Mujahedin-e Khalq Cult ex-members gathered together to discuss the Cult leader’s tricks to force members stay with the group. They talked over Maryam Rajavi’s travel from France to Albania, the Cult’s efforts to amuse members with different celebrations, meetings, …
The meeting held in Paris.
Mr. Ghorbanali Hosseinenjad, Mr. Issa Azade, Mr. Mohammad Razzaghi and Mr. Mansour Nazari participated the meeting.
The video file of the meeting published on defectors’ websites.
Eleven have been killed and dozens more injured in what is an apparent terrorist attack on St. Petersburg’s metro system. Western analysts are assigning possible blame for the attack on either terrorists operating from Russia’s Chechnya region, or possibly terrorist groups affiliated with fronts fighting in Syria.
Western analysts are also attempting to cement a narrative that downplays the significance of the attacks and instead attempts to leverage them politically against Moscow. A piece in the Sydney Morning Herald titled, “Fears of a Putin crackdown after terror attack on St Petersburg metro,” would attempt to claim:
So who is to blame? No one has said officially. The BBC’s Frank Gardner says suspicions will centre around Chechen nationalists or an Islamic State inspired group wanting payback for Putin’s airstrikes in Syria. Or it could be a combination of both.
Putin has in the past justified crackdowns on civilian protests by citing the terror threat. But will he this time, and will it work?
At least one pro-Kremlin commentator has linked the attack to the recent mass demonstrations organised by Putin’s political opponent.
Yet, in reality, the demonstrations and the terrorist groups being implicated both share a significant common denominator – both are openly long-term recipients of US-European aid, with the latter group also receiving significant material support from US-European allies in the Persian Gulf, primarily Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
US-European support for foreign-funded organizations posing as “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs) running parallel efforts with terrorist organizations undermining Moscow’s control over Chechnya have been ongoing for decades.
Beyond Chechnya, the United States’ own Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) would admit in a 2012 memo (PDF) that:
If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).
The DIA memo then explains exactly who this “Salafist principality’s” supporters are (and who its true enemies are):
The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.
In essence, the “Salafist” (Islamic) “principality” (State) was a creation of the US in pursuit of its attempted regime change agenda in Syria. The current, self-proclaimed “Islamic State” is situated precisely in eastern Syria where the DIA memo claimed its state sponsors sought to place it. Its role in undermining Damascus and its allies’ attempts to restore peace and order to the Syrian state is obvious.
The fact that NATO-member Turkey served as a logistical, training, and financial hub for not only the Islamic State’s activities, but also other terrorist groups including Al Qaeda’s regional franchise – Al Nusra – also further implicates not only possible Al Qaeda and Islamic State involvement in the recent St. Petersburg blast, but also these organizations’ state sponsors – those who “support the opposition” in Syria.
Whether the United States played a direct role in the St. Petersburg blast or not is inconsequential. Without the massive state sponsorship both Washington and its European and Persian Gulf allies have provided these groups, such global-spanning mayhem would be impossible. The fact that the US seeks to undermine Russia politically, economically, and in many ways, militarily, and has recently fielded US-European-funded mobs in Russia’s streets – means that it is likely not a coincidence violence is now also being employed against Russia within Russian territory.
As per US policymakers’ own documented machinations – such as the 2009 Brookings Institution report, “Which Path to Persia?: Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran” (PDF) – a militant component is prescribed as absolutely essential for the success of any street movement Washington manages to stir up against targeted states.
In the Brookings Institution document, it stated unequivocally in regards to toppling the government of Iran, that (emphasis added):
Consequently, if the United States ever succeeds in sparking a revolt against the clerical regime, Washington may have to consider whether to provide it with some form of military support to prevent Tehran from crushing it. This requirement means that a popular revolution in Iran does not seem to fit the model of the “velvet revolutions” that occurred elsewhere. The point is that the Iranian regime may not be willing to go gently into that good night; instead, and unlike so many Eastern European regimes, it may choose to fight to the death. In those circumstances, if there is not external military assistance to the revolutionaries, they might not just fail but be massacred. Consequently, if the United States is to pursue this policy, Washington must take this possibility into consideration. It adds some very important requirements to the list: either the policy must include ways to weaken the Iranian military or weaken the willingness of the regime’s leaders to call on the military, or else the United States must be ready to intervene to defeat it.”
The policy document would also openly conspire to fund and arm listed terrorist organizations including the notorious Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). The document would state:
The United States could work with groups like the Iraq-based National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) and its military wing, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), helping the thousands of its members who, under Saddam Husayn’s regime, were armed and had conducted guerrilla and terrorist operations against the clerical regime. Although the NCRI is supposedly disarmed today, that could quickly be changed.
It would also admit that (emphasis added):
Despite its defenders’ claims, the MEK remains on the U.S. government list of foreign terrorist organizations. In the 1970s, the group killed three U.S. officers and three civilian contractors in Iran. During the 1979-1980 hostage crisis, the group praised the decision to take America hostages and Elaine Sciolino reported that while group leaders publicly condemned the 9/11 attacks, within the group celebrations were widespread.
Undeniably, the group has conducted terrorist attacks—often excused by the MEK’s advocates because they are directed against the Iranian government. For example, in 1981, the group bombed the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party, which was then the clerical leadership’s main political organization, killing an estimated 70 senior officials. More recently, the group has claimed credit for over a dozen mortar attacks, assassinations, and other assaults on Iranian civilian and military targets between 1998 and 2001. At the very least, to work more closely with the group (at least in an overt manner), Washington would need to remove it from the list of foreign terrorist organizations.
If US policymakers have openly conspired to arm and fund known terrorist organizations guilty of murdering not only civilians in nations like Iran but also citizens of the United States itself, why would they hesitate to do likewise in Russia?
While the US poses as engaged in a battle against the so-called “Islamic State” in Syria, it has left its obvious, overt state sponsors unscathed both politically and financially. If the bombing in St. Petersburg is linked to US-European-Persian Gulf state sponsored terrorism, it will be only the latest in a long and bloody tradition of using terrorism as a geopolitical tool.
The US, having been frustrated in Syria and having little to no leverage at the negotiation table, is likely trying to “show” Moscow that it can still create chaos both beyond Russia’s borders amongst its allies, and within Russia’s borders – regardless of how well Russians have weathered such tactics in the past.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
By Tony Cartalucci , Journal-neo
MKO members and ex-members in Tirana!
Hundreds of members of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization left the group after its relocation in Tirana, Albania.
Defectors of the Mujahedin Khalq residing in Europe, reported that five hundred people have left the MKO since its relocation in Albania. According to the source, two hundred of the defected group could not manage to leave Albania. “They are still under the control of the cult”, said Mr. Isa Azadeh a former member of the MKO.
Mr, Azadeh states,” regarding their individual situation and conditions, some of the defectors were sent to other European countries by the cult leaders but some are banned by the group to leave Albania.” Apparently, cult leaders fear the possibility of revelations that defectors may announce against the cult.
MKO defectors who reside in Albania get their monthly financial support from the MKO so they do not dare to take any action against the group.
“The cult has defined this main redline for defectors otherwise their monthly payment is cut,” Issa Azadeh added. The cult has allowed the defectors and even certain elite members in the cult to call their families but they are required to tell their families not to come to Albania to visit them for the time being.”
Mr. Azadeh also gives some explanations about the current situation of cult members inside the camps in Tirana. Based on his revelations, the group leaders have colonized the old members with more than 30 years of membership in a location outside the city, named “Ashraf3” where all regulations of the proper Camp Ashraf are executed. Eventually, residents of “ Ashraf3” are not allowed to leave the camp unless for exceptional occasions such as doctor’s appointment or receiving medical treatment. The average age of these people is 55. They include the most high-ranking members with the most years of experience of acting in the cult of Rajavi.
“the cult leaders keep them outside the Albanian capital, far from civil atmosphere and distanced from defected members because they are terribly afraid of their defection – as old members of the MKO,” Azadeh reveals.
Other members of the MKO who are settled in houses and apartments across Tirana include a large number of dissident individuals who criticize the group’s policies but they are barred from leaving the cult by emotional and organizational tools.” These layers are controlled by peer pressure,” Mr. Azadeh says.
Ahmadreza and Mohammadreza Iranpour, traveled to Turkey in 2002. They wanted to immigrate to a European country to make a better life there.
Unfortunately, in Turkey the MKO recruiters tricked them into joining the group. They were then transferred to Camp Ashraf, Iraq. For a long time the Iranpour family had no news of them until they were informed of Mohammadreza and Ahmadreza whereabouts through some defectors of the MKO cult.
In January 2004 they succeeded to meet their beloved brothers at Camp Ashraf. 20 MKO members accompanied Mohammadreza and Ahmadreza in the meeting in order the meeting not to be private.
From then on the Iranpour family have traveled to MKO Camps in Iraq several times to have a visit with their beloved brothers or at least get a news of them, still they were not allowed.
The two brothers transferred to Albania along with other MKO members last year.
March 29th, is the anniversary of Ahmadreza’s birthday. Iranpur family gathered together and celebrated his birthday from far away.
They published the photo along with a letter to their beloved brother, Almadreza.
++ Reports from Albania indicate that in spite of Maryam Rajavi sitting with MEK members trying to convince them to stay, the situation is getting worse to the point that just about everyone wants to leave. She has resorted to bringing in the ‘big guns’, that is using threats of ‘the CIA’ to intimidate dissidents. They are told, you can stay in a separate building where you will have to obey certain rules and you must not go out or talk to anyone. If you do, you will suffer attacks.
++ Tehran Tasnim News published an interview with the cultural attaché of the Iranian embassy in Albania. The interview discusses the many issues which connect Iranians and Albanians, including literature. Albania’s most famous poet wrote books of poetry in Farsi. The attaché said that due to the hostility of Israel and the Americans who have a hold over the country, there are no Iranians here and not much contact. Albania’s attempt to open an embassy in Iran was stymied because of the backlash it provoked. According to the attaché, the only Iranians in Albania are the embassy officials or the MEK who have been imposed on the country by the Americans. He explained how ordinary Albanians see their country: the sea of Albania belongs to Italy, the air belongs to NATO and the land belongs to the Americans. But the people and their culture, says the attaché, belong with Iranians. The two countries share a near culture and have a good understanding of one another. Unfortunately, the Albanian government does not encourage this. In recent weeks, there have been many demonstrations against the interference of the Neocons and the corruption of Albania’s government (and opposition politicians) along with the mafia, drugs and arms dealing. Generally, the people of Albania are not happy about life there although they do not have much choice. Out of a population of approximately three million, at least half don’t live there permanently and have dual citizenship. It is a very poor country, its citizens are very poor and yet it continues to be robbed and plundered.
++ This week marked the anniversary of the stand-off at Camp Ashraf between the MEK and the Iraqi army in April 2011. Abdul Karim Ebrahimi writes his memories of that day. He reminds us that on that day, the MEK signed an agreement that the Iraqi army could take land which formed part of the camp and return it to the farmers from whom Saddam Hussein originally stole it. Then, when the army began to take the land the MEK attacked them resulting in 36 MEK and several police and army deaths. Ebrahimi and others who survived and eventually escaped the MEK are witnesses to what really happened that day. Because of the agreement, the army did not expect the attack. The MEK intentionally sent unarmed people to confront the soldiers, telling them ‘the Iraqis won’t shoot you so you can easily disarm them and take their weapons. They frightened the members saying the Iraqis were there to capture them and hand them over to Iran where they would be tortured and killed. The ordinary MEK members didn’t know anything about the land agreement. The MEK leaders wanted people to be shot. The MEK filmed the events and edited them to claim that the Iraqis had intended to kill the MEK. In fact, Rajavi wanted to blackmail them to give money in exchange for the land.
In English:
++ Nejat Society reviews an article in which a CIA veteran examines the myth of regime change using the MEK cult.
++ Eli Clifton in Lobelog digs up revealing information in ‘AIPAC Gave $60K to Architect of Trump’s Muslim Ban’. Inevitably the name of the MEK comes up among the murky deals.
March 31, 2017
My dear brother,
It is long years that we are looking forward for you. When would you liberate yourself from the clutches of the cult of Rajavis? We cant enjoy our life without you..
Maryam Rajavi has come to Albania to pave the way for you and other member’s victimization..
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has been noticeably quiet about the Trump administration’s slowness to denounce the spike in anti-Semitic attacks and bomb threats, its nomination of an ambassador to Israel who described J Street as “worse than kapos,” and its ties to ethno-nationalists like 
White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon and senior adviser Stephen Miller. But AIPAC has done more than just tolerate the U.S. tilt toward extreme and often xenophobic views. Newly released tax filings show that the country’s biggest pro-Israel group financially contributed to the Center for Security Policy, the think-tank that played a pivotal role in engineering the Trump administration’s efforts to impose a ban on Muslim immigration.
In 2015, AIPAC launched a 501c4 advocacy group, Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran (CFNI). Expected to spend $20 million in July and August 2015, the group was “formed with the sole mission of educating the public ‘about the dangers of the proposed Iran deal,’” spokesman Patrick Dorton told The New York Times. The Times reported that the $20 million budget would go to ad buys in as many as 40 states as well as other advocacy.
Indeed, the group’s filing (viewable here) show that the AIPAC spin-off paid $18 million for “media related expenses,” $8.35 million for “phone program expenses,” and $58,200 for “survey expenses.”
Shortly after the group launched, my colleague Ali Gharib and I noticed that the group’s website featured two items promoting an exiled, ex-terrorist Iranian opposition group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK). CFNI even used b-roll footage from a press conference held by the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which the State Department deemed the MEK’s “political wing” (earning it a corresponding terrorist designation until the MEK was delisted as a terrorist organization in 2012).
After we reached out for comment, AIPAC’s anti-Iran deal advocacy group scrubbed their website of the MEK related materials, seemingly acknowledging a PR misstep. But the b-roll footage remained in their television commercials and on YouTube.
AIPAC’s flirtation with extreme groups appears to have gone even further than borrowing footage from the MEK.
Tax disclosures reveal that CFNI contributed $60,000 to “Secure Freedom,” a donation to a group with the tax-id number 52-1601976. That tax-id number belongs to Center for Security Policy, a hawkish think tank largely devoted to advocating for greater defense spending (it received funding from Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, Raytheon, and General Electric) and pushing completely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about American Muslim and Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the U.S. government.
The contact address for the contribution was a residential address in New Orleans belonging to Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) staffer Marsha Halteman. Halteman did not respond to questions about why her address appeared beneath the donation.
CSP is headed up by anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist Frank Gaffney who baselessly claimed that Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin, anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, and former George W. Bush appointee Suhail Khan were part of a Muslim Brotherhood plot to infiltrate the U.S. government. He also asserted that the Missile Defense Agency logo “appears ominously to reflect a morphing of the Islamic crescent and star with the Obama campaign logo” and helped launch an interfaith group to support Trump’s anti-Muslim agenda.
Gaffney and Trump aide Kellyanne Conway played a pivotal role in bringing about the administration’s efforts to ban immigration from seven (and now six) Muslim-majority countries.
In 2015, Gaffney commissioned Conway’s firm to produce a poll about Muslim attitudes. Released in June 2015, the poll found that 51% of Muslims agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice to being governed according to Shariah,” among other findings. But the poll’s methodology was deeply flawed, relying on an opt-in online survey which industry experts consider unreliable. Conway’s own firm later admitted the data was not “statistically representative of the entire U.S. Muslim population.”
None of that stopped Trump from citing the poll as his justification for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,” on December 7, 2015.
It’s possible that the funds went to support CSP’s advocacy opposing the Iran nuclear agreement. Nonetheless, AIPAC’s willingness to partner with an organization whose president, Frank Gaffney, was denounced by the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the American Conservative Union (which briefly banned him from their events after he accused political opponents of being part of a Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy) raises serious questions about AIPAC’s commitment to fighting bigotry, discrimination, and, in particular, Islamophobia.
Neither AIPAC nor CSP responded to requests for comment.
By Eli Clifton,
About the Author
Eli Clifton reports on money in politics and US foreign policy. Eli previously reported for the American Independent News Network, ThinkProgress, and Inter Press Service.
On the occasion of the Iranian New Year Celebrations, the Cult of Mujahedin Khalq (the MEK, MKO, Cult of Rajavi) once more found the opportunity to launch its massive propaganda. This year, the group’s Albanian headquarters was announced as the new base to receive its paid sponsors.
Former US ambassador in the United Nations, John Bolton is one of the most prominent figures in the Republican Party who supports the MKO ardently. He is received at the New Year celebration in Tirana. Bolton is known as one of the hawks of President Bush; a warmonger figure who is now one of the closest politicians to Donald Trump. “I am here to stay with the Iranian opposition to celebrate the Iranian New Year, Nowruz”, he addressed the MKO ceremony. “Glad to meet you here, I have every confidence that one day we meet again in a free Iran.”
Paul Pillar, a CIA academic and veteran explains how certain American think tanks, particularly in the Bush and Trump administrations are stuck in the “myth” of changing the Iranian government by supporting the Cult of Rajavi. His recent article on the National Interest titled “Evolution, Not a New Revolution, in Iran”, analyzes the futile efforts of the MKO sponsors for regime change:
Some hardline myths about Iran never seem to die. One myth especially pertinent to U.S. policy is that revolutionary regime change in Iran is a significant possibility in the near future and that with a bit more of a push from the outside, the Islamic Republic will collapse and be replaced by something much more to our liking. This illusion was prevalent in much of the George W. Bush administration, which accordingly adhered to a policy of refusing to deal with Iran and instead of trying to isolate it and to inflict economic pain through sanctions. Several years of lack of results in the face of ever-increasing sanctions demonstrated the fecklessness of that policy. The sanctions became useful only when the next U.S. administration began to negotiate with Iran and sanctions were used as a bargaining chip to conclude an agreement that blocks all possible paths to an Iranian nuclear weapon.
The myth often is connected to a faith in exile groups as instruments for quick transition to a completely different type of regime. Many of those hoping for regime change in Iran look in this way to the Mujahedin-e Khalq, a cult-cum-terrorist group that actually has almost no popular support within Iran. Some of the same people had placed a similar faith in Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi, whose qualities as a huckster more than as someone who could father a new Iraqi republic became increasingly apparent after the U.S. invasion of 2003.
Today there evidently is another ex
pression of the old myth about Iran, with talk about regime change, among Trump loyalists at the White House and National Security Council staff. According to these individuals, increased pressure and kicks from the outside can bring about positive results in Iran, rather than, as expert analysis both inside and outside the national security bureaucracy explains, merely eliciting hostile responses from a firmly implanted Islamic Republic. It is unclear whether holding of the myth represents genuine misbelief or instead is a rationalization covering other reasons the holders want to maintain Iran as a perpetually isolated bête noire. Either way, the myth leads to damaging and ineffective U.S. policy.
Pillar warns the US warmongers that the policy of violence including regime change and revolution is far from Iranian’s aspirations. The bottom line of his argument can lead the audience to the conclusion that opposition groups such as the MKO lack the support of the Iranian people.
Iran is not at all close to any political upheaval that could be described as a new revolution or a counter-revolution, even with more pressure and pushes from the outside. Iranian politics certainly exhibits plenty of disagreement and controversy, with the possibility of significant policy change coming out of that political competition. Despite the substantial defects in the Iranian political system, there is a political robustness missing from, say, the Arab monarchies on the other side of the Persian Gulf. But most Iranians do not have an appetite for making a new revolution.
Both the regime and the people in Iran have demonstrated an ability to withstand hardship much greater than what U.S. sanctions can inflict. They did so during the extremely costly eight-year Iran-Iraq War, which Iran doggedly continued for some time even after Saddam—who started the war—began seeking an armistice. Certainly if pressure or punishment from an outside power is involved, both the regime and the people exhibit determined resistance.
He describes the natural social and individual evolutions that has happed to the Iranians during the past decades compared with the extremely prejudicial and sexist ideas ruling the communities of other Gulf countries:
There already has been much evolution in the direction and nature of the Islamic Republic during its nearly four decades of existence, although probably not as much as there would have been without the ostracism. The large majority of Iranians today were born since the revolution. Hijabs have inched above hairlines, and domestic life has become looser and freer. Especially for the female half of the population, looking across the Gulf does not instill any ideas about better alternatives.
According to Paul Pillar the policy of engagement and diplomacy will be more fruitful in the interactions between Islamic Republic and the West.
Further evolution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its policies in the years ahead will correlate directly with the extent to which it has normal political and economic interaction with the rest of the world. Isolation and punishment would strengthen Iranian hardliners’ arguments that there is neither a possibility of, nor a payoff to be expected from, such interaction. Bolstering of the hardline position in turn would mean diminished prospects for further liberalizing political change in Iran. Conversely, increased commerce, foreign investment, and the economic development that go with them would strengthen the political position of those favoring normality in foreign relations, would increase the Iranian stake in even more peaceful normality, would loosen the grip of those in Iran whose economic and political power depend on isolation, and would increase Iranian exposure to ideas and examples of still more change.
The contributing editor of the National Interest advises the US warmongers to engage in peaceful talks paving the way for the West to achieve its goals in Iran and this is what the MKO’s nature cannot accept at all. The MKO leaders run their multi-million-dollar lobbying campaign to buy the support of US hawkish politicians just because they are not able to buy the support of the Iranian people. The MKO has no way to gain power in Iran except by a forceful military intervention by the side of the Iranian enemies.
Those in the United States seeking, or at least talking about, regime change in Iran should face up to how the best way to achieve such change is to let these processes that already are in train play out, and to encourage them with increased interaction and commerce between Iran and the West. The change may not be sudden enough or violent enough to be described as a revolution with a capital R, but the change is even more likely than anything sudden or violent to be in a direction favorable for Western interests. This will be the course of Iranian history as long as we do not screw up the process with mindlessly applied isolation, economic punishment, and attempted subversion.
++ After her International Women’s Day event, Maryam Rajavi remained in Tirana to stage two more events based on the Persian New Year. Commentators though say that the fact she did not return to Paris shows only that she is desperately needed in Albania to keep everything together. The whole MEK organisation in that country is disintegrating. However, from the time she arrived and after three glamorous and expensive events,
++ Reports from MEK formers in Albania indicate that Rajavi is in deep trouble. As people separate in increasing numbers, the MEK has had to move these disaffected members to a different apartment block some distance from the other members so that their dissent does not affect the whole organisation. It is alleged that the CIA and Albanian mafia have coerced the UN to not pay these individuals as refugees but to illegally give their money as a lump sum to the MEK leaders for their upkeep. This means that disaffected members cannot fully leave and are still subjected to MEK control – they are effectively held in a state of modern slavery. Many formers who had escaped the MEK in Iraq say they have seen this scenario before. Their testimonies describe how, after 2003, the Americans at first would not allow dissenters to leave Camp Ashraf. When these people became enough to cause problems for the MEK the Americans established the adjacent TIPF. They separated dissenters only so they wouldn’t infect the other members. In TIPF the dissenters were treated harshly to deter others from joining them. Eventually, in 2008, the Americans abandoned the dissenters by driving them into the desert and leaving them to make their own way to safety. This is what is now happening in Albania; dissenters will at first be separated to keep them from going public about their treatment, and eventually they will be abandoned with no money or possessions and perhaps no legal status. Just as many people lost their lives in the MEK camps in Iraq, it is predicted that the same scenario will play out in Albania.
++ The quarter where the MEK are stationed and where Rajavi held her catwalk event is one of poorest most run-down parts of Albania. It has now changed the name of its main street to President Donald Trump Street. The mayor has insisted that Trump is now an honorary resident of that township. This prompted a small demonstration by residents who declare they are sick and tired of the CIA activities and bases in their country and the CIA ridiculing Albanian citizens by bringing the MEK to a desperately poor town which already has more than enough problems. Several weeks ago there were similar demonstrations in the capital Tirana, protesting against the government, corruption and American influence. Protestors labelled their government a puppet regime.
++ Families of the MEK’s hostages have written their views through Nejat Society. The MEK responded by swearing at the families accusing them of being angry because the MEK is supported by the Americans. The families published a statement denying any feelings of anger.
++ Sahar Family Foundation was established in Baghdad in 2008 to provide aid to abandoned MEK members (see second item above). Soon after, families of current MEK members also gave their support and joined Sahar in trying to rescue people who wanted to leave the MEK but were prevented by the MEK leaders. Sahar issued a statement last week announcing that six months after the Baghdad office closed, Sahar Family Foundation would begin its activities again, this time focused on the MEK in Albania. The statement did not mention where the new office would be.
In English:
++ Albanian newspaper Gazeta Impakt in an article titled ‘US News Agency BIRN calls Iranian terrorists residing in Albania “dissidents”’ highlighted how the US news agency BIRN, linked with George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, treats MEK as “dissidents”, unlike ISIS and other Wahhabi terrorists.
++ Mazda Parsi in Nejat Society calls the MEK “a destructive cult of confession”. “…Based on numerous evidences, the MKO was one of the first groups to commit suicidal terror acts against civilians. Besides, several group members committed self-immolations in European capitals to protest the arrest of their co-leader Maryam Rajavi by the French police, in June 2003.”
++ ‘Evolution, Not a New Revolution, in Iran’, an analytical article by Paul R. Pillar in Lobelog, demolishes the myth that regime change can or will be forced on Iran. The article mentions the role of the MEK. “The myth often is connected to a faith in exile groups as instruments for quick transition to a completely different type of regime. Many of those hoping for regime change in Iran look in this way to the Mujahedin-e Khalq, a cult-cum-terrorist group that actually has almost no popular support within Iran. Some of the same people had placed a similar faith in Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi, whose qualities as a huckster more than as someone who could father a new Iraqi republic became increasingly apparent after the U.S. invasion of 2003.”
++ Publishing an interview with John Bolton by Top Channel, Tirana, Iran Interlink comments: “Warmonger John Bolton attended a secret meeting of the MEK in Tirana. In an interview afterwards it becomes clear that the terrorist MEK cult is being groomed in Albania as part of a bigger agenda to confront Russia. Albania, a member of NATO, is not part of the EU. John Bolton was passed over by President Donald Trump for any position in his cabinet. Analysts believe this was partly based on his continued support for the toxic MEK.”
March 24, 2017
Several days ago, the US news agency BIRN, linked with George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, published an article titled ‘Iran Launches Albanian Media to Target Dissident Exiles’. Among other things, the article claims that “Iranian media are opening an online war against an opposition group – some of whose members live in exile in Albania – by launching new websites in English to influence local opinion”.
But unlike ISIS and other Wahhabi terrorist organizations, BIRN treats the Iranian Mojahedin as peaceful and harmless people.
In the article Fatjona Mejdini, BIRN journalist, stated that the newspaper Impact “also publishes video from a YouTube channel called Impact that broadcasts interviews with those who call themselves former members of the MEK. The YouTube channel is connected with an Albanian newspaper, also called Impact, which since last summer has written about the dangers that arise from the MEK presence in Albania.”
Impact newspaper, which has published an interview with former Mojahedin member Anne Singleton, is proud that its journalistic investigations are receiving international fame. Impact Newspaper would be happy if the leader of the Radicalized Iranian MEK jihadists and the Albanian Prime Minister would honor us with a debate on refugee activity and the Iranian Mujahedin in Albania.
The article in full is below:
[The MEK clearly believes that any publicity is better than no publicity and insisted on publishing the BIRN article in full on its own website.]
Iran Launches Albanian Media to Target Dissident Exiles
Iranian media are waging an online war against an opposition group – some whose members live in exile in Albania – launching new websites in Albanian to influence local opinion.
By Fatjona Mejdini
Tirana – An Iranian NGO called the Habilian Association has added a new section in Albanian to its news website, Habilian, aiming to target Iranian opposition activists who have found refuge in Albania in recent years.
“The Habilian Association has launched the first specialised website in the Albanian language providing news, analysis and documents on crimes conducted by the Mujahedin-e-Khalq organisation,” the first post in Albanian on the site on January 29 said.
Habilian is one of a few Iranian media outlets that have recently started publishing in Albanian.
While its decision to publish in the language of a small Balkan country night appear unusual, Habilian is open about the fact that it is targeting members of Mojahedin-e-Khalq, the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran, who are living in Albania.
While some believe the Iranian government is backing it and other Iranian media that target the MEK, a diplomatic source from the Iranian embassy in Tirana denied this.
Albania agreed take in MEK members in 2013, when the then Prime Minister, Sali Berisha, offered to shelter some Iranians then under the protection of US forces in Iraq.
The People’s Mujahedin of Iran is a controversial resistance group. Founded in 1965 as a left-leaning opposition to the Shah’s regime, it turned against the Islamic Republic following the 1979 Revolution.
The US listed it as a terrorist organisation in 1997 but it was removed from the black list in 2012 after it renounced violence.
The Albanian authorities have declined to give the exact number of MEK members and their families who found refuge in the country, but estimates suggest there are about 2,000.
Online battle
The Habilian Association’s website says that it is “an Iranian human rights NGO established with an aim of elucidating the fact that Iran is one of the biggest victims of terrorism”.
The website says the organisation was founded in 2005 by a group of families of Iranian terror victims killed by organisations like MEK.
“As more than 2,000 members of this dangerous cult were relocated to Albania, Habilian Association’s Albanian website was launched in order to enlighten public opinion in Albania about the true nature of the MEK and make the Albanian people aware of the threats posed to them by this terrorist group,” it reads.
A member of the Habilian Association, Masoud Heidari, told BIRN that the Albanian section of the the website aimed to “warn” Albanians about the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran.
“We decided it was our responsibility to warn the Albanian media, politicians and most importantly of all, the Albanian people, of the capacities of this terrorist group to corrupt politicians, [engage in] money-laundering activities, and ultimately their cultish nature,” he said.
The website’s Albanian page is filled with detailed articles and videos that emphasize the alleged dangers of the MEK group.
It also publishes videos from a YouTube channel called Impakt that broadcasts interviews with those who call themselves former MEK members.
The YouTube channel is connected to an Albanian newspaper, also called Impakt, which since last summer has been writing about the alleged risks that the MEK poses to Albania.
Habilian is not the first Iranian media organisation to start publishing in Albanian.
In July 2016, Iran launched the Pars Today news outlet in Albanian, alongside 24 other languages. Pars Today is part of the state-run media corporation Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, IRIB.
On March 3, Pars Today published an article in Albanian entitled “Support for terrorism and Mujahedeen-e-Khalq damage the credibility and interests of the United States”.
The site has several articles about MEK members, who are described as a terrorist group and a cult.
BIRN asked Pars Today to explain their interest in opening an Albanian language section, but got no reply to the time of publication.
The Iranian opposition organisation, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, also has an Albanian section on its official webpage, alongside six other languages.
Disinformation campaign?
Linda Chavez, a former US representative to the UN Human Rights Commission, who visited Albania in late February to see how MEK members in the country are living, told BIRN that the articles published in Albanian were Iranian government propaganda.
Chavez described it as a disinformation campaign intended to make MEK members’ lives more difficult in the country.
“I will hope that it will not resonate with Albanian people because the MEK -which whom I have a long association – oppose the anti-women misogynist regime in Iran that is continuing to oppress their own people,” she said.
“The risk to me is if Iranian propaganda is taken seriously,” she added.
She said the Iranians living in Albania were in the process of obtaining refugee status and had started slowly to integrate into society.
After BIRN contacted the Iranian embassy, a source from the embassy insisted that the Iranian government has nothing to do with the websites.
“We do our job here in accordance with our diplomatic functions/role and good relationship with the government of Albania, and we don’t have any connections with these sites, newspapers or YouTube channel,” the source said.
The MEK in Albania seems to have a strong political support. Albanian politicians and MPs from the ruling majority and opposition participated in the MEK’s “Free Iran” event in Paris on July 2016.
However, on January 14, Albanian Foreign Minister Ditmir Bushati made the first official visit by a top-rank Albanian diplomat to Tehran, meeting his Iranian counterpart and President Hassan Rouhani.
During his visit, Albania and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding agreeing to hold regular political talks.
Iranian oppositionists were not mentioned in an Albanian foreign ministry press release that was issued about the discussions.
But Iran’s ambassador to Tirana, Gholamhossein Mohammadnia, said that the issue of what he called the “terrorist cult” was discussed during Bushati’s visit.
Mohammadnia said Iran has been assured that the MEK members have no permission to engage in political activity while living in Albania, the Albanian Daily News website reported.
“Therefore, these people are not allowed to threaten Iran’s security or interests inside or outside Albania,” Mohammadnia added.
—————————————————–
Gazeta Impakt, Tirana, Albania,
