Hot Topics

Mr. Mahmoud Sepahi announces separation from MKO

Mr. Sepahi spent nine years in Rajavi’s cult. He could release himself and arrive in free world two years ago. He announced his separation from the cult in the following statement:

I’m Mahmoud Sepahi. In 2000, when I was residing in UAE in hope of immigration to the United States, I was deceived by MKO recruiters and taken to Iraq. After a few days, I found out the lies they had told me and that I had been taken there to remain in Camp Ashraf. Since the early days, I asked them to let me get back to UAE but they created so terrible condition for me that I was convinced to stay there.

I entered the organization which was not only like the hell but also like a political lunatic center. Every day, there were numerous meetings under various titles such as "Current Operation" which was held in order to suppress dissidents. During the meetings, the commandants verbally abused members with the most horrendous foul-mouthed language that you could never ever believe and you didn’t dare to reply one word to defend yourself.

When I asked for leaving Ashraf I was threatened to be imprisoned in Ashraf for two years and then I would be handed to Iraqi forces who would in turn jail me in Abu Quraib for eight years and finally I would be exchanged with Iraqi prisoners of war and would be delivered to Iranian government. Thus I remained in damned Camp Ashraf for nine years. At last they kicked me out of Ashraf because according to them I had "problems of woman and life" and I hadn’t accepted the organization.

When I declared my eagerness to leave the camp, first they tried to flatter me. Then they held numerous meetings for fourteen days but I succeeded to flee all their traps and released myself. In 2009, I could reach Europe by help of my family.

Today in Feb. 22, 2011, I declare my complete separation from Mujahedin Khalq. I’m thankful to my God who helped me arrive in free world, live a free life and decide for my own future. I hope that my bitter experience will enlighten others who are at risk of being captured by such a terrorist destructive cult so that they won’t lose the best period of their life.

Translated by Nejat Society

March 8, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

PMOI, a cult with 45 year old terrorist record

Following the recent acts of support for Mujahedin Khalq Organization by a number of US politicians, World Tribune published an article authored by Sheda Vasseghi who tries to define the true nature of the group recalling the US officials of its original anti-Western stance and their unpopularity among Iranian nation. She presents her arguments based on MKO’s official journals and statement in its early years:

The official organ of the PMOI declares in its October 1980 issue: “Ever since its foundation in 1965, the thrust of the battle against the U.S. advisors fell to the Mojahedin, who targeted and claimed the lives of a number for the first time, while it was the PMOI bombs planted in imperialist and Zionist institutions and destroying them which first caused the imperialists and their domestic mercenaries to be alarmed.” In a May 1981 Open Letter to [Ayatollah]Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the PMOI wrote: “In the dark era of the Shah, the Mojahedin had taken up arms and never missed an opportunity to gun down the imperialist American advisors” (Focus on Iran, Vol. II, No. 7, July 1995).

The PMOI is a cult rather than a political party based on Islamo-Marxist doctrines. Group members must give full obedience to the leaders of the party, who contrary to their alleged desire and respect for democracy, are not elected by any democratic means. The PMOI political philosophy plans to nationalize all industries, transportation and communication. It makes clear without any ambiguity that it will do away with “vestiges’ of capitalism” including collectivizing agriculture (Focus on Iran, Vol. II, No. 7, July 1995).

As a matter of fact, in adherence to its form of “democracy,” the PMOI has already chosen the next president of Iran from its leadership should it come to power. Since its inception in 1965, the PMOI has committed horrific terrorist acts against the Iranian people including fighting on the Iraqi side during the bloody eight-year war between Iraq and Iran. Hence, the PMOI has no real legitimacy or following in Iran.

About MKO’s approach towards Islamic Republic, Vasseghi describes its ability to deceive Western politicians:

The PMOI’s philosophy is based on the classic tactic of “my enemy is your enemy, therefore, we are friends, you must support us against our common enemy” (Focus on Iran, Vol. II, No. 7, July 1995).

