a belief system within MKO just as a cult leader. As Hoffer put into words:

It is the certitude of his (a cult leader) infallible doctrine that renders the true believer impervious to the uncertainties, surprises and the unpleasant realities of the world around him. 2

Cult leaders claim that understanding cultic codes and doctrines is problematic and difficult and it is just the true believer who manages to understand them. Cult leaders have the ability to deceive members by making false illustrations and predictions of the world from the beginning to the end to the point that turn followers to blind subordinates who consider it as a guilt if they demand accountability on the part of their leader who claims self-sacrificing for his followers’ salvation. When this belief is indoctrinated in members, they turn to devoted followers with absolute confidence in their leader and it may suffice to immune leaders of being challenged from inside. Hoffer believes that:

To be in possession of an absolute truth is to have a net of familiarity spread over the whole of eternity. There are no surprises and no unknowns. All questions have already been answered, all decisions made, all eventualities foreseen. The true believer is without wonder and hesitation. "Who knows Jesus knows the reason of all things." The true doctrine is a master key to all the world’s problems. With it the world can be taken apart and put together. 3

In a nutshell, the attempts made by the theoreticians of the ideological revolution of Mojahedin mainly aim to raise the status of Rajavi to a point beyond all challenges, questions, and doubts and free from accountability and responsibility to his decision makings and activities.

References:

1. The theoretical and political journal of the organization of Fada’yian-e Khalq, 1985.

2. Hoffer, Eric, the true believer, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1951, p.76.

3. ibid, p.77.

January 8, 2009 0 comments

France

Iran divides French Parliamentarians

For or against the regime of Tehran:Iran divides French Parliamentarians

Iran divides French parliamentarians, in their political disagreement, to right as well as left. More than 290 of French deputies have recently singed a call for the support for Mujahedin Khalq Organization of which the leader, Maryam Rajavi is exiled in France Auvers-Sur-Oise. A group called “coordination Parliamentary”, solicited by Jean-Philippe Maurer the deputy of UMP, and Jean-Pierre Brard, the communist representative are working for the removal of the name of the movement from the list of terrorist organizations of the European Union.

These activities that are relied of the recent decision made by a British court in favor of the Mujahedin, count on finding a positive opinion by Nicolas Sarkozy during the French presidency in EU. “We support this Iranian opposition group because it’s the only democratic foundation that struggles against the regime of Iran,” estimated Jean-Philippe Maurer. The deputy of Strasbourg refuses the critics that have been presented against the organization of Maryam Rajavi since 2003. Following a police raid, many militants set themselves on fire. The leaders of National Council of Resistance of Iran, the political cover of these dissidents, are still under investigations. ” Since 2003, this organization has moderated its excessive behavior.” revealed Jean-Philippe Maurer.

Lobbying Activities in Elysée

Among the same ranks of the French Assembly, other deputies of UMP totally disagree.” The parliamentarians who singed this call for support do not know the situation in Iran well.” Says Didier Julia, vice-president of the France-Iran group, “Iran is not such a simple state. It is led by Experts Council and the execution of the laws is performed by three different sources. In my opinion, People’s Mujahedin enjoys a very small support. They are very weak inside Iran. Instead, France should reinforce its relations with Iranian civil society and the Iranian government in order to achieve the public liberty. It’s not the regime change that we should look for. Iran can evolve gradually, like Syria.”

Whose lobby is more effective towards the French Parliament members; The Iranian dissidents or the representatives of the Iranian State? Didier Julia declares that the diplomatic advisor of Nicolas Sarkozy has the same opinion as he has.

Jean – Philippe Maurer thinks that the debates on Iran have not reached a clear position, in Elysée.

VSD.fr by Nathalie Gillot

January 8, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

MKO futile efforts to survive as a Guerrilla force

The armed struggle is mostly defined as Guerilla warfare which is considered as the unconventional warfare in which the guerrilla army uses mobile tactics This shows the importance of Camp Ashraf while MKO has no public support to rely on, no weapon to fight with and no border to launch cross border attacks. (ambushes, raids, etc) to fight a larger army or enemy.

