Home » Iran » Iran condemned British overt support for a Proscribed terrorist group, Mojahedin Khalq Cult

Iran condemned British overt support for a Proscribed terrorist group, Mojahedin Khalq Cult

MKO terrorism never be purged by new acronyms, UK weekly told

The Iranian Embassy in London has condemned attempts by some British newspapers and MPs to deproscribe the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MKO or PMOI) as an international terrorist organization.

"Surely use of different, new acronyms such as PMOI, NCRI, etc. can never purge the organisation’s long record of criminal activities," the embassy said.

No re-labeling can "put a shine on a body recognized internationally as a terrorist organisation, or in any way justify their terrorist cause," it said in a letter to the Sunday Telegraph.

The letter referred to an article in the weekly’s previous addition on July 29, in which it said that the writer, Christopher Booker, had one clear obligation "to whitewash the background of a cult whose cruelty and hypocrisy are evident to concerned authorities and international bodies."

"It is not a baffling scandal of contemporary politics as the writer says, to categorize PMOI in the UK terror list, the irony is rather the way some former officials as well as MPs are trying to appease Saddam Hussein’s ex-accomplices," the letter also received by IRNA read.

The embassy reminded the paper that the terrorist group "actively took part in slaughtering Iraqi civilians in order to receive the support of the Iraq doomed dictator."

"The bewilderment becomes even greater to see efforts by some lawmakers to help a cult which is proscribed even by some western governments for their atrocities towards Iranians, Kurds and Arabs," it said.

Last year, the embassy castigated the paper for reporting unsubstantiated allegations orchestrated by the MKO to distract attention from the catastrophic situation in Iraq.

In 2005, its sister paper, the Daily Telegraph went as far as calling in its editorial for support for the MKO terrorist group based in Iraq to overthrow Iran’s elected government.



Mr. Booker’s article has been translated in to Farsi and posted in Mojahedin Khalq Organisation web sites (on the list of Terrorist organisation in USA, EU, Canada and United Kingdam!!) shortly before the publication of this article in Telegraph!! (Iran Interlink)

Link to: State Department’s Report on Mojahedin Khalq Orgainsation, Rajavi cult headed by Massoud Rajavi and Maryam Rajavi (2007)


Link to Mr. Booker article in Telegraph.co.uk.


Related material:


Response to Christopher Booker

(Farsi translation of Mr. Booker’s article was posted in Terrorist websites before coming out in Telegraph!!)

Mojahedin Khalq Organisation Logo

Ahmad Baaraan, Paris, July 29, 2007

Your Sunday Telegraph article of July 29 titled “EU flouts its own highest court…” has some serious flaws that deserve your attention. I have known MEK (PMOI, NCRI, MKO, …) for more than 25 years up-close and personal. I have also studied the group in my role as a researcher. Therefore, I see myself qualified to comment about it. Quite frankly, your article is just an echo of the PMOI’s own propaganda filled with false and misleading information.

The enlistment of the group in the EU’s terror list is based on the group’s own behavior which is nothing short of a personality cult revolving around its leader, Massoud Rajavi, with a history of violence and a philosophy based on hatred. The group has also been enlisted by the US Government as an FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization) which was later upheld in court. In concurring with the Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia, Judge Harry T. Edwards notes: “…the public, unclassified administrative record, including petitioner’s own submission to the Secretary, contains more than enough evidence to support the determination that petitioner (PMOI) engages in terrorist activity.” (1)

The December ruling by the EU Court you have referred in your article did not favor de-listing the group. To the contrary, it clearly dismissed the action sought by the PMOI to annul the EU Common Position 2005/936/CFSP- the updated terror list that included the PMOI. It did however order to unfreeze the group’s assets due to lack of proper procedure for such freezing. Therefore, your assertion that the British Government is flouting its own court is not accurate. This ruling is readily available in 16 different languages on the Court’s own official web site. (2) PMOI and its paid politician supporters have misled many about this, relying on that most would not read the actual ruling. I challenged the PMOI to translate the entire ruling (not just the select parts) in Farsi (Persian), and to post the translation on the Internet. They have refused to do so, and will continue such. More than 7 months after the ruling, only the favorable part of the ruling has been published on the group’s Internet site.

Your article also refers to NCRI as a coalition of which PMOI is a member. This is simply not true. Not only people familiar with the group know that NCRI is just a decoy for PMOI; the United States Court of Appeals in Washington DC ruled the following:

After an extensive investigation of MEK and NCRI, the FBI reported to the State Department that “it is the unanimous view of the FBI personnel who are involved in and familiar with the FBI’s investigation of the [MEK]that NCRI is not a separate organization, but is instead, and has been, an integral part of the MEK at all relevant times. Contrary to NCRI’s portrayal of itself as an umbrella organization, of which the MEK was just one member, the FBI concluded that is NCRI that is “the political branch” of the MEK.”(3)

While I truly sympathise with the victims of the brutal Mullah ruling my country, Iran, I caution you not to drift into the PMOI’s propaganda traps by echoing their statistics about the number of people attendant their gatherings, people executed in Iran, and the number of supporters of the group in Iran.


Ahmad Baaraan



(1) http://uniset.ca/other/cs5/327F3d1238.html

(2) http://curia.europa.eu (case number T-228/02)

(3) 362 U.S. App. D.C. 143; 373 F.3d 152; 2004


You may also like

Leave a Comment