Given the PMOI’s ability to raise massive funds from enemies of the Islamic Republic in exchange for mercenary manpower and acts of terrorism, its organization is able to fund major lobbying campaigns in the West as well as media infiltration. Even though the PMOI was designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. and Canada in 1997 (maintained during the Bush Administration) and European Union (EU) in 2002, after years of expensive court proceedings and lobbying the EU removed the group from its list of terrorist organization back in January 2009.

She criticizes US politicians asking them a crucial question:

So how is it that former Mayor Giuliani with firsthand knowledge and experience of the effects of terrorism, two former CIA directors, and two former generals of Central Command would now support a cult with a 45-year-old terrorist record as an alternative regime for a country that serves as a key to balance of power in a volatile region?

March 6, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Ex-Officials Say They Were Paid To Attend Pro- MEK Events

Former Indiana Congressman Lee Hamilton (D) and former CENTCOM Commander Anthony Zinni told the Inter Press Service that they were paid to appear at recent events supporting the MEK, an Iranian opposition group currently considered a terrorist organization by the State Department.

Hamilton and Zinni are among the many big time former government officials and military leaders who have appeared at recent pro-MEK events sponsored by a group called Executive Action, LLC. (The events true organizers remain unclear, Executive Action’s CEO Neil Livingstone would only tell TPM they included Iranian American groups.) Speakers at the events have portrayed the MEK as critical to any chance of regime change in Iran.

Hamilton, who once chaired the House Foreign Affairs Committee and was a co-chair of the 9/11 Commission, told reporter Barbara Slavin he was paid "a substantial amount" to appear at a panel in Washington D.C. in February. Zinni, who spoke at a similar event in January, said he had been paid his "standard fee," without detailing what that is.

According to Slavin, both men said they were unaware of the cultish elements attributed to the MEK. The State Department’s 2008 Country Reports on Terrorism, for example, reported the following:

In addition to its terrorist credentials, the MEK has also displayed cult-like characteristics.
Upon entry into the group, new members are indoctrinated in MEK ideology and revisionist Iranian history. Members are also required to undertake a vow of "eternal divorce" and participate in weekly "ideological cleansings." Additionally, children are reportedly separated from parents at a young age. MEK leader Maryam Rajavi has established a "cult of personality." She claims to emulate the Prophet Muhammad and is viewed by members as the "Iranian President in exile."
The MEK’s cult tendencies have also been noted by The New York Times, The New Yorker and The Council On Foreign Relations.

"They presented me with a platform that was thoroughly democratic," Hamilton told Slavin. "Were they misleading me? You always can be misled."
Zinni was firmer:

"De-listing ought to be done much the way we handled the PLO and the IRA," Zinni said in an interview.
[…]
Zinni, who famously inveighed against the U.S. invasion of Iraq and was a fierce opponent of Iraqi exile Ahmad Chalabi, seemed to have no similar compunctions about Iranian exiles.

"The Iranian community outside Iran has much more influence inside than the Chalabis of the world that we ended up supporting in Iraq," he said.

Over the years, the Iranian government has arrested and executed MEK members. Still, experts say that the group actually has very little support in Iran, where people remember how it fought for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. Iranian studies scholar Ahmad Sadri told TPM in February that U.S. support for the MEK would anger ordinary Iranians.

Although it was put on the U.S. terror list in 1997, the MEK has a history of support in Congress. While it originally blended elements of Islam and Marxism, the group and its supporters say it has renounced violence and now advocates for a secular and democratic Iran. After the fall of Hussein, who armed and funded the group for many years, about 3,400 MEK members were consolidated at Camp Ashraf, north of Baghdad. MEK backers also insist that U.S. forces should be permanently stationed at Ashraf, for protection. (Camp residents have been subject to attacks they blame on the Iraqi and Iranian governments.)

On Tuesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where several lawmakers urged her to delist the MEK. Clinton said that the State Department is reviewing the MEK’s designation in accordance with a Washington D.C. District Court of Appeal’s recent ruling, after a suit brought by the MEK.

"You know it’s proceeding," Clinton said. "These are very important considerations and reviews and you know as soon as we can we will make such a decision."
TPM reached out to both Zinni and Hamilton for comment.

Eric Lach

March 5, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Israel using Mojahedin Khalq to push pre-emptive war against Iran agenda

Memorial Day from San Antonio: The Final Resting Place of Marquis J. McCants and the Death of the American Republic
Mark Dankof: Israel using Mojahedin Khalq to push pre-emptive war against Iran agenda
For my readers and broadcast listeners worldwide:

I was in attendance on February 27th, 2011 at the Chapel of the Four Chaplains award ceremony in San Antonio, Texas, where the presentation involved two (2) mainline clergyman, a lady Jewish rabbi serving as a Captain in the United States Air Force, an African-American United States Air Force chaplain/retired, and the United States Army’s chief official for personally notifying family members at Fort Sam Houston/San Antonio of more American casualties in what was Mr. Bush’s War, and is now Mr. Obama’s War.

Since I was asked by several people about my views on the war after the end of the Chapel of the Four Chaplains event in San Antonio, let me be absolutely clear that my 2007 essay on the death of Army Specialist Marquis J. McCants remains definitive in articulating what I feel about the American military’s War for Empire in the Middle East. Since that time, the tragedies of thousands of additional deaths, the Gaza and Mavi Marmara debacles, the deepening quagmire in Afghanistan, and a running money meter on the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts which has now arrived at $1 trillion dollars and counting, simply underscore why I wrote what I did in 2007.

In this 2007 essay, I warned of the False Flag Incident of the Century. I sound that warning again in early 2011. Israel’s machinations for preemptive war with Iran have reached new heights and depths with their employment of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) to undertake a series of terrorist actions in that country, which includes the internationally publicized cases of the assassinations of Iranian scientists in the last two years, and other acts of violence in Tehran, and Azerbaijan/Diyala/and Balochistan Provinces.

The recent spread of revolutionary fervor throughout the Middle East, chiefly aimed at sleazy regimes in league with Israel and its Neo-Conservative agents for war in the American National Security Establishment, now combines with flagging domestic American political support for the War for Empire and Eretz Yisrael. While these developments are essentially positive, they have ominously created a level of desperation among the denizens of the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) and its lapdogs in the American government and media, which may lead these servants of the Hidden Hand to a new and terrifying level of employment of the unthinkable to achieve their diabolical objectives.

Mark my words. Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s McCollum Memorandum of October 1940 is now underway again in this new historical and political context of the 21st century.

Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul Republicans must unite as never before in exposing and opposing this great evil, which threatens the American Republic and our Constitution, even as it threatens the innocent around the planet.

March 3, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Double standard on terror

Mojahedin Khalq attacked its own country as well as ours

I write regarding a commentary article that appeared under the headline Egyptian protests provoke images of Iran, on Feb. 11 in The Spectator.

Almost anything critical of Iran seems to find a place in your newspaper, and the origin of the information does not seem to matter. The article tried to legitimize an anti-Iranian terrorist group. MEK, the Iranian People’s Mojahedin Organization, which the author argues should be taken off the U.S. list of terrorist organizations, was founded after the 1979 Islamic Revolution by out-of-power groups. Here’s a partial list of its terrorist activities, which have resulted in 1,200 civilian deaths in Iran:

• June 1981: the bombing of the Islamic Republican Party headquarters, killing Iran’s chief justice, 19 members of the Iranian Parliament, five cabinet ministers, and 47 other people;

• June 1981: the attempted assassination of Iran’s spiritual leader, Ayatollah Khameini;

• August 1981: the bombing of Iranian President Ali Rajai’s office, killing him, the prime minister and another person;

• The exploding of bombs in marketplaces and taxis around the capital city, Tehran.

MEK’s international reach extends to Canada. On April 5, 1992, Iran’s Ottawa embassy was stormed by a group of Iranian exiles linked to MEK. The mob ransacked much of the interior and broke the ambassador’s arm. It was part of a co-ordinated series of actions that saw Iranian embassies attacked in Europe that same day.

MEK has no popular base in any country. It relies totally on foreign sponsorship. During the 1980-88 war against Iran launched by Iraq’s late dictator, Saddam Hussein, which was funded partly by the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf states, MEK was allowed to set up a military base, Camp Ashraf, inside Iraq. Its own country under attack, MEK was given refuge inside the aggressor’s territory.

The Spectator clearly has a double standard when it comes to terrorism. During the 1970 October Crisis, when ordinary civilians were wounded by FLQ bombs in Quebec and officials kidnapped and killed, The Spectator took a strong stand against terrorism in Canada. Why publish the call for MEK’s rehabilitation now?

MEK is a small sect, united only by its capacity for violence, loyal to no country. However, in the Mideast, there are broadly based popular movements in various countries that the article lists as “extremists.” One of these is Hezbollah in Lebanon, which boasts the largest bloc of members of the Lebanese parliament. Another is Hamas in Gaza, which came to power through election.

How is it that The Spectator can print an article endorsing a terror cell’s call for democracy in Iran, while criticizing movements and governments that represent some of the only democratic processes in the Mideast?

Brendan Stone is cochair, Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War, The Spce

March 3, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

What’s Behind the Campaign to Delist the Mujahedin al-Khalq Organization?

A growing number of former U.S. officials — both Republicans and Democrats — have hopped on the bandwagon to demand that the State Department delist the Mujahedin al-Khalq Organization (MKO) from its list of terrorist groups.

I consider the MKO a terrorist group for good reason. There is no doubt that the MKO has targeted Americans, and no amount of slick public relations should erase that. During my time in Iran, it was clear that while Iranians respect the United States and have little good to say about their own government, they all detest the MKO.

The enemy of my enemy is not always a friend: Iranian attitudes toward the MKO are analogous to Americans’ views toward American Taliban John Walker Lindh. Iranians despise the MKO for siding with Saddam Hussein as he murdered Iranians. After liberation, the MKO embraced America not because it loves liberty and apple pie but rather because it is an ideological chameleon. Only fools would believe that the MKO is sincere in its pro-American rhetoric. While the MKO claims credit for intelligence coups, more often than not it is either a conduit for other countries to launder their own collections or the MKO simply makes it up.

One thing is certain: embracing the MKO is the surest way to make anti-American the 65 million Iranians.

Still, MKO lobbying is slick and, as a cult, it can rely on the entirety of its members’ incomes to purchase support it might not otherwise receive. If American officials call for the delisting of the MKO, that is their right. For an honest debate on the issues, however, they should acknowledge the honorarium or consulting fees they receive from the group.

Michael Rubin – Commentarymagazine

February 27, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

An Unholy Alliance

Strange days! A few days ago, Congressman Poe (T-Texas) introduced House Resolution 60 calling for the Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO) to be removed from the terrorist list by the State Department. At the same time, an unknown group calling itself the "Association of Iranian University Professors in Britain" took a full page ad in the major U.S. papers making the same demand. These efforts to get the MKO legitimized is just the last round of efforts by the MKO and its neocon supporters — presumably as a reward to have "outed" the Iranian nuclear program.