According to Wikipedia this term (guerrilla) means “little war” in Spanish and the concept acknowledges a conflict between armed civilians against a powerful nation state army. Also, as Che Guevara, the Argentine revolutionist, writes in his book “Guerrilla Warfare”:

”the guerrilla band is an armed nucleus, the fighting vanguard of the people. It draws its great force from the mass of the people themselves “

In China, the Maoist Theory of People’s War believes that the guerrilla earns population’s support by distributing propaganda. To answer the question “why does the guerrilla fighter fight?” Ernesto Che Guevara responds:

”the guerrilla fighter is a social reformer that he takes up arms responding to the angry protest of the people against their oppressors.”

Therefore, as the most revolutionary guerrilla leaders believe the support of the population is of great importance to guerrilla fighters to provide shelter, supply, finance and intelligence for them. So having the base of the people guarantees the success of a guerrilla movement and this is what the MKO lacks. Instead they could operate by enjoying the protection of the friendly regime of Saddam Hussein that provided them with funds, weapons, military training and bases, but the support of Baath regime for MKO just made their situation among the masses of Iranian population worst because their cooperation with the enemy of Iran turn these freedom fighters into traitors who have been Saddam’s mercenary forces for 3 decades. The experts think that relationships with civil populations are one of the most important factors in the guerrilla fighters’ success or failure.

MKO lost its public support in three phases. The first phase happened following their use of terror after the Islamic Revolution, when they launched terror operations in civil targets and assassinated a large number of their compatriots. Like the communist forces in the Philippines and Malaysia, these strikes helped turn civilian opinion against the so-called freedom fighters. Such tactics had no result except the withdrawal of the support of Iranians for MKO terrorists.

As mentioned above the second phase of the withdrawal of public support for MKO was after their cooperation with Saddam dictatorship during the eight years of Iran- Iraq war in which the MEK served as Saddam’s private army, provided intelligence for Baathist Intelligence services. MKO bases donated by Saddam Hussein were mostly located near Iranian border of which is an important factor in guerrilla warfare but after the fall of Saddam, their bases were reduced to the one in the Northern part of Baghdad, Camp Ashraf, in Diala province. Thus after the American invasion to Iraq and the take over of Camp Ashraf by the US army, the MEK were restricted to their only remote base, Ashraf.

The third phase of the public hatred toward MKO was as recent as the visits made by the families of captured MKO members in Camp Ashraf. Families of MEK/MKO members were the only people who were considered as sympathizers by MKO leaders but they are also turning to their enemies because they are seriously seeking the visit of their beloved ones who are captives of MKO cult in Camp Ashraf. The best example is their former supporter, Mustafa Muhammadi who has appealed for the arrest of Camp Ashraf leaders who have kept his daughter for years.

Another important element in guerrilla warfare is weapon of which the NLA had plenty of, due to their ex-master Saddam Hussein’s donations .But they had to submit all their weapons to the US army that disarmed the group after the seizure of Camp Ashraf in 2003.

Nowadays the MKO lacks public support ,weapon and also border but their only last resort includes Camp Ashraf that itself is supposed to be handed over to Iraqi Government and eventually to be shut down.

MKO leaders find no way except prolonging their stay in Camp Ashraf, Iraq since their vital need is now awning a location where they can survive as a coercive army.

This shows the importance of Camp Ashraf while MKO has no public support to rely on, no weapon to fight with and no border to launch cross border attacks.

January 5, 2009 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

A comment on the expulsion of Iranian Rebels

Iraq to expel Iranian rebels once it takes over camp from US

In June 2004, under the Geneva Conventions the United States granted “protected status” to 3,000 members of an Iranian opposition group interned in Iraq.

Listed as a terrorist organization, an US-led coalition disarmed these members of the People’s Mujahideen. Since 2004, they have been held in Camp Ashraf, northeast of Baghdad under the protection of the United States government.

On December 22, the Iraqi government announced their intent to expel the Iranian exile group. An expulsion, which has been long sought by the Shiite-led government, will become feasible once the U.N. mandate that regulates the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and gave the Iranian opposition group protected status expires at the end of the year (2008).

“Iraqi national security adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie on Saturday traveled to the camp with several other government officials to deliver the message to members of the Mujaheddin-e Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group that was closely aligned with deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein but has been under U.S. military protection since shortly after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

The government informed the group that it would soon assume responsibility for security at Camp Ashraf and that residents would be repatriated unless they find a third country willing to take them. The U.S. military currently protects Camp Ashraf, which is 40 miles north of Baghdad.

‘Staying in Iraq is not an option for them,’ the government said in a statement issued Sunday. The Iranian government has long called for the group’s expulsion.

The statement did not set a deadline for removing the MEK. Iraqi officials have pledged to treat the group’s members humanely but have made their disdain for the MEK clear. The delegation that visited the camp included officials of the Defense and Interior ministries as well as Iraqi intelligence officials.

The statement also said the group is barred from participating in political activities and ordered it to cease media campaigns.

The Shiite-led Iraqi government, which has close ties to Iran, has for years threatened to shut down Camp Ashraf because it regards the MEK, also known as the People’s Mujaheddin Organization of Iran, as a terrorist organization.”

The MEK was founded in the 1960s in opposition to the late shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. They were accused of carrying out several attacks in Iran, including some targeting U.S. officials.

When Iraq and Iran were at war during the 1980’s, the MEK relocated its headquarters to Iraq where they were embraced by Saddam Hussein who provided them with weapons and financial support.

According to the Kurds and Shiites, these rebels are guilty of suppressing the failed Kurdish and Shiite uprisings that followed the Persian Gulf War.

“Shortly after the 2003 invasion, the U.S. military persuaded the MEK to disarm and offered to protect the group. The arrangement was awkward because it tasked the U.S. military with sheltering a group that remains on the State Department’s terrorism list.

The group’s charismatic leader, Maryam Rajavi, is based in Paris, but France and many other countries have been reluctant to resettle the group’s members.

Also Sunday, Iraq’s Interior Ministry issued a statement calling the recent detention of ministry officials by a special unit that reports directly to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ‘a brazen act of political retribution.”

On New Year’s Day, Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced that he would expel the Iranian armed opposition group from the country after taking over their base from US forces.

“Based on taking over everything and in accordance with our constitution and our policies of opening up to our neighbours… our forces are going to take full control of the camp where the People’s Mujahedeen Organisation of Iran (PMOI) live,’ Maliki said.

Maliki was speaking to reporters on the sideline of a ceremony during which the United States handed over to Iraqi forces security control of the Green Zone, symbol of the American occupation of the country.”

Maliki made it clear that the PMOI is a terrorist organization and, therefore, cannot and will not operate in Iraq. Iraq officials are in fear that the PMOI will create a political crisis in contradiction with their constitution.

Maliki while making it perfectly clear that Iraq is no longer a home for the rebels, indicated that the rebels would be treated in accordance with international laws. Iraq will not force the rebels to return to Iran. They will instead give them the opportunity to either go back to Iran or another country.

“Maliki, who was speaking ahead of a visit Saturday to Tehran, told Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in March that he would take steps to ensure that Iraq was not used by ‘terrorists’ from Al-Qaeda, or from Iranian rebel groups.

Last month the White House said it received assurances from Baghdad that the rebel group will not be expelled to a country where they may be persecuted, apparently excluding their return to Iran.”

Pumabydesign

January 5, 2009 0 comments

Maryam Rajavi

The Real visage of Maryam Rajavi

Commonly, everyone who stands in front of a camera is willing to express a cheerful mood and adopts a positive posture to take a photo of good quality. However, this norm has some exceptions. For instance, there are cases in which individuals try intentionally to present a depressed, annoyed, disappointed, and unpleasant mood in front of a camera. From a psychological point of view, these individuals suffer from some complexes and a sense of despair to the point that bear not to be seen pleased even for a moment. A photo taken of Maryam Azdanlu, MKO’s second leader now in the absence of her husband, when visiting the Holocaust memorial in Berlin, is the subject of this paper. It can be considered her worst photo appearing up to now in websites among her countless photos put in allied as well as rival websites. In fact, putting this photo beside others may leave everyone with an uneasy feeling.

Her mood is not to be attributed to her sympathy arousing from visiting Jews shambles since her past history shows that even in most terrible and intolerable situations, Maryam Azdanlu has managed to control herself, conceal her real feelings,

Here, we intend to grasp the implied meaning of this photo. Her mood is not to be attributed to her sympathy arousing from visiting Jews shambles since her past history shows that even in most terrible and intolerable situations, Maryam Azdanlu has managed to control herself, conceal her real feelings, thus standing with her Giaconda-like smile in front of camera lenses. There remains the idea that this has been a hunted photo in which the photographer caught a moment she was representing her unmasked and with no celebrity posture for reporters. The photo is taken when she is no one but Maryam Rajavi with her own personality, feelings, and emotions free from any pretension and stilted gesture.

In fact, this photo may be considered the most exact presentation of Maryam Azdanlu untainted of any razzle-dazzle in a vestibule of informal status and position. It is for the first time she is seen using no make-up, with wrinkles on her forehead, hollow cheeks and eyes, wrinkled skin, etc. Let us finish these descriptions lest annoying her womanish and tender feelings.

This photo is better to be equated with the moments when Maryam is engaged in a never ceasing struggle with herself within her Auvers-sur-Oise camp behind the high walls of Mojahedin fortress in the heart of Europe. It represents the times when she is heavily engaged in internal conflicts with herself to reconcile her numerous inner selves that are irreconcilable with her womanish nature and have long been tormenting her soul. First, her aristocratic self rooted in Qajar dynasty and her class conflict resulting from being engaged in cultist relations. Second, a cultist self rooted in the ideological revolution of Masoud Rajavi. Third, a wretched self rooted in all her political failures and despairs. Fourth, an organizational self rooted in lengthy ideological sessions of Mojahedin, lack of sleep, weekly cleansing sessions, and Jari operations. Finally, her womanish self rooted in her loss of family, husband, and child as well as being accused of infidelity.

In a nutshell, Maryam is to be considered the most miserable woman in MKO due to her internal conflicts and tensions. Also, she is one of the most piteous women of the world since she has met a destiny similar to that of other ill-famed women in the history who played a key role in the historical events and crises and has been exposed to paradoxical judgment on the part of the history. It is only God who knows her suffering in her formal visits of Auvers-sur-Oise families and the time when she hugs and kisses their children yearning to have a real family and life free from any playacting. She is well aware that she is not a leader but a big loser loosing her youth, family, country, fortune and freedom. It is only Maryam who can feel the bitter taste of her out-and-out defeat.

January 4, 2009 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

MEK Terror Group to Leave Iraq

Al-Maliki also announced that there is "no place in Iraq for the terrorist" Mujahidin-e Khalq (MEK) organization. The Iraqi government has taken control Iraq Regains National Sovereignty; Takes Control of Green Zone, Basra Airport;MEK Terror Group to Leave of Camp Ashraf, northeast of Baghdad, the terrorist training camp leased by Saddam Hussein to 3500 members of the Iranian MEK cult. The MEK carried out terrorist attacks inside Iran on behalf of Iraq, as well as spying on, and making false allegations about, Iran’s civilian nuclear energy program. MEK have probably been triple agents, sharing information with and pushing disinformation on Saddam, Israel and the US through various channels. They also served Saddam as an SS, repressing Iraqi dissidents. When the US took Iraq in 2003, the Neoconservatives at the Pentagon wanted to adopt the terrorist group for covert operations against Iran and against the Shiite fundamentalist parties in Iraq that had been hosted in exile by Tehran. The Pentagon/ Neoconservative interest in the MEK appears to have been connected to its secret ties to Israel, and prominent members of the American Israel lobby such as Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson went to bat for this motley crew of bombers and saboteurs (ironically, they have been prolific in accusing ordinary Americans of being ‘terrorist supporters’ if they declined to ask ‘how high’ whenever Bibi Netanyahu commanded us to jump). The State Department, in contrast, pushed for listing the MEK as a terrorist organization. In the end, as usual in the Bush administration, Washington gave us the worst compromise possible, declaring MEK a terrorist organization and going on using it for espionage and sabotage in Iran as well as against Iraqi Shiites. In 2005 the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and the Da`wa Party came to power in elections in Baghdad, the very parties against which MEK had been conspiring, and they have repeatedly tried to get rid of the Mojahedin, but were stopped by the Pentagon. The ‘Islamic Marxist’ guerrillas are likely now to be expelled. Al-Maliki said that they would not be forced to return to Iran, and could go to other destinations of their choice, but could not remain in Iraq.

http://www.juancole.com/2009/01/iraq-regains-national-sovereignty-takes.html

The full article:

Iraq Regains National Sovereignty;

Takes Control of Green Zone, Basra Airport;

MEK Terror Group to Leave

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced Thursday that Iraq had "regained its national sovereignty". It could in fact be argued that for the first time since the end of the Gulf War, Iraq is again for most purposes an independent country in international law. It was put under Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter in the early 90s, having been found an aggressor against Kuwait. In some ways, its Chapter 7 status was taken advantage of by the Bush administration in its invasion of Iraq. There are still some things Iraq wants from the UN, and the Russian ambassador there has suggested that some Article 7 provisions will last for a while yet. But the main thing standing between Iraq and sovereignty now is anyway not international law but the large foreign troop presence on Iraqi soil. Still, that presence is underpinned by a bilateral treaty concluded by a sovereign Iraqi parliament with the United States. Cont’d . . .

US troops now need warrants for arrests, though they can detain suspects for 24 hours while they seek to justify it to a judge. Thousands of Iraqis imprisoned by the US will have to be released unless valid legal cases can be built against them.

In a move of the utmost symbolism, Iraqi troops are now taking control of the Green Zone, the few acres in downtown Baghdad, surrounded by blast walls, where US military and diplomatic personnel have worked, and where parliament and many Iraqi government offices are located. US military control of this area has often provoked tensions. Once Marines manhandled a member of parliament from the Sadr Movement who was coming in for a vote, provoking widespread criticism. The nerve center of the US in Iraq and of its Iraqi political allies had to be put behind blast walls because otherwise it would have been constantly bombed and sniped at. The area took a great deal of mortar fire as it was, endangering US State Department personnel who were sleeping in flimsy shelters. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has announced his determination to take down the blast walls. Minister of Defense Abdul Qadir al-`Ubaidi pledged to reopen the road between the Green Zone and the Republic Bridge within days, according to al-Hayat.

Bombings and other violence killed 8 in the northern cities of Mosul and Kirkuk or their environs on Thursday.

Basra authorities arrested a leader of the "Army of Heaven" millenarian cult that launched attacks last year this time. It is the beginning of the Islamic new year, and apparently the cult is seeking ways of taking power.

Al-Maliki also announced that there is "no place in Iraq for the terrorist" Mujahidin-e Khalq (MEK) organization. The Iraqi government has taken control of Camp Ashraf, northeast of Baghdad, the terrorist training camp leased by Saddam Hussein to 3500 members of the Iranian MEK cult. The MEK carried out terrorist attacks inside Iran on behalf of Iraq, as well as spying on, and making false allegations about, Iran’s civilian nuclear energy program. MEK have probably been triple agents, sharing information with and pushing disinformation on Saddam, Israel and the US through various channels. They also served Saddam as an SS, repressing Iraqi dissidents. When the US took Iraq in 2003, the Neoconservatives at the Pentagon wanted to adopt the terrorist group for covert operations against Iran and against the Shiite fundamentalist parties in Iraq that had been hosted in exile by Tehran. The Pentagon/ Neoconservative interest in the MEK appears to have been connected to its secret ties to Israel, and prominent members of the American Israel lobby such as Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson went to bat for this motley crew of bombers and saboteurs (ironically, they have been prolific in accusing ordinary Americans of being ‘terrorist supporters’ if they declined to ask ‘how high’ whenever Bibi Netanyahu commanded us to jump). The State Department, in contrast, pushed for listing the MEK as a terrorist organization. In the end, as usual in the Bush administration, Washington gave us the worst compromise possible, declaring MEK a terrorist organization and going on using it for espionage and sabotage in Iran as well as against Iraqi Shiites. In 2005 the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and the Da`wa Party came to power in elections in Baghdad, the very parties against which MEK had been conspiring, and they have repeatedly tried to get rid of the Mojahedin, but were stopped by the Pentagon. The ‘Islamic Marxist’ guerrillas are likely now to be expelled. Al-Maliki said that they would not be forced to return to Iran, and could go to other destinations of their choice, but could not remain in Iraq.

The British military has handed over the control tower at Basra International Airport to Iraqi authorities. Britain had been using the airport as a military base, but now will withdraw outside it and allow it to function as a civilian, Iraqi facility. This step is a further phase in the British withdrawal from Iraq; the UK once had 40,000 troops in the country, and is now down to about 4,000. They will likely all be out by July 1.

As the foreign troops leave, Iraqis will have to settle their differences themselves. Kurdistan President Masoud Barzani slammed Iraqi Arab leaders for provoking ethnic tensions with Kurds.

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

http://www.juancole.com/2009/01/iraq-regains-national-sovereignty-takes.html

January 3, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Cult leaders accountable to nobody

Of the common characteristics of cult leaders referred to in most academic resources is a lack of accountability for their activities and decision-makings. This practice is in full contrast to the norms of leadership in democratic and free societies in which leaders’ decisions and activities have to be parallel to the social major interests and demands of the public. However, leaders in cults not only consider themselves too superior to be reprimanded for what they do but also regard themselves as heavenly gifts bestowed to earthly followers; super-humans beyond restrictions of ordinary people and free from any error. Their self-appointed position necessitates that cult leaders assume responsibility only to a higher position like that of a god or ideology. These features are easily traceable within the notorious cultist relations of MKO, already blacklisted as a terrorist political cult.

Where this approach is rooted and on what basis it is founded constitutes one of the most basic discussions of the field of cult studies. However, it has to be pointed out that its scope depends on the specific content and orientation of each cult and despite the existing subtle differences, it is exercised commonly within all cults. Also, it has to be noted that unaccountability is more outstanding in political cults due to their external manifestations and broad objectives compared to other cults. A factor distinguishing MKO from other parallel political groups is that its leadership is not only unaccountable to the insiders but also prevents other opposition groups to assume responsibility of their doings by means of many factors like accusation, labeling, perversion, threat, subornation and other levers and sometimes even resorts to improper language to beat them off in the course of political struggle and eliminate all rivals. Therefore, the study of this aspect of cultic relations is of a wider dimension in MKO.

Here, there is an attempt to review these aspects in cults in general and in social relations of MKO in particular. First, the fundamentals and foundations of cults are taken into consideration. Stated in the Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame, Bonewits, classifies unaccountability of cult leaders as one of the cults’ 16 factors:

Charismatic and self-appointed leader who claims divinity or special knowledge and demands his followers unquestioning and total loyalty and obedience. 1

And, according to Ian Haworth of the Cult Information Centre:

All cults share the same characteristics. The definition of any cult is that it indoctrinates its members; forms a closed, totalitarian society; has a self-appointed, Messianic and charismatic leader. 2

This is the very prominent feature of Mojahedin leadership particularly after the development of the ideological revolution that aimed at the legitimization of the idea that the ideological leadership of Rajavi would be no longer accountable to anybody. In addition, it was assumed that faultfinding with Rajavi would be a great and unforgivable sin. The study of the background and reasons of the occurrence of this feature in cult relations from a historical and theoretical point of view may give us a better understanding of the issue.

The factor of unaccountability has an obvious manifestation in all political cults and leftist parties in particular and even has influenced the right groups of fascist orientations. In the contemporary history, and especially in the reign of Stalin in USSR Communist Party as well as that of Hitler in the world of capitalism, there appeared more cases of this orientation. It has to be noted that this feature is found almost in all totalitarian and dictator leaders but it is unlikely to imply that all political leaders are cultic. In fact, this factor along with other features may confirm the cultic nature of a group.

Despite the liberal and modern gestures of some contemporary leaders like Stalin and Hitler, they were of a full totalitarian and dictator nature. Stalin made use of ideological basics of Marxism-Leninism to stabilize his god-like position at the top of the Communist Party and Hitler used the factors of ideology, science and religion to exercise his authority on Nazis. As Stalin used his self-fabricated interpretations of historical and philosophical materialism as the basis of his unaccountable leadership, Hitler grabbed at scientific theories like that of Darwin to impose his leadership on Nazis. Therefore, these leaders paved the way for constituting categorized cults of personality relying on their unaccountable status free from any challenge and question.

The main lever of these leaders for stabilizing their unaccountable position in an egocentric manner is religious taboos and deceiving members by claiming to be connected with the unseen world. However, every cult has its own unique approach in furthering the personal interests of its leader.

References:

1. www.la.info.org/library/programming/bonewits.shtml

2. Singleton, A., Saddam’s private army, Iran-Interlink, 2003, p.xvii.

January 1, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts