Rajavi means to say anti-human when she says anti-terrorist
Many might be taken aback to hear that a notorious terrorist cult takes a sudden step forward to announce it is “the most anti-terrorist movement in the world” after one or two countries decide to
ignore their hot chants of combating terrorism just for political causes none of which serves the interests of their nations. It is bitter but, alas, we hear it from the mouth of a hallucinated terrorist ring-leader.
Maryam Rajavi, occupying the leading throne of Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO/MEK/PMOI/NCR in the absence of her husband whose whereabouts are unknown for the present, in a statement just following MKO’s drop from Canada’s list of terrorist entities stated: “Labeling the PMOI a terrorist organization marked an enormous aberration in combating terrorism. The designation of the most anti-terrorist and anti-fundamentalist movement in the world only emboldened the real terrorists and the godfather of terrorism and fundamentalism, namely the dictatorship ruling Iran”.
Expect for a variety of speculations, there is no clear cut answer to the question of why advocates of combating terrorism have made a sudden U-turn to move against the current. But, there is an undeniable fact that MKO maintains the characteristics of a terrorist cult even if removed from any list. In a testimony before the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on July 7, 2011, Ray Takeyh says that MKO can neither abandon terrorism nor is commitment to democracy neither in deed nor word:
“Terror has always been a hallmark of MEK’s strategy for assuming power. Through much of its past, the party exulted violence as a heroic expression of legitimate dissent. One of the central precepts of the party is that a highly-dedicated group of militants could spark a mass revolution by bravely confronting superior power of the state and assaulting its authority. Once, the masses observe that the state is vulnerable to violence, than they will shed their inhibitions and join the protest, thus sparking the larger revolution. Thus, the most suitable means of affecting political change is necessarily violence. Although in its advocacy in Western capitals, the MEK emphasizes its commitment to democracy and free expression, in neither deed nor word has it forsworn it violent pedigree.”
Emboldened by the illogicality of decisions, a terrorist leader makes an easy step to announce that the world has been wrong so far to label an anti-terrorist group a terrorist one. However, to give a better interpretation of her phrase, many consider it Rajavi’s slip of tongue and read it as anti-human. That is to say, she means to say anti-human when she says anti-terrorist. The existing problem now is the destiny of the group’s members rather than its name on the list. The relevant fact overlooked is the fate of its members. The removal of MKO from any terrorist list in no way helps to end the plights of its members long enslaved against their will. If these countries that delist MKO really believe in the soundness of their decisions, then, the best complimentary deed to end a humanitarian task is to accept a few of the members living in limbo in a cult state and in Iraq.