The effort is signed by such neocon luminaries such as John Bolton and former CIA director Woolsey, as well as Bush administration alumni such as former Attorney General Mukasey. What strange bedfellows! On one hand, you have the neocons, close allies of the Israeli right-wing and committed to a muscular war against global terrorism, and on the other, the MKO, a radical left-wing Islamist group involved in the 1970s in anti-Shah and anti-U.S. activities — including a failed attempt on the U.S. ambassador to Iran and the killing of several U.S. citizens based in Iran at the time

There is much more to the MKO story. During the early days of the revolution, the MKO promoted a Khmer Rouge-type policy of wholesale elimination of the previous elite and massive reeducation of the population. After losing the power struggle against Khomeini and reappearing in Iraq, the group’s cult-like reputation and its personality cult around its leader Massoud Rajavi intensified. According to the CIA, the MKO was also used by a beleaguered Saddam to crush the Kurdish rebellion that came immediately after Iraq’s defeat in the Persian Gulf War. The MKO organized regular media visits at its base in Iraq, Camp Ashraf, where it exhibited its military arsenal, which included tanks and artillery. Of course, most of this arsenal remained unused, since the MKO was unable to mount anything more than pinprick attacks against the Iranian regime. At the same time, the MKO’s propaganda machine was working overtime in the U.S. and Europe. In fact, it has been quite effective, and the MKO has managed over the years to pull the wool over the eyes of some European politicians as well as Congress (on particular its most conservative GOP members) and present itself as a bona fide moderate and democratic opposition movement and an alternative to the theocratic government of Tehran. Following the Iraq war, they were unexplainably protected by the U.S. forces — presumably because the Bush administration, with its less than profound understanding of Iranian political dynamics, wanted to keep the MKO as a potential weapon against the Islamic Republic. It is only recently that the Shi’ite-led government of Iraq felt strong enough to challenge the U.S. by taking control of Camp Ashraf.

It is no secret that the neocons have been pushing hard for years to get the State Department to remove the terrorist label from the MKO. As a result, there have been numerous efforts by Congress to remove them from the aforementioned list. However, these efforts have taken a new dimension in the past few years with the unholy MKO-neocon alliance. This campaign, which did not succeed even under the Bush administration, is surprisingly reaching a new crescendo under the Obama administration. Nobody can be fooled by the motivation of the MKO supporters in the United States, who have openly promoted either military action against Iran or the dismemberment of the country as the ultimate remedy. That the MKO is complicit in these policies is not surprising for a movement which has already betrayed the Iranian people by siding with Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. For this, they have been universally reviled both by Iranians in Iran and the world.[…]

While the human rights issue of the refugees trapped in Camp Ashraf has to be dealt with in a compassionate way, the State Department must continue to resist pressures to legitimize the MKO. Pressure to remove the MKO from the U.S. terrorism list is a cynical ploy that can only have negative consequences for both the U.S. and the Iranian people.

Legitimizing the MKO will not change the fact that it remains a terrorist organization, which has betrayed the Iranian people twice and is willing to go to any length to promote its undemocratic goals, including an unholy alliance with the neocons. The State Department must resist the pressure, for the interest of peace as well as the democratic movement in Iran.

Karim Pakravan is a member of the Faculty at DePaul University in Chicago.

February 26, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Mujahedin Khalq ; New Chalabi for the West

WHITE HOUSE SUPPORT FOR MIDDLE EAST ‘UPRISINGS’ DEPENDS ON HOW AND WHETHER THEY CAN BE USED AGAINST IRAN

Our friend David Frum published an interesting post, “America Can’t Afford to Ignore the Chaos in Supporting MEK; West feckless attempts to manipulate Iran’s politics Bahrain”, see here. David makes some points with which we agree, as when he writes that “An entire American carrier battle group is based in Bahrain—there is no way the United States can avoid being implicated in the actions of the Bahraini government.” But we were disturbed by his bottom-line policy recommendation for the United States:

“Always and ever: Iran is the big play in the Middle East…Every regional decision has to be measured against the test: Is this moving us closer to—or further from—a positive change in the Iranian political system? That test should guide decisions about Bahrain and about a lot more than Bahrain.”

One of the reasons we were struck by David’s recommendation—and keep in mind that he is one of the most prominent and thoughtful neoconservatives to be found—is that it already seems to have been taken on board by President Obama and his administration (though they have not explained it anywhere near as clearly as David did). On that point, David Sanger of The New York Times told National Public Radio’s Diane Rehm on Friday, see here, that President Obama believes the uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, and elsewhere “could create an alternative narrative to Al-Qaeda and an alternative narrative to Iran that the United States ought to make use of”.

It is in this context that we should understand why the Obama Administration, literally seven hours after Omar Soliman announced that Hosni Mubarak would step down as Egypt’s President after all, called the White House press corps back in and, as Sanger put it, “all but urged the protestors” in Iran, such as they were, “to get out and do more”. The Administration has clearly decided, as America’s strategic position in the Middle East erodes before our eyes, to “push back” against the Islamic Republic, in multiple ways.

Some of those ways will be more feckless attempts to manipulate Iran’s internal politics—as with the Obama Administration’s exhortations for domestic unrest in Iran. We were appalled to learn recently that the Administration is considering lifting the MEK’s designation as a foreign terrorist organization.

On that point, Bill Clinton’s Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, retired U.S. Army General Hugh Shelton, added his voice to those of retired generals James Jones—President Obama’s former national security adviser—and Anthony Zinni, calling for the MEK’s rehabilitation, see here. Shelton argues explicitly that Iran could exploit the wave of pro-democracy protests in the Middle East, and that, to forestall such a scenario, “Iran’s current regime is currently a government that needs to change”.

We have told every Obama Administration official and member of Congress with whom we have discussed the matter that it is hard to imagine a dumber, more counter-productive change in America’s already deeply dysfunctional Iran policy than to lift the MEK’s designation as a foreign terrorist organization and start supporting it as the “vanguard” of some mythical expatriate Iranian opposition. This would make the reliance of the Clinton Administration and the George W. Bush Administration on Ahmad Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress as the keys to successful “regime change” in Iraq look enlightened by comparison. But the chances of this happening are, sadly, increasing.

In its desperation to look like it can still shape events in the Middle East in some meaningful way, the Obama Administration is looking for other ways to press the Islamic Republic. Just a few days ago, Steve Coll—Pulitzer Prize-winning author and president of the New America Foundation—broke the story in The New Yorker that the Administration has started secret, preliminary talks with the Taliban, see here.

From an Iranian perspective, this is simply one more indicator of America’s unique combination of perfidy and incompetence in Afghanistan. During 2001-2003, the Islamic Republic provided substantial cooperation to the United States in its efforts to unseat the Taiban from power in Kabul and destroy Al-Qa’ida in its Afghan sanctuaries. Iran cooperated with the United States, in part, on the basis of U.S. representations that Washington wanted an independent and stable Afghanistan which would not be under the sway of the Taliban and its chief external backers, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

But Iranian officials warned that local populations would see a prolonged U.S. military presence in Afghanistan as occupation—a judgment borne out by subsequent events, as greater geographic penetration by U.S. forces since 2006 and the deployment of additional U.S. troops since 2009 have correlated directly with an escalating spiral of violence and instability. This, in turn, has once again empowered the Saudi- and Pakistani-backed Taliban, which has clearly made a comeback—to a point where Afghan President Hamid Karzai, now seemingly joined by the Obama Administration, judges that the only basis for a political settlement is power sharing with the Taliban.

As we have experienced directly, this leads Iranian policymakers to question not just America’s intentions in Afghanistan, but also its competence—and with good reason. If Karzai and the United States move forward on power-sharing with the Taliban, without engaging the major non-Pashtun factions (many of which have close connections to the Islamic Republic), it could, as Coll notes, “ignite a civil war along ethnic lines”.

And it is becoming apparent that the Obama Administration will back the Bahraini royal family in whatever level of brutality seems necessary to keep Bahrain in the “American camp”. In other words, the Obama Administration is responding to the wave of popular unrest across the Arab world by intensifying its pursuit of the sorts of policies that have so thoroughly alienated most of the Middle East’s inhabitants from U.S. foreign policy in the first place.

Race for Iran – by Flynt Leverett & Hillary Mann Leverett

February 22, 2011 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Learn from the past—Don’t harbor MKO terrorists

The West used to support notorious killers—Saddam Hussein and the Taliban—because they had the same enemy. And now, in an attempt to disrupt Iran, the West is befriending and supporting the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MKO). The West should learn from their disastrous experiences. The Arabic proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" offers a seemingly innocuous short term logic which the US and Europe has bought into—but banding together with militant radicals to demolish a common enemy doesn’t work. And the West simply doesn’t get it. What’s distressing is that while US legislators are supporting the MKO, the MKO has been clashing with the US-backed Iraqi forces. [1] The MKO is no friend.

The West has seen its fair share of backfires. In the case of Saddam Hussein, Matthew Partridge of The Guardian asserts that "the decision by the US and UK to permit arms sales to Saddam Hussein ended with the promotion of the notorious Baath regime and enabled Saddam to subsequently invade Kuwait."[2] (This decision also strengthened Saddam enough to be able to fully arm the MKO.) He also points out that in WWII Anglo-American support for the Soviet war effort led to victory on the Eastern front, which led to the fall of Hitler but the rise of Soviet power, which later turned out to be a diplomatic nightmare for the US. Partridge explains that “US support for anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan during the 1980’s was one of the decisive factors behind the unraveling iron curtain." [3] But even though US support lifted the iron curtain, it also led to the rise of the Taliban and Al-Qaida. Partridge emphasizes that similar “diplomatic overtures to the Taliban in the late 1990’s not only failed to detach [the Taliban] from Al-Qaida, but it meant that the Clinton administration largely stood by while they brutally repressed the Afghan population.” [4] It was not enough for Partridge to call attention to these disastrous attempts at maintaining US power and control abroad. He also warns that there is a bad relationship forming, which is gearing up to go head to head with Iran; Partridge cautions that the former mayor of New York, Rudolph Giuliani, and the former advisor of homeland security, Tom Ridge are lending their support to the MKO, even though the MKO is a designated terrorist group, as outlined by the Department of State. Partridge writes that “their suggestion that [MKO] be both tolerated and supported is wrong."[5]

Andrew Belonsky a human rights blogger and journalist recently wrote an article about the MKO and their American supporters for Death and Taxes. In his critique he stresses that “most Republicans would do anything to take down Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Iranian regime. And for Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin, that means embracing a ‘terrorist group’ and Wikileaks, respectively. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, yes, but the only winner here remains Iran.” [6] Belonsky furthers that the “regime’s defiance proves so tenacious and irksome, Western leaders end up grasping at straws, leaving Ahmadinejad to laugh as his enemies squabble among themselves, aware that he has them backed into a corner, clearly so desperate that they’re willing to erode their own positions simply to destroy him.” [7] Belonsky says that "those who support the [MKO] simply want the group to launch a proxy war against Iran, yet haven’t considered the potentially dangerous consequences." [8]

The leaders of the MKO are thrilled to have new support and they will embrace any relationship which gets them closer to their ambition to take over the Iranian government, which has been their aim since the early years of the movement. In the early 1970’s, in a desperate attempt to gain recognition for their movement, they disturbed peace and began a more aggressive retaliation campaign against the government. In order to strengthen their small movement they made a decision to take up arms. It was then that they connected with the Palestinian Liberation Organization, who trained them in terrorist activities. As they reinforced their cause, with PLO support, they targeted Iranian civilians and officials for assassination. They also targeted American civilians, contractors and military personnel. A number of these assassination attempts were successful, and are well documented by the US intelligence. Despite their terror, they gained no ground, and that is when the MKO’s opportunistic nature kicked in. When an Iranian majority began supporting the Ayatollah Khomeini, there was a massive movement against the Shah. The MKO decided to join the movement in an attempt to influence it enough to gain political standing, but their attempt failed. After the Islamic revolution and the takeover of the US Embassy in 1979, when the MKO realized they couldn’t find a part in the Islamic Republic’s ruling system, they clashed with the government and began their terror campaign once again. When they realized their effort would be unsuccessful they began an official “armed struggle” and started to assassinate Iranian civilians who supported Ayatollah Khomeini. This of course resulted in Khomeini turning against the MKO. Many of the MKO went into hiding, others fled the country. Leaders sought support overseas. The Iranian government identified the MKO as a terrorist cult and a major threat to civilians and their terrorist activities against Iran and Iranian citizens are well-documented around the world. And now the MKO is partnering up with those who hate Iran’s influence in the Middle East. It’s clear that the MKO is on no one’s side—only their own.

In late 2010 when the Iranian nuclear scientist Dr. Majid Shahriari was assassinated in his car, RichardSilverstein.com published an article titled "Mossad and Mujahedin–e-Khalq Partners in Assassination Campaign." [9] Silverstein unveiled how the MKO was the Mossads’ operational hand in Iran and writes that “the assassination campaign would indicate a ratcheting up of the relationship between Mossad and MEK. Instead of being satisfied with passing on bogus intelligence to the U.S. in hopes of fomenting a military strike against Iran, Israel is now using the MEK to execute high-value targets within the regime.” [10] The blogger furthers that “what is ironic about these marriages of convenience is that they so often blow up in the faces of those who devise them (cf. Reagan era support for the Afghan Mujahadeen which morphed into the Taliban). No doubt, Israel would be delighted if the [MKO] overthrew the Iranian regime as a number of powerful neocons have advocated.”

But would an [MKO] dictatorship be any friendlier to Israel than the mullahs?”

And does the Mossad think that an [MKO] regime wouldn’t pursue nuclear weapons with the same or greater zeal as its predecessors?” [11]
The MKO are not heroes and a partnership with them will backfire. They are hypocrites who don’t stand for peace or democracy, and they don’t belong in Iran.

By Mazda Parsi

References:
[1] Belonsky, Andrew. "How GOP Leaders Allow Iran to Shape Their Policy." dt death+taxes 24 December 2010: Web. 15 Feb 2011.
[2] Partridge, Matthew. "Britain and America should beware supporting the Mujahideen-e-Khalq: The west must get tough with Iran – but supporting groups such as MEK would be morally and strategically wrong." Guardian 09 January 2011: Web. 15 Feb 2011.
[3] ibid
[4] ibid
[5] ibid
[6] Belonsky, Andrew. "How GOP Leaders Allow Iran to Shape Their Policy." dt death+taxes 24 December 2010: Web. 15 Feb 2011.
[7] ibid
[8] ibid
[9] Silverstein, Richard. "Mossad and Mujahadeen e-Khalq, Partners in Assassination Campaign." Tikun Olam: Making the World a Better Place. Essays on politics, culture and ideas about Israeli-Arab peace and world music, 01 December 2010. Web. 15 Feb 2011.
[10] ibid
[11] ibid

February 19, 2011 0 comments

Iraq

Thousands of citizens of Diyala Province call for MKO expulsion

Thousands of citizens of Diyala Province, Iraq, called for expulsion of Mujahedin Khalq Organization from Iraq. They also called on trial for the group leaders.

On Friday February18, 2011, thousands of protestors appealed Iraqi judiciary to punish criminal leaders of MKO.

A protestor who was one of the organizers of the demonstration, Habar Al Amuri told Al Sumaria News: "this morning, thousands of Diyala citizens protested against presence of MKO in their territory. They gathered in front of gates of Camp of New Iraq (formerly Ashraf),the organization’s base in Iraq. They asked the government to expel the organization from Iraqi soil."

He notified that the group was the source of a lot of grieves and violence against Diyala citizens.
A demonstrator, Hassan Al Rabiee expressed his opposition towards MKO’s presence in Iraq:"How late will Iraqi government ignore people’s request? Why haven’t they expelled an organization which is guilty for killing innocent people, yet?"

"The protests will continue until the group is expelled ", he warned the government.

Alsumaria News

February 19, 2011 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts