Home » You searched for ideological revolution » Page 27
Search results for

"ideological revolution"

The cult of Rajavi

Camp Ashraf, the Micro Model of Future Iran!

Although you may be familiar with MKO’s rhetoric and its dual face when addressing the world outside versus its strongly closed internal fort, you could be possibly taken by surprise to hear its leaders once more reiterating brazenly what they dreamed for the future Iran with not in the least belief to what they publicize. Of course, majority of the gathering hired crowed in the Paris-Nord Exhibition Hall on June 28 hardly knew what Maryam Rajavi was saying in her speech because neither had they any basic information about the organization nor were they to be under any further aegis of MKO as its supporters.

The gathering was claimed to be incorporated representatives from the Iranian exile community residing in various countries in Europe, the United States and Canada but none from Camp Ashraf whose members the organization propagate as the backbone of the Iranian Resistance against Iranian regime. Camp AshrafCamp Ashraf,the micro model of future Iran is also known to be the ideological preserver of the organization and a micro society upon which it intends to build the future Iranian society. Thus, whatever the organization suggests for Iran has to have been already tested within its miniature model of promised utopia, Camp Ashraf.

Here is what Maryam Rajavi puts forward in her speech: ‘The future Iran we are fighting for will be a society in which all Iranian citizens enjoy freedom of speech, belief, religion, clothing, and free access to information. Everyone will be equal before the law.’

Ashraf residentsIn his first organizational gathering after the initiation of the ideological revolution, Massoud Rajavi in depiction of the process to arrive at the intended utopia said: “All the discoveries are first made in a laboratory before being generalized. I hope we bring this wave to the surface of the society in the near future”. Of course, he meant his novel, unprecedented discoveries through an unconventional internal revolution that totally discarded traditional social values.

Honestly speaking, are Ashraf residents, locked up within high walls of a closely watched camp to represent an Iranian micro-society, enjoying ‘freedom of speech, belief, religion, clothing, and free access to information’? I think Maryam Rajvi knew well she was joking when she was saying these words. And I do hope the organization is removed from terror lists at least because the captured souls of Camp Ashraf will be granted the opportunity of attaining physical freedom out of a dangerous cult whose leader looks upon them as scapegoats for the accomplishment of his/her cult ambitions.

Sattar Orangi, Mojahedin.ws, June 30, 2008

http://www.mojahedin.ws/news/text_news_en.php?id=1727

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Massoud Rajavi

Rajavi’s Authority on MKO Echelon

To extend his hegemonic leadership over the whole organizational echelon, Rajavi first needed to subjugate high-ranking members hitting upon their personal weaknesses, threatening to dispossess them of organizational positions, fabricating stories about the first founders with himself playing a connection, and more.

Masud Rajavi- leader of the destructive cult

The mass execution of the founder leaders of Mojahedin following SAVAK’s mass arrests in 1970s paved the way for Rajavi to take a different methodology to steer the organization. Although the later ideological schism of the organization could procure a good opportunity to deeply reexamine its ideological infrastructures to restructure it anew, Massoud Rajavi’s insist to lead the organization on the ruins of the past on one hand, and his gaping demarcation with faithful members on the other hand, totally changed the destiny of the organization. Rajavi’s hegemony is the second round of a past totalitarian leadership phase that ended and was remodeled in the ousted Pahlavi’s prisons.

The Iranian Islamic revolution was at its climax when Rajavi was released from the prison but he had managed to win over the majority of high-rankings to be identified as the leader. In fact, the opponents had been already purged inside the prison under the pretexts of being ultra-rightists or reactionaries and much more names and who were known to have jeopardized the organizational entity: there was not a single rival to challenge him then. Pointing out the widespread purgation by Rajavi while in prison, Bijan Nyabati, a left member of the NCRI, states:

Unlike normal procedures, Massoud Rajavi, by the effective aid of the brave martyred commander Musa Khyabani, disregarded many existing potentialities and started reorganization by purging all reactionary inclinations in an attempt to accomplish Hanif’s unfulfilled plan of bringing together a versatile cadre. He suspended all previous memberships and started a new recruitment out of the imprisoned Mojahedin. 1

Nobody doubts that Rajavi opportunistically took advantage of the created gap due to a power vacuum and his personal potentialities following the execution of the founder leaders to secure a status among the cadres. Majority of those who got separated in the course of the first ideological revolution that led to the ideological schism of the organization strongly criticized Rajavi’s opportunistic and power-seeking ambitions to succeed an autocratic leadership. Lotfollah Meisami is one the long detached members of the organization that is fully acquainted with Rajavi’s personal profile and ambitions and how he managed to expose as chosen leader even when his activities were limited in the prison:

Another issue concerning Rajavi was the ostentation he carried. For instance, when he arranged to meet others in a different section of the prison, there were escorts of some kind that came to prepare before his arrival. In fact, they made others wait on him as a man of high dignity. It was the same case with high-ranking official when they happened to visit the prison. 2

Rajavi being self-appointed as the autocratic political and ideological leadership following the internal ideological schism, he could see that he had guaranteed a permanent leadership with the potential rivals taking their portion of leading ambitions away with the split branch. He emerged out of prison while he was accompanied with a number of loyalists to start a new autocratic leadership that has continued for three decades promoting him to the status of a guru.

Refrences:

1.    Niyabati, Bijan; A Different Look at the Ideological Revolution within MKO, Khavaran Publication, 7.

2.    Meisami, L.; The moral decline of a Mojahed. Raah-e Mojahed journal, 1985.

Research Bureau –  Mojahedin.ws  –  May 30, 2008

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Maryam Rajavi

The leadership Catalyst in MKO

Leadership is the most pivotal position that preserves a cult. A fact that cannot be gainsaid is that cults are authoritarian in structure but the guru needs assistants who may help him in administering the members and making the most of them. So, together with his selected aids, the leader forms a hierarchical structure of leadership that is of great significance in handling the cult. For a better understanding of leadership structure in a cult Singer describes it in this form:

For a simple visual portrayal of a cult, imagine an inverted T. The leader is alone at the top, and the followers are all at the bottom. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority although he may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to his wishes and rules. There is no appeal outside of the leader’s system to greater systems of justice. 1

Singer’s described T can also be drawn as a triangle which forms a dynamical harmony which turns into a total disorder in case of angles disarray. The leadership at the top establishes a hierarchical cohesion with other appointed subordinates who in turn guarantee his authority. An investigation into the cult of Mojahedin’s fundamental leadership change, especially after the forced internal ideological revolution in 1985, signifies that Mojahedin’s long maintained democratic centralism, simply meaning obedience to the central leader, was abolished only to pave the path for Rajavi’s hegemony. Now appointing himself at the top, Rajavi needed to establish a different structure with devoted and trustful assistants to work as binding links between him and other ranks and to transcend his status analogous to that of a god. 

The role of Maryam Rajavi, his wife, in this revolution was the same as a catalyst. Appointed second in rank to Rajavi, she was evolved as the archetype for other members to achieve her status of being unquestionably devoted to Rajavi’s ideological leadership. She was the catalyst between the unattainable at the top and lower ranks. Thus, Maryam being closely attached to Rajavi, recognition of him was only possible through attachment to her. She plays the role of a qualified subordinate for the purpose of seeing that other members adhere to her husband’s wishes and rules:

Maryam was held up as an example to the women in the organisation. It was claimed that women could free themselves from their oppression as women, only by following her example. But although the move was a pretext for freeing the energy of the women in the organisation, it had the very real value of being able to exploit the women members’ devotion, and keeping the men in a state of permanent confusion over their role. 2

In the same way that the personality of Maryam is made so tangible and immediate that it can act as a catalyst to help lower ranks transcend, her attachment to Rajavi and his ideological adulation increases her transcendental advancement.  Expounding on the recognition of Maryam as a pivotal catalyst, Bijan Nyabati observes:

First, Maryam has to be turn into a value in Mojahedin’s mind whatever the cost might be; otherwise no other valuable alternative can possibly be substituted. 3

That is where Maryam’s unconventional divorce and remarriage is gauged an ideological value and an example of absolute devotion for others to follow. She is much described as a rebel against the tradition and the norms conventionally adhered to in Iranian culture:

Here, Maryam becomes an anti-traditionalist and family iconoclast! She aims at the foundations of the long-lasted social traditions and divorces her man. Again, she is the one who picks her man and weds herself to him. 4

It was a move that totally questioned traditionally and religiously adopted laws and rituals and hardly anybody could comprehend what the couple was weaving as a revolutionary ideology. Of course, in the same way that nobody could understand and grasp the devised revolution, they failed to gain the necessary competence to get close to leader’s ideological sanctum. Unlike them, Maryam due to her rebellious move gained the essential competence to allow her to hold the position of co-leader:

The third phase of Mojahedin’s internal ideological revolution exposed Massoud’s factual status, tangible only for Mojahedin’s heads, for the lower ranks. Hereon, Massoud is beyond the reach of Mojahedin. He is unachievable unless through a catalyst who is Maryam for certain. Massoud is inaccessible unless those in his quest are melted in Maryam. To understand it in the words, all the members one by one have to follow Maryam as an example. 5

But the real purpose of the phase was to strengthen Rajavi’s hegemonic leadership. He intended to make a sanctuary that no rival could penetrate it. As explained by Anne Singleton:

The real purpose of this phase was to guarantee that there would be no leadership challenge. Rajavi had now removed himself from the ordinary level of leader and elevated himself beyond the normal leader’s role to that of link with God. An unassailable position. 6

Accordingly, any leadership challenge could mean criticising God’s vicegerent which would be considered an unforgivable sin. Besides, any challenge could only be aimed at Maryam and, consequently, left his status untouched. He demanded members total devotion and his hallowed position had to be instilled into the members through chosen apostles who necessarily formed the base angle of the leadership triangle:

What Rajavi was asking everyone in the Mojahedin to do was to give him total obedience. He implied to them (through the mouths of Maryam and Fahimeh) that he had links with God and therefore knew things that ordinary members couldn’t be expected to understand. This meant that anyone who rejected him was blaspheming against God. The members were mostly willing to allow themselves to be indoctrinated with this new concept. 7

Maryam’s credibility could best be instituted by Rajavi himself. Through a variety of illustrated allegories, Rajavi in his internal meetings frequently referred to Maryam’s highly elevated status and her angel-like salvation power. In fact, he meant appreciation and recognition of his own transcendent and god-like position. Imparted in the memoirs of an ex-member quoting Rajavi we read:

In one of his meetings Rajavi said: actually you are in a grave. Is there anything worse than it? With a stone covering it. We send Maryam to push it away so you could see a shining light. It is the light coming from Massoud. See how you are distanced? She becomes light while you are sleeping in your graves with a stone over them. Who has made self-sacrifice to save you? Maryam, for sure. Then, if you intend to come out and reach me, you have to take advantage of Maryam’s aid. You cannot possibly reach the source of light but you have to be thankful of being extricated from your graves. You will come to understand little by little. 8

Hardly will you encounter people other than Massoud and Maryam with highly elevated position as leading cadre in the cult of Mojahedin. Other ranks get their legitimacy from the couple. While Rajavi is holding hegemonic control of the cult, his wife, Maryam, is granted the legitimacy of a catalyst to mobilize members’ devotion and heightens their vision of an urgent commitment to justify destructive cult-like activities that not only threatens the world peace but also jeopardizes the insiders’ life as human beings. 

References:

1.    Thaler Singer, Margaret; Cults in Our Midst: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace, p. 9.

2.    Iran-Interlink; Anne Singleton’s Saddam Private Army.

3.    Niyabati, Bijan; A Different Look at the Ideological Revolution within MKO, Khavaran Publication.

4.    Ibid.

5.    Ibid.

6.    Iran-Interlink; Anne Singleton’s Saddam Private Army.

7.    Ibid.

8.    [7]. Soliloquies in solitude, a collection; interview with an ex-member of MKO.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

The Cult of Mojahedin; devoid of minimum obligation to human rights

Since the presidency of Jimmy Carter up to now, one of the main factors the US relies on for any supposed alternative to assume another country’s political control is the least ostensible evidences of adhering to universal declaration of human rights. In fact, it has turned into a seemingly legal bound that the US has adopted when planning to interfere in internal affairs of a country or regimes’ change. For instance, the US invasion to Iraq was under the banner of combating terrorism and preventing violation of human rights by the ousted despotic there. As a result, a certain alternative has to be necessarily respecting the least accepted international conventions on human rights and be free of any stigma of human rights abuse.

Human Rights Abuse inside MKOConsidering itself an alternative, MKO, in spite of chanting slogans, hardly believes in and adheres to the principles of human rights. Reportedly, the organization is notoriously known to be abusing its insiders through a various instances of human rights violations. Reported by Human Rights Watch, “abuses carried out by MKO leaders against dissident members ranged from prolonged incommunicado and solitary confinement to beatings, verbal and psychological abuse, coerced confessions, threats of execution, and torture that in two cases led to death”. 1

The abuse techniques varied according to the group’s shift of policies. For instance, following the internal ideological revolution, divorce of married couples and gender revolutions became complementary. It is worth noting that before divorce revolution, members were said to marry each other to compensate for emotional problems of those members losing their partner in the military assault of the so-called Eternal Light. Moreover, in divorce revolution, couples were forced to give pledge never remarry. Such actions by MKO turned it into an extremist religious cult exceeding human rights. Solidarity confinement within Ahraf Camp

The US is well aware of the violation of human rights within Mojahedin as well as its terrorist inclinations and the fact that leftist groups cannot abide by the content of international conventions adopted to stop violations against human. The reason is that the universal human rights declaration is mainly based on liberalist and humanist thoughts and considers human rights regardless of the type of ideology, religion, nationality, ethnic characteristics, class, etc. Mojahedin can hardly adapt themselves to the thought since it is under heavy Marxist dogmatism explicitly apparent in its adopted eclectic ideology.

Beside evident instances of human rights violations, Mojahedin have abused strong humanistic sentiments of the Europeans under the cover of charity associations with the purported aim of supporting Iranian children and asylum seekers. By gaining the sympathy of ignorant people and extracting money from them, Mojahedin managed to collected considerable amount of money to finance its terrorist operations. Reported by the LA Times quoting the FBI:

MKO members in the name of a Charity Committee for the Defence of Human Rights collected money from passengers, mostly Asians, under the false pretences of helping refugees. They showed the photos of children suffering from hunger and apparently victims of mistreatment and torture in Iran. In this way, they gained the sympathy of passengers by telling them that they want the money to help the refugees.” 2

The main focus of MKO former members is on the organization’s false claims as to its adherence to human rights conventions and at the same time exploiting members. Ann Singleton, an MKO ex-member writes:

One of the main criticisms of former members of the Mojahedin, concerns the internal structure of the organisation. It is described as operating an iron discipline over its members, to the extent of practicing serious violations of human rights in an attempt to make members conform. 3

In some cases, responsible organizations have been denied to have access to accurate information of human abuses within MKO since it could face the organization with global challenges. Referring to Amnesty International Annual Report, Singleton writes:

Amnesty International in its 2002 Annual Report, being unable to investigate in the Mojahedin’s headquarters and camps in Iraq, the hundreds of accusations of human rights abuses which had reached its office, resigned itself to stating:”There were unconfirmed reports that the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran, an armed political group, ill-treated its own members at a base in Iraq. The reports were denied by the organization but it failed to provide substantive information to allay AI’s concerns. 4

MKO former members refer to the organizational and ideological structure of Mojahedin as a factor contributing to anti-humanistic actions of the organization. Their testimonies are well appraised evidences of disrespecting the least human rights principles within the group:

The greatest concerns then as regards the Mojahedin are firstly, that membership of any cult is damaging to the mental, physical and emotional health of all its members. In addition, membership of this particular cult deprives the person of every basic human right as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5

Singleton also expounds on the paradoxical nature of organization mottos on the one hand its activities resulting in the violation of absolute rights of the members on the other hand as the reason why many members separated from MKO:

These are surely disturbing reports concerning an organisation which presents itself as the foremost critic of Iran’s human rights record, and an organisation which purports to promote women’s rights and democracy. It has become clear that most of those who have left did so because they were loyal to their understanding of what the Mojahedin organization originally represented. The fact is that Rajavi moved the organisation away from its original form and made it into something unrecognisable for these people. It is they who have remained loyal to the Mojahedin, not Rajavi. 6

Human rights watch report, the US State Department announcement, former MKO member’s testimonies and many other unquestionable evidences indicate that Mojahedin do not recognize the content of universal human rights declaration neither ideologically nor practically. If such an organization that violates the basic human rights of its members under the banner of ideological revolution and cultist relations manages to assume power, not only the present challenges of the US and other European countries fail to be met but it may result in an overall political and social blockade.

 

References

1. No Exit: Human Rights Abuses in the MKO Camps, Human Rights Watch Report, May 2005

2. Nimrouz, No. 628, March 10, 2000, page 1 and 49.

3. Iran-Interlink; Anne Singleton’s Saddam Private Army.

4. ibid.

5. ibid.

6. ibid.

  

Mojahedin.ws, Research Bureau, May 14, 2008

http://www.mojahedin.ws/article/show_en.php?id=2708

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Altering Individual Identity: a Cultic Approach in MKO 2

The main goal of producing a new identity in cults is to make insiders dependant on the cult and to be obedient. The mechanisms the cults exploit to achieve the goal are interrelated but each can be discussed separately since they are all prerequisites for insiders’ persuasion and control and the final transformation of the recruits into real cultists. It will not be wrong to say that whatever the cults do is to cut the members off from the outside world to produce a new identity and belief totally different from what the members previously held as right and dear. The process finished, the insiders will adopt a new and reborn personality as Singer states: Altering Individual IdentityAs part of the intense influence and change process in many cults, people take on a new social identity, which may or may not be obvious to an outsider. When groups refer to this new identity, they speak of members who are transformed, reborn, enlightened, empowered, rebirthed, or cleared. The group’ approved behavior is reinforced and reinterpreted as demonstrating the emergence of "the new person." Members are expected to display this new identity. 1 The new personality totally split from the outside world is manipulated for a variety of group tasks based on the objectives of the group and cult that consider the outsiders as the enemies who have to be confronted: The conflicts a mass movement seek and incites serve not only to down its enemies but also to strip its followers of their distinct individuality and render them more soluble in the collective medium. 2 As Hoffer asserts, a cultist personality is formed to be submissive to the inner-cultic relations that have priority to outwardly demonstrated ambitions and goals. The members undergoing overall identity change easily consent to any means of changing behaviour and conduct. Thus, cults can successfully accomplish their goal of binding new members to the group. Considering the stages people will go through as their attitudes are changed by the group environment and the thought reform processes, Singer points to psychologist Edgar Schein’s second stages of three: During this second stage, you sense that the solutions offered by the group provide a path to follow. You feel that anxiety, uncertainty, and self-doubt can be reduced by adopting the concepts put forth by the group or leader. Additionally, you observe the behavior of the longer, term members, and you begin to emulate their ways. As social psychology experiments and observations have found for decades, once a person makes an open commitment before others to an idea, his or her subsequent behavior generally supports and reinforces the stated commitment. That is, if you say in front of others that you are making a commitment to be "pure," then you will feel pressured to follow what others define as the path of purity. 3 There are also the eight psychological themes that psychiatrist Robert Lifton has identified as central to totalistic environments and cults invoke these themes for the purpose of promoting behavioral and attitudinal changes in the members. The third theme, demand for purity, depicts two opposite world of black and white; the cult being an absolutely white and clean world versus the black and evil world of outside. Of course, the members with a new personality have no other choice but to think and act according to cult’s ideology and drawn strategy: An us-versus-them orientation is promoted by the all-or-nothing belief system of the group: we are right; they (outsiders, nonmembers) are wrong, evil, unenlightened, and so forth. Each idea or act is good or bad, pure or evil. Recruits gradually take in, or internalize, the critical, shaming essence of the cult environment, which builds up lots of guilt and shame. Most groups put forth that there is only one way to think, respond, or act in any given situation. There is no in between, and members are expected to judge themselves and others by this all-or-nothing standard. 4 The process of producing identity within MKO follows the same mechanism in the cults and its orientation began with the start of the internal ideological revolution. All the members undergoing the revolution process admitted their identity change, that there does exist a long distance between their organizational and personal identities. It was instilled into them that their identity would be prompted based on the extent of adherence to the ideological system of the group and denial of any personal identity. In a text written by a member of MKO in self-denial we read: Personality, egocentrism, self-reliance and individualism are all souvenirs of the bourgeoisie’s worthless humanism that distanced me from the organization as far as its degree of its impact on me. It was like a chaff that barred me to drink the pure, life-giving instructions of the organization and was leaving me alone in a desolate waste-land with no way out. I was enslaved by dominant ambiguities within me. When I failed to overcome the ongoing struggle inside me, I was even more vulnerable to the outside misfortunes and could not even face them. 5 The member’s confession well depicts his identity destabilization and what psychologists call an identity crisis. He looks back at his own world and values to find out that he has been wrong in the past. This process makes him uncertain about what is right, what to do, and which choices to make and of course, as he admits, only the cult-like instructions of the organization can lead him to what is inspired to be the right path. Consequently, he takes on a new organizational identity which he considers a change for the better. In the process, he, as the member of a cult, detaches from his most dear ideas and attachments which he discovers to have been nothing beyond a barren waste-land for the identity reborn, a utopia in the horizon he fails to dismiss easily. Masoud Banisadr, another separated member of MKO, in his memoir relates of the time when sat tearing whatever attached him to the past under the commands of the organization: This time I attacked my old photographs from my own childhood till marriage and up to then, my parents photographs as I wanted to deny all of them, my father who was perhaps responsible for my bourgeois tendencies and my mother who was responsible of my own ‘mild’ and ‘gentle’ behaviour known as liberal ones. Anna seeing me taking all those photographs and albums, with anger, was quietly crying, then when I attacked our marriage Album she start crying louder, and asked me to stop it. She said those are not just yours . . . but I was not listening to her and took everything and put them in a rubbish bag. 6 Quoting Lifton’s forth theme, through a cult’s instructions, members are told whatever connects them to their former lives is wrong and has to be avoided, a fact well affirmed by MKO’s ex-members: Through the confession process and by instruction in the group’s teachings, members learn that everything about their former lives, including friends, family, and nonmembers, is wrong and to be avoided. Outsiders will put you at risk of not attaining the purported goal: they will lessen your psychological awareness, hinder the group’s political advancement, obstruct your path toward ultimate knowledge, or allow you to become stuck in your past life and incorrect thinking. 7 That is why MKO refer to members’ solubility in the organizational identity as a “reborn” or “identity salvation”. The organization, being transformed into a cult, pursues the same cult mechanism of altering the members’ personal identity to produce a new identity. References: 1. Margaret Thaler Singer; Cults in Our Midst, JOSSEY-BASS, 2003, p. 78. 2. Eric Hoffer; The true believer, Harper &. Row, Publishers, New York, 1966, p. 112. 3. Margaret Thaler Singer; Cults in Our Midst, JOSSEY-BASS, 2003, p. 76. 4. Ibid, 71. 5. Mojahed, no. 252; Abdol-ali Maasoumi’s letter to the ideological revolution. 6. Masoud Banisadr; Memoirs of an Iranian Rebel. 7. Margaret Thaler Singer; Cults in Our Midst, JOSSEY-BASS, 2003, p. 72.

Mojahedin.ws – Research Bureau -March 22 2008

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Former members of the MEK

Letter of Mr. Keyvan Radbin to the SFF

Mr. Radbin is a former member of the MKO. He managed to leave the Ashraf camp just after the occupation of the country. He lives in Canada now. The letter was originally in English which is as follows: I am Keyvan Radbin. I was born on Sep. 22-1971 in Tehran. I got familiar withblank MKO by their TV and Radio programs. I became their full-time sympathizer from 1999 to 2001 in Tehran and my activities contained social and advertising for the organization. I leaved Iran to Iraq from Turkey for joining to MKO on July 18-2001. I stayed in Turkey for around one month and then after explanation process by the organization’s people in charge, I got moved to Iraq first to Basra port and then to Baghdad. After staying in Baghdad for half day I was moved to Ashraf camp.  I leaved the organization on 2003 after the war with difficulty. I was almost one of the first people who leaved the organization after the war. Actually, the first day that I faced the people in charge in Baghdad, I got that something was wrong with them. I could not understand them well and I got that I had fell into deep trouble because their behavior was completely different from what I had been watching in their media programs and what had been told to me up to that time. But I thought may be after passing sometime everything would be good and I would get matched with the new environment so I took it easy!! But on my entry to the reception area in Ashraf camp I got that everything was getting worse and worse within my thirteen days staying in reception area. I got that they were trying to impose something on me that they had never spoke about! First ideological revolution then divorce (noting that I was single) but they never explained about those subjects frankly and openly. Any time that I used to ask them they answered me that when I go forth I would understand the depth of the subjects more!!! Anyway, I don’t make it too long about the sufferings that had there. In just one sentence I must say that all were like a horrible night-mare that the person who has never been there can’t even imagine. I don’t want to remember them again. In reception area I saw that how they tortured one young person psychologically that his face had been changed to an old person within a couple of months. He suffered there just because he didn’t want to accept their imposed ideas and stay there! (Anyway, I have explained everything in details in my interviews). Then I got moved to reception area (called paziresh) again with fully disappointment of the things that I’d seen there in my previous process in reception area. After less than one month I saw myself in a jungle without any rule, a jungle that everything had a meaning other than human being. Then I remembered the old movies about slavery. In one month of the stress I had bad back pain that I still have it. Then I faced with daily operation (called amaliyate jari) or daily self criticism. It was like the ancient Roma rules that governors put the innocents through the lions to get ripped off by the wild animals. Then I faced with weekly cleaning off (called ghosle haftegi) and many other inhumanity things. I started to criticize the organization for their lies and bad behaviors. But each time I was confronted with rough suppressions that I had never seen even by the Iranian regime. Then I remembered one of my friend’s words that told me before joining the organization that they are the worst dictators! I got everything, yes he was right. I requested a few times to leave the organization but each time I faced with psychological and physical pressures which made me to stay there. Eventually they told me that there is no other world outside Ashraf camp and I had to spend the rest of my life there. They took me to their courts many times. I got beaten up a few times by Hassan Norali and Ali Osat the people in charge. I was threatened by Fahimeh Arvani, Fereshteh Shojayi, Ahmad Ebrahim, Abdi, Nader Rafiyi and others many times that if I stay against them they would send me to Abu Ghraib prison. I spent some times in the organization’s intelligence service jails in Ashraf camp a few times. They got few false confessions from me by keeping me under severe pressure. I was always under the vision and control of the people in charge there. I didn’t have any freedom even for going to bathroom and so on. A few times I tried to kill myself but some power didn’t let me do so. I tried to escape from there but it was impossible because I saw few people that tried to escape had been arrested by Saddam’s forces and had been tortured badly. Within the war we moved to Jalula in the north. Since I knew their lies they tried to kill me and they shouted at my head but I was lucky that I had a helmet on my head and God helped me the bullet after hitting to my helmet crooked and didn’t went deep. When we returned to the Iraqi army base (called feylagh in Arabic) they put me on trial by Ahamad Hanifnejad, Vahid Batebi and Saeed Jamali. They blamed me that I am a spy and I work for Iranian regime! Again they tried to put me in trouble but again God like always was with me and they couldn’t do anything. Anyway when we returned to Ashraf camp again I requested once more that I wanted to leave and eventually because of the presence of the US army this time they couldn’t imprison me. Then they put me in the exit area (called khoruji) and even there they also tried to put me in trouble. But when the US army officers came there other defectors and I explained everything to them. They moved us to first TIF and then to TIPF and I spent two years in TIPF and then I moved to Turkey and after two and half years staying in Turkey I came to Canada. In six months of staying in Canada so far I have been able to study and get my Diploma in International business management and I still study to get my second degree as an automotive service technician. So Rajavi tried to teach me how to do suicide bombing but he never succeeded in doing so. I showed him that he is very weak and stupid and his impression of a human being is false. When I was in Ashraf camp I made friendship with Soheyl Khattar (Sasha). He also had same problems as mine and he also had been tortured. He tried to escape but eventually he was killed by his person in charge (called mas’ul) when he was in the Iraqi base (feylaq). Actually the doctor who was called Hassan Aref told me that because he was witness there when Sasha`s dead body was brought to the clinic. I have tons of bitter experiences while I was in Ashraf camp that I have mentioned some of them in my interviews. I will explain them all again with details anywhere and anytime needed. Once getting into MKO you never could see any exit. It was just a one-way road without return. There I saw the frighten tunnel. I must add, all the human rights activists in all over the world must be aware that there is somewhere in Iraq which is called Ashraf camp that in this so called modern world there are innocents who live there like slaves and still are being tortured physically and physiologically that leaders of the cults do. They are the worst dictators that the world has ever seen, even worse than Stalin and Mao;”blue kite”movie is a simple example of imprisoned people in Ashraf camp. By the way, we shouldn’t forget that the defectors who have been displaced to the north of Iraq in Kirkuk have been tortured and their rights for living have been trampled by MKO for many years. Regarding the fact that their refugee status have been recognized by the UNHCR, but they are still displaced and they are still living in bad situation and also get threaten by the MKO. All the world and free countries should help these defectors to be moved to some safe place for living like millions of free people around the world and make their lives. It’s enough to have people abused by MKO.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

Bush,Iran and Bomb

  Research on a Programmed War –  Chapter 13 

To fight the Iranian Regime, the Bush administration decided to not only sit at a table with the evil but also to invite itself to evil ‘s table, allying with a group that has been designated as a foreign terror organization by the State Department since 1997. In fact the position taken by the group and its ideology are perfectly opposite to those of the United Stated as well as the Islamic Republics ideas, but its leaders impudent manipulators, animated by a logic of existence ,are making alliance with the worst enemies of the Islamic Regime to prolong their existence. Michael Rubin qualifies the MEK (Mujahedin-e-Kalq) as “monsters of the left”, a lable that perfectly characterizes this cult-like group which has mixed terrorism, autocracy, Islamism and Marxism since its creation.   Born on the vestige of a reformist movement formed in 1960’s by Mehdi Bazargan, MEK was created by a group of students of whom Masud Rajavi supposes that God not only created the world but he leads it to a historical evolution that ends to a society without classes, omitting the capitalistic inequalities. Their theory is a strange “syncretism” where Marxism and Islam coexist and reject the conservative clerics. According to them, the Shiite clerics as well as the Sunnites failed to understand the real essence of Quran and its dynamism. Masud Rajavi who affirms himself as the only leader, interpret religion to justify terrorism. In his opinion, a person who dies while a terror operation is equal to martyr and in his interpretation of Shiite, he  has the glorification of a martyr. 

A dictator who never had power MEK, engaged in armed struggle without kindness against Shah multiply the assassination and attempts against American interests in Iran.   In 1979, the movement was one of the elements who supported the hostage taking of American diplomats in Tehran. Meanwhile, the group supported the Soviet invasion to Afqanistan and opposed the resistance of Afghan Mujahedin. Reorganized by Rajavi, MEK functioned as a communist party inspired by Trotskyite, with its central committee and political office and youth and propaganda organizations to recruit new members.  Rajavi, with his Stalinist mustache, has not invented a democratic system but a tyranny and rigorous hierarchy that put him on the head with the absolute power. For Muajhedin’s leader, Khomeini’s reaching power, means the victory of conservative clerics to which he has always opposed. On the other hand, the revolution’s leader views the mix of Marxism and Islam as intolerable. At the head of a delegation, on the early days after the revolution, Rajavi was received by Ayatollah Khomeini in Qom but the leader of the revolution refuses his offers frigidly presenting a lesson on what the true Islam is. The gap between the two sides deepened everyday so as Khomeini’s supporters call Mujahedin “hypocrites” or “infidels”, the verbal oppression increased and reached a physical phase that is forgotten today. The MKO’s partisans who were called,” God’s enemies “ were executed in large numbers. And of course MKO respond by the assassinations and attempts which mounted to 10000 victims during 1981 to 1982.  On July 29th, 1981, Rajavi accompanied by Bani Sadr, the ex-president of Islamic Republic, fled Iran on a military aircraft that landed on military base of Evreux. Rajavi found refugee in Auver-sur-Oise where his medicine brother resided, a few meters from Ravoux motel in which Vincent van Gohg died, Rajavi installed his general base and changed it to a camp which still exists there.  In order to continue his existence, this dictator who has never had power, rules a weakened group, serves the worst enemy of his country: Saddam Hussein.  Mujahedin became the supplementary army for Iraqis in the bloody war between Iran and Iraq. Today all Iranians with any opinion share one idea: the betrayal and hatred towards Mujahedin as a group of “traitors” and” terrorists”.   Murder with Tanks In 1991, following the defeat of Saddam Hussein, the future of Iraq is the subject of discussions among a small group of advisors of Bush father. Robert Gates has already prepared a lot of scenarios. One of them considers the creation of a mini-state in Southern Iraq dominated by Shiites. Gates was supposed to create an army similar to that of South of Lebanon which is Israelis’ agent. Washington repeatedly calls the Shiites and Kurds for uprising. These calculations were due to the Americans’ assurance of Saddam’s heavy failure. They were sure that he could not oppress the internal uprisings.  On the first occasion, a message of support was sent to Iranian Kurds, however it was so vague that the Kurds couldn’t confirm or deny it. At the same time, the American military experts crossed Turkey borders and arrived in Kurdistan.  Bush and his partisans were shocked when Saddam Hussein oppressed Kurdish and Shiites uprisings violently. “They had no plan any more” told me a collaborator of Dick Cheney at that time. “I remember that we asked our intelligence Service: how could the Revolutionary Guard of President oppress the uprisings. They were not able to give any answer.” And the reason: “ the soldiers who were wearing the uniforms of revolutionary Guard , Saddam’s favorite force, and assassinated Kurdish civilians and Shiites opponents in Basra were all MEK members. The son of Jalal Talibani, Iraqi Kurds’ leader, says: “Until the fall of Saddam’s Regime, it (MKO) was a part of Iraqi army that played an important role in oppressing Kurdish uprisings in 1991.”  New York Times published the testimony, on these events, of a former member of MEK who was the body guard of Masud Rajavi and his second wife Maryam. He says:” they told us that if these rebels succeed to overthrow saddam Hussien, it would be the end to our movement too”¦ Maryam Rajavi advised us to take them under the tanks and keep our bullets for the other  operations.”

Unique Manipulators There are evil states” out there but some allegedly “Revolutionary” movements are also evil, including FARC in Colombia and MEK.  Masud Rajavi and his second wife Maryam control their movement with despotism: the members are not allowed to read anything except that of MEK, living collectively ,they must remain single ,deprived of any sexual relations, attend regular meetings of auto-criticizing.   In 1985, Maryam and Masud got married, believing that their marriage is the beginner of an ideological revolution in the organization, forced the few married couples of MKO to divorce in order to devote themselves  physically and mentally to the cult  of personality that they created. These qualified manipulators know well how naive and oblivious the democratic governments of the world are. Therefore, in 1986 they set out for lobbying in European parliaments especially in that of France they succeed to collect the signatures and 3000 parliamentarians on a petition. In 1992 they repeated the same operation in the United States and could collect the signatures of 1500 of members and collaborators of American congress to “support National Council of Resistance of Iran as a democratic alternative to Khomeini’s regime in Iran.” They also sent some delegations to meet British Workers Party, communist Party of Italy and Greece, attracting the welcome of several human rights organization and famous scholars. They all had forgotten that enemy of an enemy is not necessarily their friend. Michael Rubin, the specialist of Iran in American Enterprise Institute who is however close to neo-conservatives, speaks of a real aversion for the movement: “Within the United States, MKO members tell Congressmen, their staffs, and other policymakers what they want to hear: That the MKO is the only opposition movement capable of ousting the unpopular and repressive Islamic Republic. They are slick. Friendly lawmakers and commentators get Christmas baskets full of nuts and sweets. Well-dressed and well-spoken representatives of MKO front organizations approach American writers, politicians, and pundits who are critical of the regime.’’

Four points that are not negotiable. Tehran has repeatedly asked Paris for the extradition of MKO leaders and the halt of their activities in French soil. According to the research on relations between Iran and France, published in 2006: “”¦ Iran has decided to put pressure on France to accept the expulsion of MKO’s chief and organize the content of Eurodif.” For the cause, the hostage takings in Lebanon and several attempts were organized by Iran. “At beginning of December 1985” write Dominique Lorentz “the Iranians awaken President Mitterrand with two operations. On December 7th two bombs exploded simultaneously in Galeries Lafayette and Printemp.” I visited Ronald Dumas in his house in Paris, he told me of his first visit in Iran:” it was 1951, I was working for a small newspaper and I had a skin problem that made me have beard. Mossadeqh was on power at that time and had sympathy for me.” Having finished his nostalgic memories, Duma talked of four points that are not negotiable according to Mitterrand, in Iran-France relations: Refusing to pay ransom for the release of detained hostages, to discuss the military contracts with Iraq or to deliver arms to Iran. The last point: he refused the expulsion of Iranian political refugees including Masud Rajavi and former president Bani Sadr.”

The Queen of Bees

A few months later Masud Rajavi was extradited to Iraq by Jacque Chirac who had just come to the head of federal government. The Iranian authorities pleased of such decision were definitely wrong. Rajavi became the ally of their worst enemy and the executor of Saddam’s dirtiest deals. Rajavi possessed an army included of 7000 to 8000 men, heavily armed that  its main mission was the oppression of internal uprisings for Baath regime in Iraqi territory and launching sabotage operations and assassinations in Iran.  In 1987, the Interior Minister, Charles  Pasqua, announced the expulsion of Iranian opponents, especially the Mujahedin. The decision causes a wave of protests. High Commissioner for Refugees declares its concern and Human Rights League protests.  Jack Lang claims:” Shame on Pasqua. Shame on Chirac’s government for  this inappropriate act means the denial of  refugees’ rights and alliance with Khomeini’s dictatorship .” Lionel Jospin names it “brutal expulsion.” Charles Pasqua’ s response is  both ironic and exact:” you are free to have sympathy for Muajhedin-e-Khalq that today, fight the regime of Khomeini as well as yesterday that they helped him to reach the power. You will fail to represent them as democratic and you can not imagine what kind of regime will they establish in Iran if they take the power.” The only problem was that a few months later, Pasqua signed a text of support for MEK” The movement which has a little interest in democracy starts a large campaign of protestation all over Europe and America in July 1985, with the blind help of Western newspapers. The pressures succeed finally. Paris accepts the return of seven of the extradited people.  On June 17th, 2003, 1300 policemen raided the organization’s headquarter in Auver-Sur-Oise . One hundred sixty-five members and responsible were arrested including their president Maryam Rajavi. In a protest gesture, ten of Mujahedin self- immolated; two of them died. Maryam Rajavi, wearing her Chanel jacket and the scarf always on her head, was released.   According to the study made by “ journal of study on eastern Mediterranean and the  Turkish-Iranian world” , “ this operation can mark a new step in Iran-European relations, characterized, on one hand, by the pressure Europe put on Iran due to its nuclear program, not to give a pretext to the Americans who are seeking a regime change in Iran if the later refuses to cooperate with AIEA; from the other hand, European union, following its approaches on Iran including the support for “ reformists” , wants to omit the  options that  could lead to the destabilization of the political scene in Iran. In this perspective, considering that People’s Muajhedin as a well-organized organization can play a role in destabilization of Islamic Republic French government launched the operation to limit MKO’s action on French soil [“¦]. In order to justify the operation, the interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy explains:” Mujahedin wanted to make a protection base of France and we can not accept it.”

The explanation was a little short. The movement has used France as a support base for years. And, in Auver-Sur-Oise, behind the walls and towers that protect her headquarter, Maryam Rajavi continue to control her organization like a queen of bees in her beehive. 2003 was an excellent year for MEK. The fall of Saddam served them with another supporter: The United Stated. 

Chapter14 In March 2003,the American troops surrounded camp Ashraf ,the principal military base of Mujahedin in Iraqi territory ,located on the West of Iranian border at a hundred kilometers North of  Bagdad. It contained 3850 men, armed with heavy arms including tanks and artilleries. They are disarmed and detained in the camp.  Tehran sent a message to White House, by its intermediate Javad Zarif, its ambassador in United Nations. Iran proposed to exchange the Al-Qiada high-ranking members who had been detained in Iran, following the September 11th, for the 3850 men of MEK. “Your terrorists instead of ours” mentioned Zarif.  The suggestion that was made in the middle of March became the subject of a meeting between Bush and his top advisors. As always, Cheney was sitting on the right side of the president ,in the Situation Room. This conference room , especially decorated ,is located in the basement of the White House. A lot of rooms surround it, with large maps of different regions of the world on the walls. The information that is transmitted every morning to the White House by the secret services are reproduced on these maps. The Situation Room is also equipped with extra ordinarily sophisticated computers that let the authorities in the room contact instantly with any part of the world.  Bush, who had had the war on terror and particularly the elimination of terrorists, should have been satisfied with this suggestion. Besides, the deal was good to Iran because if they could have reached the [MKO] leaders, they could have used their intelligence to prohibit the emergence of possible attacks.  But, finally the Americans refused the suggestion that Cheney resumed declaring:”we preserve all the options.” 

“This group loves the United States”  For Washington, MEK is not only an “option”, but also a reality; it has an office in the very official building of National Press, a high place of the whole American Press in American Capital.  On April 8th, 2003, Ileana Rose-Lehtinen, republican from Florida, president  of the sub-committee on international relations for Near-East  and Central Asia declared about Mujahedin:” this group loves the United States. They are assisting us in war on terrorism they’re pro-US . This group has not fought  against the US. It’s simply not true. .”  In Washington, numerous figures including Paul Wolfowitz and Dauglas Feith are reviewing MEK as an ideal instrument for the politics they would like to take against Iran. The grouplet also tries to seem credible. Its spokesman in Washington, AliReza Jaafar zade, who took distance from the MKO in 2003, fed the Americans with the revelations on Iranian nuclear program.  On May 10th,2003 general Ray Odierno, commandant of the forth infantry division installed in Iraq. declared:”I would say that any organization that has given up its equipment to the coalition clearly is cooperating with us, and I believe that it  should be reviewed whether  they are  still a terrorist organization or not.”  A declaration that is a little thought of, shows the spiritual status of many military officials. Michael Ledeen has well said:” I’m not the man to get closer that 300 kilometers to MEK, these men are not supported, they have no legality.” He knows well that it is a lie. Mujahidin were received at least by the United States that became their really political sponsor.

“A terrorist group is not necessarily illegal” Just after the reelection of George W.Bush, the Vice-president Cheney declared on January 20th, 2005 on CBS:” if you provide a list of potential zones of problem, Iran is on the top.“ At the same time, he asked the director of CIA to think of using MKO forces for sabotage operations inside Iran.  Maryam Rajavi and her movement who assassinated in the past several Americans and served Saddam Hussein as supplemetary force, became an arm in the hands of American president and his advisors. The only obstacle against an open cooperation between MEK and the American administration: the organization has figured on the list of foreign terrorist organizations of the State Department since 1997. A designation that curiously didn’t forbid it from having an office and activities in American capital. John Ashcroft, the ultra-conservative minister of Justice, supports the group actively and one of his collaborators explains this juridical ambiguity:”the simple designation of a group as a foreign terrorist organization doesn’t make it necessarily illegal.” The organization is recorded by the Justice Department as a lobbyist foundation, an activity that they are skilled in.  In January 2005, a former collaborator of Ronald Reagan, Raymond Tanter, created Iran Policy Committee, composed of “former officials of White House, State Department and Pentagon, The Intelligence Agencies, the research centers and universities.” And, he fails to mention the several important representatives of arm industries. According to members of IPC “Iran poses the main treat against the United States and its allies.” Since its creation, the committee put pressure on the Administration to remove MEK from the terrorist list and “to put these freedom fighters on the top of the strategy for regime change in Iran.” During a conference, on November 21st 2005, Taner declared :” one of the military options is the ‘ Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator [ a nuclear bomb tactic in large measure] that could have the capacity to destruct the tunnels profoundly undergrounded and sub terrain installations.” After, this radical introduction, he adds: “the international community should realize that there is only one group that can terrify the regime of Tehran: the People’s Mujahedin and National Council Resistance of Iran, the political coalition that MEK belongs to. [..] They are not only the best sources of Intelligence on the potential violation of the rules of non-proliferation, by Iran; but also they are possible allies of the West to bring regime change in Tehran.”  

“The Increasing quarrel of  the civilizations” Tanter’s innovation was supported by Tom Tancerdo, the Representative of Colorado in house of Representatives. The man whose reputation is due to his plan for the deport of clandestine workers on American territory, the construction of a wall throughout the borders of the country and the necessity for the United States to engage in the “The Increasing quarrel of  the civilizations’’. “ I think” he says, “we are not fighting only a small group who took religion as hostage, but a civilization that is determined to destruct us: radical Islam. Radical Islam has been the enemy of Christians since centuries ago. ‘’ In 2005, he also founded “the Assembly for Democracy and the League for Human Rights in Iran.” He described Maryam Rajavi as “very charismatic; she believes in the women’s rights, she believes in democracy in Iran. I support her efforts. I know that the US has qualified it as a terrorist organization, but you have to know that they were designated after the Clinton Administration was seeking to achieve a relation with Iran and with Mullahs; these ones wanted to formulate an only exigency: that the Mujahedin be listed as a terrorist organization and the designation was made due to political reasons and it doesn’t mean that they pose a threat to the United States. “ 

“Thanks, sister Maryam”  On the early days of May 2005, MEK organized a large demonstration in Washington, at Constitution Hall, to represent itself as the legitimate representative of resistance .A lot of members of Congress were present. A number of lecturer were there too. One of them was Captain Vivian Gembara of the fourth infantry division, a jurist who negotiated the disarmement of Mujahedin in Iraq. She is the daughter of an officer of special forces that was a really legend during the Vietnam War:”It’s just simply imprudent” she said “ to continue the exclusion of MEK, since we have to  face a much more important threat in Iran.”  On October 20th,2005, Maryam Rajavi addressed the congress. The self-proclaimed President of Iran attended the Capitol by video satellite directly from Auver-Sur-d’Oise . The 51 year-old woman received the cheers of the audience with a humble smile. At the end of her speeches, the democrat representative of Texas, Sheila Jackson said emotionally:” thanks, sister Maryam.”  The title “Freedom Fighter” is an appropriate title for any political rebel … At their eras, Jonas Savimbi in Angola and Masud in Afghanistan practiced it successfully, having received financial and military support.  Maryam Rajavi promises exactly what her sympathizers like to hear. In January 2005, she engaged in organizing the free elections in six months following the regime change and to form a constituent assembly in order to lead the affairs by the representatives elected by people.” The admirable declarations that were contradicted by the report published Human Rights Watch at the same time. Twenty–eight onerous pages with the appropriate title:” No Exit: Human Rights abuses inside the MEK Camp.” According to Joe Stork the director of Middle East branch of HRW, in Washington: ”The Iranian government  has a shameful record on human rights, but it will be a big mistake to support a dissident group that is responsible of a lot of cases of human rights violations.”  The reports are based on the evidences of twelve former Mujahedin who were interviewed from February to May, 2005. They explained the use of torture, maltreatment and solidarity confinement after they had criticized the undemocratic methods of the movement and declared their willingness to leave the organization.  Two of them declared that they had witnessed the death of two prisoners during the interrogations. “The MEK” they said “ has installed special prisons in its Iraqi Camps where the dissidents are detained.” One of the eyewitnesses explained that he had been imprisoned for eight and a half years, the other one,  for five years.The four other defectors, accused of having opinions, affirmed of having been severely tortured and forced to sign false confessions in which they are recognized of having links with the agents of Iranians Intelligence Service.  Three former Mujahedin witnessed the death of Parviz Ahmadi, the commander of a unit. He died in February 1995 after he was beaten violently. It lasted three years for the MEK to announce his death, in the organization journal, Mojahed, as a “martyr” assassinated by the Iranian Intelligence Service.  All these testimonies, finally describe the very evidence that ” People’s Mujahedin is not a political movement but a cult devoted to the personality of the couple leaders.’’ The report was not considered as important by the media.  It should be said that nowadays in Washington the tensions are on the rise as well as 2002-2003 while the American invasion to Iraq.

” CIA attracts too much lightening”  In the fall 2004,while George Bush was campaigning for his reelection , declared in an interview by Fox NEWS network that feeds him with a pleasant support:” Iran will never be allowed to achieve nuclear weapons”  In February 2005, in his annual lecture on state of Union , he spoke a long speech on Iran that “ is the principal state sponsor of terrorism that seeks the program of the development of nuclear weapons, depriving its own people of liberty […]” . A few days before that, in January 2005 , “ Iran  Freedom Support Act” , intended to support a transition toward democracy in Iran, was introduced in the Chamber of Representatives. A month later it would be adopted by Senate. The act permits financing the opposition groups. At the head is the MEK which the only one that has an operational structure.  In the unrevealed scene of American politics, including the State Department and the Pentagon, MEK is a source of confrontations.  A testimony of this iron arm summarizes the situation:” the militarists consider them as their comrades and the diplomats consider them as terrorists” Condi Rice reproaches Rumsfeld for using MEK secretly for the clandestine operations. The information of the State Secretary is exact. They have become the “counter Iranian”, used in a totally illegal way, by the pentagon and DIA, the secret military services for the guerilla’s activity inside Iran. CIA is totally put away,” because it attracts too much complaints against the administration“ said to me, one of the officials of CIA. 

“Our policy has not changed”  There is not any presidential directive to permit such operations. The thing that, allows, at least in theory, to short-circuit  the eventual investigations of Senate and home of Representatives. The camps, controlled by the Special Forces and located in the deserts around Iran – Iraq border, have been used for the formation and military training of Mujahedin for their sabotage operations inside Iran.   An only man who knows everything on these clandestine operations is the sub-secretary of Defense, Stephen Combone, and a neo-conservative that a lot of people consider him as the real arm of Rumsfeld. A man “in shadow”, according to one of his collaborators, he is literally fascinated by the potentiality of MEK: about the intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program, but also because it is the only group that has the power to launch terrorist operations to   make  the Iranian leaders anxious. Cambone has also negotiated with the Pakistani authorities and gained the agreement of President Parvis Musharaf so as the Mujahedin could use the Baluchistan Province to launch their operations.  Interviewed by a reporter, the spokesman of the White House, Scott Mc Clellan, denies the intervention of the Administration.  “ – a lot of reports” asks a journalist,” reveal the operations launched in Iran, from three different areas. PKK on Iraqi border, MEK on the Southern border and also some operations from Baluchistan. Does the United- States have any policy? There are also some reports on the possible operations launched by the Special Forces in Iran.”  “- our policies towards these organization haven’t changed” replied the spokesman of White house. […] “We still consider them as terrorist organizations.”  “ – and we have never cooperated with them, I mean ….?”  “Our policies haven’t changed” repeated Mc Clellan. Auver-Sur-Oise, April 2007. The man who joins us in the garden of this property, located at 200 meters from Mairie Place, is a close collaborator of Maryam Rajavi … in his forties, fine moustache, imposing glasses, he oppose my questions as well as the spokesman of the White House :’ we have no contact with the United States and we don’t launch ,with their help , any operation inside Iran.” To any question he gives the same smile. “No, we don’t receive any financial aid from Washington.” an American military operation against Iran? His fingers touch the edge of the cup of coffee: “our position is very clear. We oppose any foreign intervention.”

Translation: Nejat Society   

     

Download”Bush,Iran and Bomb”
Download”Bush,Iran and Bomb”

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Mind-control Mechanism in the Cult of Mojahedin

 Researchers and the scientists of humanities have identified similar features in all contemporary cults one of which is application of mental and psychological control techniques mainly aimed at persuading cult members, and making them more and more obedient and passive. Considering the significance of the matter, finding out the nature and extent of members’ obedience in cults is oneMind control mechanism in the destructive cult of Mojahedin of the major issues in internal cultist relations. The reasons why a person submits to be subjected to mental, physical , psychological, and financial misuse to the extent that he/she gives up job, family, and the individual freedom are very important issues for those interested in investigating cultist mechanisms and levers. In simple words, those outside cults, out of curiosity, strive for public awareness and preventing people’s deviation as well as discovering how in an age of scientific development and communication there people who easily fall in the cults’ trap and are are hoodwinked by their tricks. In order to understand such an issue we must look at the social and psychological techniques used by cults and cultic groups. This process of planned, convert coordinated influence-popularly called brainwashing or mind control or, more technically, thought reform-is the means by which the cult leader subjugates the followers.

The fact is that at first such mechanisms are raw materials based on psychological theories and assumptions and are to be put into action. Our discussion is around the brief study of such mechanisms by which people undergo full obedience and control and also comparing the programs exercised in cults like that of Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) initially blacklisted as a terrorist organization. Mojahedin stand opposed to the allegations of being a cultist group abusing sophisticated scientific procedures to expand its hegemonic domination over the members. However, such a position taken by them does not affect theoretical and academic challenges put against them. What is of importance is the extent to which their relations and techniques are adaptable to that of other cults. First we’d better develop an understanding of through what mechanisms cults manage to survive.

Cults aim at creating drastic mental and psychological changes in all aspects of members’ life. They insist on saying that cultist values are significantly above those admired in the society and the first step to enter a cult is cutting all those values repelled by the cult. That is the prerequisite to prepare members to easily consent to cultist teachings that implant a completely different life-style. As Margaret Singer explains:

Cults tend to require members to undergo a major disruption or change in lifestyle. Many cults put great pressure on new members to leave their families, mends, and jobs to become immersed in the group’s major purpose. This isolation tactic is one of the cults’ most common mechanisms of control and enforced dependency. (1)

For the techniques to be accomplished in internal relation of Mojahedin, three stages has to be met; cleansing the mind of any non-organizational mental drifts, taking the individual mental, behavioral, and psychological functions under the control, and finally impose it on the individuals to be in a constant conflict of facing permanent contradiction between his/her personal values and the organization’s ideal world. The finally process results in full metamorphosis of members and molded as desired by the cult. They are under a never-ceasing watch to be found with the flaws they had hardly noticed in themselves for which they will be reproached in the presence of other members whom will have no escape from the strict criticism. They all try to adapt themselves to the new conditions to find a new identity and gain organizational legitimacy. Such procedures opted for as the mechanism of overcoming non-revolutionary features result in a total dependence of the individuals to cult. The main theme of all cults is mind control and gradual self-alteration, a factor that is explicitly observable in internal relations of Mojahedin under different pretexts as organizational discipline. Cults are known to dictate what members have to wear and eat and when and where they work, sleep, and bathe as well as what they should believe in, think, and say and even dream. Although such factors comprise the primary cultist instructions, they may set the ground for further destructive direction.

Most former MKO members as well as Mojahedin themselves acknowledge the implementation of these mind-control techniques. The main difference between Mojahedin and other cults is that the techniques are phased that are vehemently glorified and celebrated as unmatched turning points. Mojahedin’s internal ideological revolution is the best example. It is most likely that Mojahedin, because of feeling close strategic and ideological affinities, have been influenced by Mao’s Cultural Revolution in China. However, according to Singer, Mao resorted to thought-reform programs under the influence of cultist relations:

Then in the late 1940s and early 1950s, the world witnessed personnel at Chinese revolutionary universities implement a thought-reform program that changed the beliefs and behaviors of the citizens of the largest nation in the world. This program, which Mao Tse-tung wrote about as early as the 1920s, was put into place when the Communist regime took power in China on October 1, 1949. Chairman Mao had long planned how to change people’s political selves-to achieve "ideological remolding," as he called it-through the use of a coordinated program of psychological, social, and political coercion. As a result, millions of Chinese citizens were induced to espouse new philosophies and exhibit new conduct (2).

Mao’s "Red Book" refers openly to the significance of such procedures for achieving what he calls revolution. Mehdi Abrishamchi defines it as adaptation and mental and conceptual balance. the mechanisms aim at reforming the basic values of a person distancing him from individual identity, persuasion and also absolute submission to organizational commands. In this regard, Eric Hofer writes:

To ripen a person for self-sacrifice he must be stripped of his individual identity and distinctness. He must cease to be George, Hans, van, or Tadao- a human atom with an existence bounded by birth and death. The most drastic way to achieve this end is by the complete assimilation of the individual into a collective body. The fully assimilated individual does not see himself and others as human beings. When asked who he is, his automatic response is that he is a German, a Russian, a Japanese, a Christian, a Moslem, a member of a certain tribe or family, He has no purpose, worth and destiny apart from his collective body; and as long as that body lives he cannot really die. (3)

Mojahedin identify the individual identity to sealed boxes and believe that the main theme of the ideological revolution is to unlock these boxes:

 To unlock the boxes (minds of members) is the main theme and the first stage of ideological revolution. (4)

By opening these boxes the first step is taken to change members’ attitudes and standpoints to adapt them to organizationally adopted values and principles that are in contradiction with the outside world.

 

References:

 

1. Singer, M. Cults in our midst. Coordinated programs of persuasion.

2. ibid.

3. Hofer, E. The True believer.

4. Niyabati, B; A different look at the internal ideological revolution within MKO, p.36

Research Bureau-Mojahedin.ws-February 22, 2008

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

Mind-control Mechanism in the MEK cult

 Researchers and the scientists of humanities have identified similar features in all contemporary cults one of which is application of mental and psychological control techniques mainly aimed at persuading cult members, and making themblank more and more obedient and passive. Considering the significance of the matter, finding out the nature and extent of members’ obedience in cults is one of the major issues in internal cultist relations. The reasons why a person submits to be subjected to mental, physical , psychological, and financial misuse to the extent that he/she gives up job, family, and the individual freedom are very important issues for those interested in investigating cultist mechanisms and levers. In simple words, those outside cults, out of curiosity, strive for public awareness and preventing people’s deviation as well as discovering how in an age of scientific development and communication there people who easily fall in the cults’ trap and are are hoodwinked by their tricks. In order to understand such an issue we must look at the social and psychological techniques used by cults and cultic groups. This process of planned, convert coordinated influence-popularly called brainwashing or mind control or, more technically, thought reform-is the means by which the cult leader subjugates the followers.

The fact is that at first such mechanisms are raw materials based on psychological theories and assumptions and are to be put into action. Our discussion is around the brief study of such mechanisms by which people undergo full obedience and control and also comparing the programs exercised in cults like that of Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) initially blacklisted as a terrorist organization. Mojahedin stand opposed to the allegations of being a cultist group abusing sophisticated scientific procedures to expand its hegemonic domination over the members. However, such a position taken by them does not affect theoretical and academic challenges put against them. What is of importance is the extent to which their relations and techniques are adaptable to that of other cults. First we’d better develop an understanding of through what mechanisms cults manage to survive.

Cults aim at creating drastic mental and psychological changes in all aspects of members’ life. They insist on saying that cultist values are significantly above those admired in the society and the first step to enter a cult is cutting all those values repelled by the cult. That is the prerequisite to prepare members to easily consent to cultist teachings that implant a completely different life-style. As Margaret Singer explains:

Cults tend to require members to undergo a major disruption or change in lifestyle. Many cults put great pressure on new members to leave their families, mends, and jobs to become immersed in the group’s major purpose. This isolation tactic is one of the cults’ most common mechanisms of control and enforced dependency. (1)

For the techniques to be accomplished in internal relation of Mojahedin, three stages has to be met; cleansing the mind of any non-organizational mental drifts, taking the individual mental, behavioral, and psychological functions under the control, and finally impose it on the individuals to be in a constant conflict of facing permanent contradiction between his/her personal values and the organization’s ideal world. The finally process results in full metamorphosis of members and molded as desired by the cult. They are under a never-ceasing watch to be found with the flaws they had hardly noticed in themselves for which they will be reproached in the presence of other members whom will have no escape from the strict criticism. They all try to adapt themselves to the new conditions to find a new identity and gain organizational legitimacy. Such procedures opted for as the mechanism of overcoming non-revolutionary features result in a total dependence of the individuals to cult. The main theme of all cults is mind control and gradual self-alteration, a factor that is explicitly observable in internal relations of Mojahedin under different pretexts as organizational discipline. Cults are known to dictate what members have to wear and eat and when and where they work, sleep, and bathe as well as what they should believe in, think, and say and even dream. Although such factors comprise the primary cultist instructions, they may set the ground for further destructive direction.

Most former MKO members as well as Mojahedin themselves acknowledge the implementation of these mind-control techniques. The main difference between Mojahedin and other cults is that the techniques are phased that are vehemently glorified and celebrated as unmatched turning points. Mojahedin’s internal ideological revolution is the best example. It is most likely that Mojahedin, because of feeling close strategic and ideological affinities, have been influenced by Mao’s Cultural Revolution in China. However, according to Singer, Mao resorted to thought-reform programs under the influence of cultist relations:

Then in the late 1940s and early 1950s, the world witnessed personnel at Chinese revolutionary universities implement a thought-reform program that changed the beliefs and behaviors of the citizens of the largest nation in the world. This program, which Mao Tse-tung wrote about as early as the 1920s, was put into place when the Communist regime took power in China on October 1, 1949. Chairman Mao had long planned how to change people’s political selves-to achieve”ideological remolding,”as he called it-through the use of a coordinated program of psychological, social, and political coercion. As a result, millions of Chinese citizens were induced to espouse new philosophies and exhibit new conduct (2).

Mao’s”Red Book”refers openly to the significance of such procedures for achieving what he calls revolution. Mehdi Abrishamchi defines it as adaptation and mental and conceptual balance. the mechanisms aim at reforming the basic values of a person distancing him from individual identity, persuasion and also absolute submission to organizational commands. In this regard, Eric Hofer writes:

To ripen a person for self-sacrifice he must be stripped of his individual identity and distinctness. He must cease to be George, Hans, van, or Tadao- a human atom with an existence bounded by birth and death. The most drastic way to achieve this end is by the complete assimilation of the individual into a collective body. The fully assimilated individual does not see himself and others as human beings. When asked who he is, his automatic response is that he is a German, a Russian, a Japanese, a Christian, a Moslem, a member of a certain tribe or family, He has no purpose, worth and destiny apart from his collective body; and as long as that body lives he cannot really die. (3)

Mojahedin identify the individual identity to sealed boxes and believe that the main theme of the ideological revolution is to unlock these boxes:

 To unlock the boxes (minds of members) is the main theme and the first stage of ideological revolution. (4)

By opening these boxes the first step is taken to change members’ attitudes and standpoints to adapt them to organizationally adopted values and principles that are in contradiction with the outside world.  References: 1. Singer, M. Cults in our midst. Coordinated programs of persuasion. 2. ibid. 3. Hofer, E. The True believer. 4. Niyabati, B; A different look at the internal ideological revolution within MKO, p.36

Research Bureau-Mojahedin.ws-February 22, 2008

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Yaser Akbarinasab
Former members of the MEK

Akbari Nasab family demands for returning their son’s body to Iran.

According to reports ,Akbari Nasab family are trying in Baghdad to return the body of their son Yaser who last year died in Ashraf prison and his death was announced as self- immolation.

Reza Akbari Nasab the oldest brother who is now in Baghdad ,went to Ashraf yesterday asked for visiting his other brother “ Morteza” and his other son” Musa”. The visit was arranged with the presence of some authorities of MKO without Musa.

According to Reza Akbari, his brother who couldn’t talk in a free atmosphere due to the presence of his commandants started to insult his older brother.  “I didn’t receive the medical documents of my nephew’s death so I suspend his death” Reza Akbari Nasab told the reporters. He also asked the Iraqi authorities to assist him to transfer his nephew’s body to Iran.

Yaser Akbarinasab

 The following is piece written by Mr. Reza Akbari Nasab:

The function of “brainwashing “in a meeting with an “element” not a “brother”

First of all I have to explain that: My brother “Morteza” left Tehran in 1985, to join the MEK in Iraq. We had noblank news from them for years. In 1990 we found out that his wife has died in “Eternal Light” operation. Their three children “Fatemeh”, ”Yaser” and “Musa” were separated from father following the strange “Ideological Revolution” and were sent to Germany where they were held in a camp. 

Unfortunately the misfortunes didn’t end with our family and due to the manipulations, Morteza called his sons to come to the desert (Ashraf) and the consequence was the death of Yaser last summer.

Apparently he killed himself in a suicide but the bizarre thing is that the organization kept everything silent with no news of such an event.  Just after the defectors published the news on their websites, the MKO became forced to confirm the news and contrary to their usual process, they didn’t hold any ceremony for his death and tried to make every thing forgotten. A dear friend from America sent me an email and asked forget the issue and look for consoling my family. 

Time passed and we were going to forget Yaser until my mother asked me to go to Iraq and try to get news of Morteza and Musa. Finally I could come to Iraq in Feb 3rd, 2008 and I went to American Camp in Ashraf and asked for meeting my brother and his son, I also asked them to let me go to my nephew’s tomb and see the documents of his death. The American officials told me to tell my request to MEK authorities. During the hours I was waiting for my beloved ones the American soldiers and officials hosted me in a courteous manner.

I was enjoying the friendly atmosphere of American camp which had decreased the pressure on me when a man carrying a file came over shouting at me: “why have you come here?” He was speaking Persian angrily so I didn’t recognize him. But he was no one except my kind and lovely brother, Morteza! He was carrying a file that he said that they were my writings on the death of Yaser. He actually threatened me that he would hand them to the Americans since I had written some polite critics against the American officials. I told him sympathetically: “you may be right but let‘s have a short talk which is something normal in any political organization’’.

But he didn’t accept and he even didn’t let me get closer than 3 meters. My former kind brother insulted me in front of American soldiers. My nephew Musa didn’t get the permission to visit me since he is a German citizen and Mujahedin were afraid.

The Americans didn’t answer my questions simply and to answer my claim that the MKO members are manipulated they just said that it’s not their responsibility! They didn’t let me visit the tomb of Yaser either. I expected more of the American democracy. While leaving, I told the American lieutenant: ‘’you are developing a new Al-Qaida.” Recently I have received important news: that the members of Ashraf are not allowed to visit Yaser’s tomb.

Here’s a question: if Yaser has self-immolated, because the Americans treated him badly! Why is his tomb forbidden? Maybe the real thing is that our young boy was killed and then burned! There is also other news on the assassination of Yaser which will be proved by the struggle of benevolent people.  Bagdad- Winter 2008.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts