Articles

Slaves of a terrorist cult

Unlike the past that the term slavery could easily be defined and discerned, definition of slavery, or better to say modern slavery, is disputed today. But as the unanimous opinion reigns, modern slavery is an institution whereby human beings are divested of their freedom and personal rights and describes a number of conditions involving control of a person against his or her will enforced to surrender to the wills of a master by violence or other forms of coercion. Defined in this way, the slave is wholly subject to the will of another and it has been practiced, in varying degrees, since the earliest of ages into the modern world.

the members of MKO are indeed modern slaves who are spending their life slaving in its camps mastered under the Rajavis

According to some drawn common characteristics that distinguish slavery from other human rights violations, a slave is:

· forced to work — through mental or physical threat;

· owned or controlled by an ’employer’, usually through mental or physical abuse or threatened abuse;

· dehumanized, treated as a commodity or bought and sold as ‘property’;

· physically constrained or has restrictions placed on his/her freedom of movement. [1]

The public opinion assumes that slavery, the legal ownership of a person before the abolishment of slavery, is now illegal in all countries. Actually, the trade was legally abolished in the early 1800s. It is also prohibited by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1956 UN Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. Despite the fact that slavery is banned in most of the countries, it exists today and is usually ignored by most of people in the world and the media as well because it is practiced under a variety of forms and affects people of all ages, sex and race.

Can it be called anything else but slavery when extreme poverty forces parents to offer themselves or their own children to toil in the fields as a guarantee against a loan that they hardly afford to pay? Or when individuals are lured by the promise of a good job but instead find themselves subjected to working without payment while enduring physical abuse, often in harsh and hazardous conditions? Or when the indebted, abducted and trafficked women and children are intimidated by crime families and mafia gangs into any disdainful and reprehensible activity? Or even when people are illegally lured and recruited by individuals, political parties, militia groups, freedom fighters and cults to work, usually under threat of violence or other penalties, in order to accomplish intended ambitions and objectives?

You do not need to be too smart to indicate instances of practiced slavery in the modern world. Endless, mushroom-like emergence of cults that physically and mentally enslave the recruits is one among many nightmares of the modern man. In fact, man’s hope and struggle to find out the right that is in many circumstances identical with the wrong and the false, sets him on a path at the end of which is a gateway at which a man stands to push them through as slaves. As Steven Hassan, the liberated member of a cult, puts it into words:

Throughout the world, people are stressed out, sleep-deprived, and disillusioned with existing political, social, and religious institutions. They are hungry for hope. Charismatic cult leaders with delusions of grandeur or an appetite for power and money are eager to take advantage of this situation by recruiting and indoctrinating people into a form of mental slavery. 2

There are countless unscrupulous religious and political leaders who today use a variety of cultic mind control techniques to deceive and enslave followers and deprive them of their freedom among other worldly possessions. Soon after drawn into the cult, the recruits lose their resistance and accent to be manipulated under the dangers and threats manufactured by manipulators who have sought to silence their courage. In fact, many are of the opinion that among many dangers man is exposed to by his fellow creatures, the mind control techniques practiced by majority of the cults to enslave the recruits are the greatest because they empower the evil men to carry out any evil deed that continue mostly undetected.

Enslaved by political cults, the members are mostly bought and sold in political bargains for the fulfillment of certain political interests. Speaking of one instance in particular, for more than three decades some free Iranian people have been enslaved in the clutches of a terrorist cult globally recognized under a variety of alias. Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO, MEK, PMOI, NCRI, NLA, … ) is a notorious political cult that nobody but those in its bound can possibly give details of the rough, cult-like life they have long experienced within it. The victimized insiders of the organization that have managed to tear the bounds are the sole evidences of modern slaves enslaved within the organization’s slave camp located in the heart of a scorching desert in Iraq the group refers to as Ashraf City. It is easy to prove that, according to the above state characteristics of a slave, the members of MKO are indeed modern slaves who are spending their life slaving in its camps mastered under the Rajavis.

References:

www.antislavery.org

Steven Hassan; Releasing the bonds, Freedom of Mind Press Somerville, MA, 2000, p. 10.

December 28, 2008 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Grinches among Canadian politician

Folco Raymonde David Gilmour

Canadian politician Grinches

There are a few Canadian politician such as Mrs. Folco, Quebec MP, and David Gilmour , former MPs who consistently are supporting Mojahedin Khalgh, MKO an undemocratic cult and warmongers who are in alignment with neo cons . While the Neo cons policy has failed in at cost of hundred thousands of Innocent Iraqis it is a shame theses two Canadian politician supporting such a group.

Mrs. Folco and David Kilgour looks are getting paid by the banned organization in return for the support of the Mojahedin dictator<< Maryam rajavi leader who was illegally appointed by her husband as the president of Iran in 1994 . since we had requested from those to present the facts proving Mojaheidn are pro democracy which they failed to provide that makes it more strong the support is political not humanitarian as they claim.

We suggested them If you have any doubt on the popularity and legitimacy of MKO you can make an inquiry from Canadian Intelligent services and Canadian embassy in Teheran.

Mrs. Folco

Mr. Kilgour

It is Christmas time .

If you care about humanity and human rights then why you do not try to transfer some of the younger Mojahedin who are willing to leave Ashraf , to Canada instead of demanding a legitimate government such as Iraq to keep the Mojahedin who were part of Sadam Hussein ‘s brutal security services.

If you are telling the truth then you can bring some of those young victims who are not engaged in terrorist or military operation such as Somaye Mohammadi who was taken away from to US and while she had Immigrants status.

When the parliament will resume we will take legal action against Mrs. Folco who are violating ethical code of parliament .

Also, we request The minister of Security to shed light on any funding may have been contributed to Folco and David Kigour campaign and offices in exchange for their support and lobbying the fascist organization in which is violation of Canadian criminal code.

Folco and Kilgour can not sell Canadian soldiers to a fascist group because MKO claiming they are freedom fighters . Mojahedin and Iranian Government are both two sides of a coin while Mojahedin are loathed by so many Iranian . Also, Mko are isolated among of the new Iranian generation inside and .

However , to us you look as Grinches who want to deter peace in the Middle East by supporting a brutal and undemocratic organization such as Mojahedin.

December 28, 2008 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Rajavi’s new version of his cult history

Rajavi and his catalysts have misused the history of the organization and its founders in order to justify members that early founders of MKO, and Mohammad Hanifnejad in particular, have appointed Rajavi as the next leader of the organization. In this regard, a number of Rajavi’s fellows have fabricated some statements and have attributed them to Hanifnejad in order to legitimize the ideological leadership of Rajavi. Following the previous articles on the statements made by Lotfollah Meisami and others, here we take a look at those made by Mehdi Abrishamchi and one of the MKO former members. Abrishamchi summarizes all we mean by his manipulation of the history of the organization in one sentence, sacrificing all the alive and dead of the organization to Rajavi and says:

When Masoud speaks, it seems as if he speaks as the representative of all the alive and dead of the organization. 1

He further shows the spirit of Hanifnejad full of praise for Rajavi and makes an attempt to raise the status of Masoud, stating:

Evidently, no one but Masoud is aware of his own status, and hardly anybody can grasp that Masoud has arrived at the high summits of our ideals and has developed our revolution, ideas, and organization to a point that would for sure elevate the soul of Hanifnejad to appreciate. 2

Although the organizational principles of MKO are opposed to centering on just one individual, he introduces Rajavi as the history of the organization and says:

Our greetings and songs, cries and slogans, love and affection, will and determination, poems and stories, all aim to imply the fact that if Mojahedin have reached the present position and have developed their revolution up to this point, serving the humanity and achieving many honors, they owe all these to the ideological leadership of Masoud. Also, we owe our recent ideological revolution to Masoud and Maryam. 3

Manipulating the history of the organization and its victims in Rajavi’s favor is so disgraceful and repulsive that Anne Singleton, an MKO former member, refers to Rajavi as misusing the members’ ignorance, writing:

Rajavi is very good at spending from other people’s pockets, especially in using the deaths of his followers. 4

She further expounds on the fact that Rajavi consents to subordinate all the historical achievements of the organization obtained as a result of so much blood shed for achieving his personal ambitions:

Rajavi clearly wanted power and was prepared to subordinate the whole organisation and all its members into a means for him to achieve this. 5

Interestingly, Rajavi and his fellows claim that he is inheritor of all the ideological principles and the history of the organization. However, the fact is that the ideological principles of the organization have been manipulated, distorted, held in archive and even eliminated under the command of Rajavi and in his favor whenever necessary:

It is worth mentioning Rajavi’s other motive for removing and then burning all of the books from the camp libraries and safe houses abroad, (libraries which incidentally only had approved books in them anyway), and that is that these books and documents were in contradiction to having an ideological leader. Even his own speeches in Tehran University in the political phase before 30th Khordad were destroyed. These speeches had been published and avidly read at the time. Their essence was taken from Marx and Mao and was to compare the evolution of species with the evolution of society and, of course, Islamicise it. Another reason was that these books and documents were very much in contradiction with capitalism and harmful to Rajavi’s new approach to his new Western masters. Until now, the whole ideology and activities of the Mojahedin, including the killing of Americans, all their songs etc, had been built on Maoism and the fight against the West and imperialism. 6

She further elaborates on perverting the ideology of the organization by Rajavi for instrumentalizing the ideology:

Rajavi perverted the ideology of the Mojahedin from its original conception to something, which allowed him total control of all aspects of the organisation including the personal lives of the members. Alongside this internal change, the organisation also lost its direction in the political scene. 7

It has to be pointed out that the history of the organization, its founders and its ideological principles, are of no significance for Rajavi. Their value depends on the extent to which Rajavi can abuse them for the achievement of his ambitions and stabilization of his cultic leadership in the organization. He has attempted to fabricate some memories and accounts to present himself and pretend to be the sole inheritor of the organization and its principles to which he is not hew. He has exploited all the resources of the organization for the fulfillment of his personal interests at the hands of a number of his ignorant fellows.

References:

1. The lecture of Mehdi Abrishamchi on the ideological revolution, Mojahed journal, no. 255

2. ibid

3. ibid

4. Singleton, Anne, Saddam’s private army.

5. ibid

6. ibid

7. ibid

December 27, 2008 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Terrorist groups says Iran NIE wrong…

You could not make this stuff up even if you tried. Under the direction of new owner Rupert Murdoch, the Wall Street Journal is becoming the paper version of Faux News. Here is their latest nonsense on the Iran NIE: "The Iranian opposition group that first exposed Iran’s nuclear-fuel program said a U.S. intelligence analysis is correct that Tehran shut down its weaponization program in 2003, but claims that the program was relocated and restarted in 2004.

The claim, to be made public today by the National Council for Resistance in Iran, joins a broad pushback by conservative hawks who say the U.S. analysis has wrongly given the impression that Iran’s nuclear-fuel program doesn’t present an urgent threat." Since when is a terrorist group a credible source for anything, let alone one to be used in a mainstream article? The National Council for Resistance in Iran is the MEK lobby in DC. They call themselves the true government of Iran in exile and their president is Maryam Rajavi. Let’s do a MEK/MKO basics crash course:

• During the 1970s, the MeK was accused of conducting several assassinations of US military personnel and civilians working in Iran, and of actively supporting the takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran in 1979. That same year, the MeK helped to overthrow the Shah and install the new Shiite regime led by the Ayatollah Khomeini.

• The Secretary of State has amended the designation, under Executive Order 13224 on terrorist financing, of the Mujahedin-e Khalq, known as the MEK, to add its aliases National Council of Resistance (NCR) and National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). That Executive Order blocks the assets of organizations and individuals linked to terrorism. The decision also clarifies that the designation includes the U.S. representative office of NCRI and all its other offices worldwide, and that the designation of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (‘PMOI’) as an alias of the MEK includes the PMOI’s U.S. representative office and all other offices worldwide.

• Tehran proposed ending support for Lebanese and Palestinian militant groups and helping to stabilise Iraq following the US-led invasion. Offers, including making its nuclear programme more transparent, were conditional on the US ending hostility. But Vice-President Dick Cheney’s office rejected the plan, the official said. The offers came in a letter, seen by Newsnight, which was unsigned but which the US state department apparently believed to have been approved by the highest authorities. In return for its concessions, Tehran asked Washington to end its hostility, to end sanctions, and to disband the Iranian rebel group the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq and repatriate its members.

So basically, what the Wall Street Journal is saying is that a terrorist group on the US State Department’s list of terrorist organization – who has also killed US citizens and was close to Saddam Hussein – is unhappy with the Iran NIE.

Moreover this same group is close to the Vice President, who chose to protect his friends rather than hand them over to Iran in exchange for…Iran giving up all enrichment activities – the thing that Cheney has claimed is the problem. Do you follow this logic? Does the WSJ not have a fact-checking crew? Is the Wall Street Journal now aiding a terrorist organization by giving them a say in US foreign policy? This is good to know. So next time there is a Saudi Arabia NIE, perhaps the Wall Street Journal can feature al Qaeda as supporting the conservative position. Like I said, you could not make this crap up if you tried. Propaganda news at its finest folks… and the war on terror at its most laughable.
at-Largely

December 24, 2008 0 comments

Iraq

Baghdad not willing to give shelter to MKO

Accompanied with a smuggler, having 3000$ in his pocket, several Kalashnikovs and two satellite cell-phones, Babak and another Mojahed tried to infiltrate the Iranian border during the night. A few weeks later, he succeeded to launch grenade attacks against the Defence Ministry in Tehran to show the world that the Islamic Republic can be destabilized internally before the presidential election of 2001.

“Then we had to recruit the Iranians and wait for the supplementary forces and munitions that were sent from Mujahedin’s base, Camp Ashraf, in Iraq” Babak remembers. Neither forces, nor munitions arrived to help Babak who had received the order to return to Iraq. But, one night, the Iranian police arrested him in a shopping center in Tehran. Sentenced to ten years of imprisonment of which he is now spending the ending years.

Today this former member seeks for the return of the last soldiers disappeared from Ashraf where 3300 Mujahedins have been settled for almost twenty years.

On January first, the US army will hand over the control of Ashraf to Iraqi government. But Baghdad is willing to close the camp. ‘’They have no passport any more; Most of them want to go to Europe to get status of political refugee.”, believes Arash who is another defector of MKO. He left Camp Ashraf in 2004 and is now working in an NGO in Tehran.

Under the pressure of its Iranian allies, Baghdad is likely to decide to send some of them to Iran. Even the Iraqi government has declared that choosing the receiving country could not be “voluntarily”. To escape from an obligatory return to Iran, some of Mujahedin members having no other choice, despite going to Europe, escape to France where more than 300 to 400 members of MKO are seriously supervised by DST but also infiltrated by the Iranian agents. However, a French expert on security issues says that “we do not like them to arrive in our territory.”

The actual problem is that no one is willing to receive them. However, during the recent years, Americans several times solicited France and Jordan to shelter the members but every time, all of them refused to grant refugee to their leader, Masud Rajavi and his militants in Ashraf.

In 2003 when they arrived in Baghdad, the Americans disarmed MKO. “Since the American invasion, they are killing the time as much as they can in Ashraf,” Arash says.”If they had the possibility, Most of the Mujahedin would leave Ashraf” he adds. The Americans consider MKO as a terrorist organization but this doesn’t prevent them from having an ambiguous relationship with MKO.”CIA doesn’t trust them but the Pentagon uses some of them for espionage in Iran “, confess a former member. Using the Americans’ welcome, 600 have left Camp Ashraf for Iran in recent years. ‘Tehran works on this file so intelligently, seeking to hire these defectors rather than eliminating them,” a European diplomat in Iran says. Since the time of the reformist president of Iran, Mohammad Khatami; ” we haven’t considered them as a political organization any more but as a dangerous cult of which the members are the prisoners of their leaders”, an Iranian official states.

Their capacity of action in Iran was almost zero. The opponents of regime also include the sympathizers inside Iran. “Mujahedin used the opportunity under the presidency of Khatami to recruit the Iranians who were more easily traveling abroad.” explains the foreign diplomat.

With the money that Saddam gave them and the funds they laundered, Mujahedin have launched an intensive lobbying activity among Western Medias and political authorities. With some success: recently 290 French representatives have asked for the removal of MKO from the list of terrorist organizations. And lately in London and Luxemburg, some similar decisions have been made.

George Malbrunot, special Le Figaro correspondent, Tehran

to view the original text in French click here

December 24, 2008 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

The instrumental misuse of MKO history – part 2

The instrumental misuse of MKO founders and history – part 2

Of the current issues prevalent in the world of politics regarding the challenges MKO has risen to is that Rajavi has manipulated the history of MKO and its founders. It is said that he and his fellows have made an attempt to misuse the history of the organization in a way to legitimize his unauthentic leadership imposed on the organization and its members. Here a number of fabricated memories made by a number of self-seeker MKO members are reviewed in order to bring the matter to light. In this regard, Mohammad Hayati, one of the theoreticians of the ideological revolution introduces Rajavi as the sole advisor of Hanifnejad and says:

I saw no one closer and more active than Masoud in discussion and negotiation with Mohammad [Hanifnejad], no one even Saeed [Mohsen] and Asqar [Badizadegan]. 1

Mehdi Khodaee-Sefat who has not met Hanifnejad grabs at other techniques in order to exalt Rajavi, saying:

Once in 1972, I met Masoud in cell No. 3 in Qasr prison and discovered the mysteries of life in him. Again, in 1975, in the cell No. 6 when I heard his voice for the second time, it was as if I got everything in a blink of an eye and considered the tortures of prison and Savak unimportant. 2

Hamid Asadian, Mojahedin’s poet, makes a generalization and states:

Masoud represents the revolutionary values of a generation who had a historical presence in the political, social, and cultural scene of Iran since 1965. 3

He adds:

All resistances, solution findings, victories and in a nutshell the survival of Mojahedin depends on one person who represents the ideals of Mojahed generation. He is the story of Mojahedin and Mojahedin are his story. 4

And Abrishamchi introduces Rajavi as the sole discoverer of Hanifnejad, stating:

His role [Hanifnejad] was a unique historical and ideological one which was unknown at his time. Just one person, Masoud, discovered it and made a close relationship with him and paid a considerable cost for doing so. 5

In order to check the truthfulness of these statements, we’d better take a brief look at the statements made by Lotfollah Meisami, one of the closest cadres to Hanifnejad, and raise the question that why all these fabricated memories have been recalled simultaneously and after a number of decades and all have a similar theme and form.

Meisami expounds on some points in contradiction to those mentioned before. In contrast to what Rajavi’s allies mean by fabricating theses memories, he says that the main reason Hanifnejad paid more attention to Rajavi was the flaws he had had noticed in Rajavi including selfishness, vanity, egoism and so forth. Thus, Hanifnejad always had him under full control and warned him of his flaws. According to Meisami:

It has to be pointed out that everyone has some traces of egoism and vanity. Yet, in a well-formed organization, all these defects can be surmounted. It was so for Rajavi too and whenever he was in their companion, Mohammad and Saeed kept close to him and controlled him fully. 6

Or:

In the same period of time, the personality of Masoud Rajavi came under question and there appeared many quotations from Hanifnejad. For instance, Hanifnejad was quoted saying that the prevalent egoism in Masoud would be destructive for the organization. The members of central council of leadership were well aware of this statement. 7

Interestingly, in these memories there are some individuals who took a hostile position toward Rajavi at that time and now have changed their mind and come to remember, or better to say fabricating, memories in Rajavi’s favor:

After the schism of 1971 and its consequences, the issue of the leadership was raised in Qasr prison. There were seventy members therein and they needed to be organized so Masoud was already in charge of solving problems. For example, if someone or something was snitched he informed those outside and also made us aware of the outside news. After the imprisonment of Bahman Bazargan, they cooperated with each other, yet when the number of members increased and almost all Mojahedin came to prison, Masoud came under question to some extent. Some members like Musa Khiabani, Fathollah Khamene’i, Kazem Shafiee, Nabi Moazemi, Ebrahim Avoukh, and those gone to Palestine criticized Masoud for his flaws. 8

Furthermore, Meisami points out that Rajavi was so isolated in goal and neglected by MKO prisoners that despite assuming the leadership of the organization, prisoners formed a council of leadership in the prison and conducted polls in which Rajavi was defeated:

There were a lot of members in Qasr prison and it seemed that nothing could fill the void left by the martyrdom of the founders. Also, members were unsure of Rajavi. It was said that there had to open polls for selecting the central cadre in which Musa Khiabani and two other candidates were at the lead; but Rajavi got no vote. 9

In another part of the memories of Meisami, it has been stated that:

Members refrained to accept a fixed leadership. So polls were carried out in which Fathollah Khamene’i, Kazem Shafiee and Musa Khiabani were elected for the first central cadre in the prison yet Rajavi got just a single vote. 10

Most important of all, Meisami believes that Rajavi followed a different path after the execution of founders and even considered them as outsiders:

After the martyrdom of the founders, some members like Masoud Rajavi had a different viewpoint against the early founders and even refrained to consider the former members of the organization as true insiders. 11

References:

1. The book of founders, MKO publications, p.121.

2. ibid, p.138

3. ibid, p.160

4. ibid, p.161

5. ibid, p.87

6. Meisami, Lotfollah; Degeneration of a Mojahed, Mojahed journal, No. 32.

7. The memoirs of Lotfollah Meisami, 2003, p.74

8. ibid, p.194

9. Meisami, Lotfollah; Degeneration of a Mojahed, Mojahed journal, No. 32.

10. The memoirs of Lotfollah Meisami, 2003, p.194.

11. ibid, p.157

December 23, 2008 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Unpardonable Neoconservative Treason

Neoconservative (Neo-Trotskyite) Use of Communist Terrorists

“Iraq shelters terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians.”

–“A Decade of Deception and Defiance”, the White House’s background paper for President George W. Bush’s September 12, 2002 remarks to the United Nations General Assembly

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/book.html

A major pretext for the Iraq War was Saddam Hussein’s support of the Iranian Communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, NCRI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) terrorists at Camp Ashraf and at other camps in Iraq. In 2003, American and coalition forces attacked Camp Ashraf, Iraq and killed some of the terrorists. However, neoconservatives (neo-Trotskyites) in the American government arranged for the protection in Iraq and for the use of these communist terrorists inside Iran.

Fox News Channel Viewers Duped by Neo-Trotskyites

After the Federal government raided the home of Alireza Jafarzadeh, confiscated boxes of his documents, and closed the NCRI office in the National Press Building, Jafarzade became a Foreign Affairs Analyst with the Fox News Channel. On television and in postings, Jafarzadeh claimed that he was revealing secrets about Iranian terrorist networks and front organizations. See, for example:

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,307452,00.html

Of course, he did not reveal to the dupes who watch the Fox News Channel that he had worked for an Iranian communist terrorist organization responsible for murdering American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of Iranian and Iraqi civilians.

For books by former MEK members, read:

– Saddam’s Private Army

By Anne Singleton

– Masoud: Memoirs of an Iranian Rebel

By Masoud Banisadr

http://www.amazon.com/Masoud-Memoirs-Iranian-Rebel-Banisadr/dp/0863563740/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230001161&sr=8-1

Covert American Military Operations Inside Iran

Some of the guests on the Fox News Channel have bragged about American military forces conducting “boots on the ground” covert operations inside Iran. There are some others in the American media providing vague details of these operations. For example, Seymour Hersh’s articles in the New Yorker, such as:

Annals of National Security

The Iran Plans

Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?

by Seymour M. Hersh April 17, 2006

“The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack. Current and former American military and intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups.”

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/04/17/060417fa_fact

Using Communist Terrorists Inside Iran

Americans with international satellite television dishes or who research foreign news sources will discover that the American military has been using Iranian communist terrorists from Camp Ashraf, Iraq on covert missions of gathering information or of committing acts of terrorism in Iran.

On December 21, 2008, former MEK member Arash Sametipoor appeared in London, England on George Galloway’s “The Real Deal” (Press TV and Sky TV). For the next few days, you can watch this television program online or download it to your computer at:

http://www.presstv.com

You can find other interviews and details posted at Web sites, such as:

– Iran-Interlink

http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=5551

– Nejat Society

https://www.nejatngo.org/en/

Arash Sametipoor reported that he had been captured in Iran during a covert mission. He attempted to kill himself using an old cyanide pill provided for him. While he was sentenced to serve eight years in prison in Iran, he was released after four years. He knows firsthand about life inside a terrorist cult. While America’s neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) claim that Iraq has its own government now, the truth is that Iraqi political leaders continue to demand that the MEK surrender their weapons or leave Iraq. Not only has the American military been protecting these communist terrorists, but also the American military has prevented parents of these terrorists from seeing their children at or near Camp Ashraf, Iraq.

Unpardonable Neoconservative Treason

During the American Revolution, Benedict Arnold was a revolutionary war hero until he betrayed the American Revolution.

http://www.americanrevolution.com/TreasonofBenedictArnold.htm

Now, America’s neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) have replaced Benedict Arnold as the worst traitors in American history. There should be no presidential pardons for any of these traitors.

December 23, 2008 0 comments

European Union

A row that is likely to continue

In its judgment made on 4 December, the European Court of First Instance ruled that the Council of Ministers had infringed the legal rights of the MKO when it updated the blacklist on 15 July 2008 without explaining its inclusion. The second clause of the Council Decision (2008/583/EC), however, explicitly states that it has provided for the groups and entities statements of reasons for their proscription:

2. The Council has provided all the persons, groups and entities for which it was practically possible with statements of reasons explaining why they were listed in Decision 2007/868/EC. Concerning one group and three persons the amended statements of reasons has been provided to them, if possible, in April 2008.

Following the MKO’s application to contest the Council’s decision, the court ruled that it “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”. Of the restrictive measures was freezing the assets and funds of the listed groups.

The court in its 47 paragraph judgment says that “the Court finds that the continued freezing of the applicant’s funds by the contested decision was the result of a procedure during which the applicant’s rights of the defence were not respected” and consequently annuls the decision concerning MKO’s assets-freezing. Then, what it has to do with the removal of the organization from the terrorist list?

Since the Council applied for interpretation of the Court judgment of the Court of First Instance on 4 December 2008, the court issued a latest order in which the application for interpretation was dismissed as inadmissible. commenting on the court order released on 17 December 2008, MKO states that “the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (CFI), in its fourth ruling over the past two years, rejected a request by the EU Council and France to delay implementation of the December 4 court ruling on the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI ) until the deadline to submit an appeal against the ruling has ended. It described their demand as ’clearly unacceptable’ and ordered the Council to pay all legal costs incurred by the PMOI. Thus, the Court put an end to unlawful delays and excuses by the Council, leaving it with no alternative but to comply with the court ruling and acknowledge that the PMOI is no longer on the terrorist list”.

But in none of these orders the court has ruled and acknowledged that MKO “is no longer on the terrorist list”. Still, since 4 December, member states have been working on the assumption that the judgment is in suspension and MKO’s name remains on the blacklist after it was updated on 16 December. The court’s decision not to provide further clarification on the nature of its decision means that the row between the MKO and the EU member states is likely to continue.

December 22, 2008 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

The instrumental misuse of MKO history

Rajavi owes his leadership to a number of factors among which misusing and manipulating the history of the organization and its founders is of utmost significance paving the way for imposing Rajavi on the organization and expansion of his authoritarian leadership therein. The short-term relationship of Rajavi with the organization’s founders, and Mohammad Hanifnejad in particular, is an instrument in the hands of Rajavi and his fellows to manipulate the history of the organization in his favor.

A number of factors like the mass arrests of the early founders and high-rankings in 1971 and their execution as well as Rajavi’s escape from execution made the background for him to manipulate the history of the organization at avail himself of the critical conditions after the schism of the organization. Promotion of Rajavi to the membership of the central cadre after the assertion of Hanifnejad was the beginning of the later seizure of leadership. According to many eyewitnesses it was most accelerated due to Rajavi’s egocentricity and narcissism that prepared for Rajavi and his catalysts to make false interpretations of it. Step by step and especially after the initiation of the armed phase, this illusion turned to reality and many newcomers came to believe that Rajavi was the heir to the leadership after Hanifnejad. It would not be wrong to say that Rajavi’s had a key role in creating this illusion either in gaol or after their freedom in 1979.

There are evidences that the main part of this process has been taken place since 1985 when Rajavi used the ideological revolution as an instrument to stabilize his totalitarian and egocentric leadership in the organization and to legitimize the ideological revolution and its consequences. In the early days of the ideological revolution, some members like Davari, Abrishamchi, and Hayati were tasked with fabricating false memories of the interest of Hanifnejad in Rajavi and the complimentary statements made by Hanifnejad on the political, organizational, and ideological qualifications of Rajavi.

This process was externalized when the central office of the organization issued a declaration on the initiation of the ideological revolution and the ideological leadership of Masoud Rajavi. The declaration asserted that after the execution of the organization’s founders, and Hanifnejad in particular, Rajavi would be the leader of the organization, responsible for its survival and development. It focused on the point that Hanifnejad himself had appointed Rajavi as his successor and the next leader of MKO. Since Rajavi was well aware that his own fabrication of memories was of no effect, he ordered his fellows and catalysts including those arrested in 1971, to make false statements in the intra-organizational sessions of the ideological revolution. Here some of these fabrications will be reviewed. Abbas Davari, whose some instances of offensive behavior towards Rajavi was quoted by some MKO former members, in his article “The point of perfection” published in the organization’s official organ, Mojahed, writes:

Saeed Mohsen was very sensitive about the freedom of Masoud and when Masoud was offered a clemency and his execution was replaced by life imprisonment as a result of the efforts of Dr.Kazem Rajavi [his brother], Mohsen was too happy and asked me to convey his message to Masoud. He said: “Extend my greetings to Masoud and tell him that his responsibility is very heavy at the time being since he is the only remnant of the central cadre and the manifestation of our principles and experiences. He is endowed with a great responsibility in this phase. He will be beset with many problems and may suffer many disturbances. We will receive all praises since we enter the reign of martyrdom yet he will face all accusations since he will continue the struggle and would have a status much higher than ours. He will be martyred every day and every hour. Yes, he will be an alive martyr. 1

In another article, he has pointed out that:

The necessity of ensuring the continuity of this way and developing the revolutionary Islam was evident to the founders and the person who arrived at the very summits of honor. The organization founders accomplished their responsibility and before their martyrdom appointed Masoud as the next leader not to leave the organization without a head. 2

These statements are pre-determined reactions to the objections and accusations made against the ideological marriage of Masoud and Maryam and the issue of Rajavi’s fabricated Imamate. Mohammad Seyedi Kashani makes a statement in this regard, stating:

The most significant thing I remember from the martyr Asqar Badizadegan is the statements he made about Masoud and his seriousness and rigidity. He always said that Mohammad (Hanifnejad) was more interested in Masoud among all members of the central cadre and loved him more than others doing his best to train and teach him as a true Mojahed. Some years later when I got acquainted with Masoud, I found out the reason why the founders had appointed him preferably as the leader among all members of central cadre and those with a longer history in the organization. 3

References:

1. Davari, Abbas, Mojahed journal, no. 456

2. The book of Founders, MKO publications, 2002, p.91.

3. ibid, the statements of Mohammad Seyedi Kashani, p.111

December 21, 2008 0 comments

Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

Defenders who offend human rights

It gives me great pleasure to hear there are still people here and there who believe in altruism and condemn widespread misanthropic behaviors practiced by their fellow-creatures under a variety of pretexts. Even in the heart of the most developed and democratic countries you may encounter countless, daily reports of discrimination on the basis of race, religion and gender and other forms of human rights violations. The least can be done is to release true, reliable and unbiased reports of the instances of violations regardless of political interests and appeasement of certain group and party.

But supporters of human rights may err as they are humans. There come circumstances when the very same enthusiastic supporters of humanity and human rights give their support, knowingly or unknowingly, to a political party or a group of freedom fighters whose true anti-human nature is concealed behind a camouflage of widespread democratic propaganda. Can it be really justified especially when the blunderers are the elite in a society and shoulder a great responsibility that represents their nation?

Just on the occasion of ‘International Human Rights Day’, a session was reportedly held at the press building of the Italian Senate with regard to the severe violation of human rights in Iran. The participants in the session are reported to include a number of senators and members of the parliament as well as some personalities and heads of societies in defense of human rights. You may ask what these Italian people have to do with violation of human rights inside Iran when what happens in Italy itself is much more alarming. We have nothing to do with such issues but the question is well responded when you come to know the people orchestrating the session.

Read the excerpt from the report to figure out the sponsors. Senator Vincenzo Fasano, from the ruling coalition, called supporting the Iranian Resistance and said: “I have studied your programs and am aware of your goals for the future and also your support of annulment of death penalty. I also very welcome your genuine motto of your future government which is the separation of church and state, and hence I find myself committed to stand by you”.

That is again Mojahedin Khalq cult that has started a new phase of pro-democratic blitz as a new tactic after being disarmed by the coalition forces invading Iraq. Globally recognized a terrorist group and a cult of personality, the cult of Mojahedin is still holding the members in the heavily guarded enclosed Camp of Ashraf where a matriarchal autocracy holds the control. It does not mean that the organization believes in the superiority of women or recognizes the rights of women; rather it is a cult technique to further enslavement and exploitation of women. Of course, Senator Pasquale Nessa has hardly grasped the real intention of the cult when at the session he states: “I am aware of your struggle for women’s freedom and I wish you success”. Obviously, he is not at all aware of what passes within the Camp Ashraf and that, women are the main victimized human beings under the pretext of fighting for freedom, that is to say, they are deprived of their freedom and coerced to engage in a never-lasting struggle to regain it.

As I said, it is the duty of all influential figures who live in democratic countries to struggle against the violation of human rights. But siding with the violators of human rights and acting as their paid mouthpiece is much despised. I believe that for sure Senator Giorgio Bornacin, from ruling party, knew nothing of Mojahedin’s documented instances of violence and atrocities not only perpetrated against Iranian people but also its own members when he addressed Mojahedin saying: “It is very important today that we are present and struggle against the violation of human rights. This is the duty of all parliamentarians who live in democratic countries. I am with you to restore the rights of the Iranian people’s rights and participate with you in this struggle”. There seems no need to explain the present condition of the members at Camp Ashraf who are dispossessed of primal rights of human.

So, if it is the way these representatives approve for the restoration of the Iranian people’s rights and setting the enslaved members free, I have to admit that they are going astray and are presenting a new definition of defending human rights that shall question the accuracy of the democracy they advocate not only for the world but their own people.

December 21, 2008 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts