Hot Topics

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

MKO behind Iran embassy attack in Sweden

Iranian authorities say anti-Iran terrorist group MKO has been involved in the recent attack on the Iranian embassy near Stockholm in Sweden.

The Iranian Embassy in Sweden came under attack on Friday when more than 150 people gathered outside its main building to protest the outcome of the June 12 presidential election.

One of the embassy personnel was seriously injured in the attack, police said.

Rasoul Emami, Iranian Ambassador to Sweden, said members of the terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) were found to be among the assailants.

According to Emami, the terrorists have been caught on camera smashing the windows, breaking through the building, attacking embassy staff and tearing down the fence.

The remarks come only a week after Iranian security officials discovered that the terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) had helped intensify the post-election violence in Iran.

According to the security officials, the arrested members had confessed that they were
extensively trained at their bases in Iraq’s camp Ashraf to create post-election mayhem in the country.

Founded in the 1960s, MKO is a guerilla group, which masterminded a slew of terrorist operations in Iran.

The terrorists are especially notorious for taking sides with former dictator Saddam Hussein during the war Iraq imposed on Iran (1980-1988).
The group masterminded a slew of terrorist operations in Iran and Iraq — one of which was the 1981 bombing of the offices of the Islamic Republic Party, in which more than 72 Iranian officials were killed.

A 2007 German intelligence report from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has identified the MKO as a "repressive, sect-like and Stalinist authoritarian organization which centers around the personality cult of [MKO leaders] Maryam and Masoud Rajavi".

June 29, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

The curious case of Iran’s Mujahedin

David Shariatmadari: A group of senior British politicians claims the Iranian Mujahedin are Iran’s best hope of reform. Are they right?

They’ve been described by British politicians as "brave patriots" and "the main democratic Iranian opposition group". Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Christopher Booker said the organisation they set up, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, was "real opposition to the dictatorship" and "the best hope of transforming Iran into a secular, democratic, non-terrorist country". On Wednesday, another Telegraph group journalist, Con Couglin, called them "the leading Iranian dissident group". Their devoted fans include Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, Lady Turner of Camden, and Andrew Mackinlay, a member of the House of Commons foreign affairs committee.

So who are they? And how come you’ve never heard of them?

Well, the People’s Mujahedin, otherwise known as the Mujahedin-e Khalq, called monafeqin (hypocrites) by their detractors and either PMOI, MKO or MeK for short, have been around for nearly half a century. Their origins can be traced to the radical politics of the years before 1979, and their early history is one of ideological twists and turns, schisms and betrayals. To cut a very long story short, they lost out to supporters of Ayatollah Khomeini in the early days of the revolution and in response to a bloody crackdown began a paramilitary campaign against the fledgling republic. During the Iran-Iraq war they were given refuge by Saddam Hussein and allowed to mount attacks on Iran from within Iraqi territory, where they still maintain a settlement, now known as Ashraf City. Reports suggest they were involved in the suppression of the Kurdish uprising after the 1991 war. In 2001, they renounced all military activity. Despite this, they were put on the EU’s terror blacklist in 2002, a decision which was reversed in 2008.

Since their exile from Iran, they’ve spent a great deal of time trying to win westerners over to their cause, and the single-mindedness of some of their supporters has proved remarkably effective. The British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom, which lobbies on the group’s behalf, counts among its members a surprisingly large number of peers and MPs, many of whom, judging by their parliamentary interventions and speeches, seem to have an understanding of Iran’s history based entirely on the standard PMOI line.

Others have been more difficult to convince. The UK government, for example, which tried hard to prevent their removal from the list of proscribed organisations. In 2005 Human Rights Watch (HRW) produced a report into abuses at Ashraf City (then called "Camp Ashraf"). The PMOI’s supporters in Europe and America were quick to brand HRW’s informants "suspicious individuals". The PMOI denied the claims and the National Council of Resistance of Iran said the "accusations only serve as a license to the mullahs’ regime to continue the execution and suppression of PMOI members and supporters in Iran". Last summer, I interviewed Joe Stork, director of HRW’s Middle East and North Africa and asked him about the reaction to the report. "The Mujahedin organisation has, it seems to me, done a pretty good job of cultivating fans, in various countries in Europe," he said. "The reaction on the part of those people was quite vociferous. Denouncing the report, attempting to delegitimise it, putting what seemed to me an awful lot of effort and resources into discrediting the report. Unsuccessfully, in my view."

The picture of the PMOI you get if you do a bit of research – talking to disinterested parliamentarians, former members and journalists who’ve investigated them – is of an organisation that relies heavily of the cult of personality, subjects its members to intense psychological pressures, and massively inflates its level of support inside Iran. It was the subject of an investigation by the German government agency charged with monitoring "foreign extremism", has been accused by HRW of perpetrating serious human rights abuses within the last decade and by others of being complicit in Saddam Hussein’s crimes against his own people.

More relevant, perhaps, is the fact that Iranians who live in Iran regard the PMOI as totally marginal to contemporary politics. At best it’s seen an embittered faction whose main constituency is gullible western politicians. At worst, its members are regarded as lunatics who sided with the enemy during a war in which hundreds of thousands of ordinary Iranians died.

Why is any of this important? Well, the PMOI provides the current Iranian government with an easy scapegoat. The more senior parliamentarians collude with PMOI, put their names to their turgid press releases and organise debates on their behalf, the more the Iranian government’s accusations of can be made to carry water. Tehran claimed this week that PMOI activists, and the group’s London command centre, were behind some of the recent protests.

June 27, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Democracy As Usual in Iran

This observer in Tehran can inform you that the (English-language) media frenzy and its sensationalism has breached the limits of reality and has hijacked the essence of debate in Iran.
It is used as a diversion to eclipse a rejuvenation of a democratic process. The hyped protests, all within a square mile in west of Tehran, are simply a storm in a teacup and all of it must be framed in perspective. A civil war, a revolution or regime change, it is not.

Let us first remember that Iran is a country of about 72 million people, a third of whom are under 25 years old. A turnout of some 50,000 angry mobs (or even one million people, something that has not happened) is not exemplary of the rest. The other 71+ million people also have rights, lives and a desire for quiet pursuit of happiness and peace. Isn’t democracy about the will and rule of the majority, as well as the rule of law and civil order? Or should it be narrowly interpreted (by foreign media) as the right of a select tech-savvy few with computers, email and foreign language skills to project a distorted scuffle and civil disorder? Are elections not about discipline and order, after all? Or should the rules be overturned at random by crying foul and burning down banks and shops, simply because losers dislike the results of the very same system in which they signed up and ran campaigns?

Secondly, the blatant sudden turn of events after the election has not been properly explained to most Iranian youngsters and foreigners with a cursory knowledge of Iranian affairs. In fact, it has nothing to do with the election itself. The violence of June 20th marked the 28th anniversary and a rerun of a major street battle in Tehran between the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MKO-MEK) and their rivals during the early days of the Revolution. The rivals won 28 years ago and the MKO-MEK (a Stalinist, violent group that has no mind for the democratic process or even internal elections) was forced into exile. Many of their members were arrested and jailed when Mr. Mousavi was prime minister.

The MKO-MEK can be best described as the Persian speaking wing of the degenerated Iraqi Baath Party and an earlier species of Al Qaeda back in early 1970s– a contemporary of the Red Brigades and the Baadermeinhof terror organizations in Europe. For decades, it has been designated as a terrorist group by most countries. They murdered American military advisers in Iran prior to the 1979 Revolution. MKO was on Saddam’s payroll to kill Iraqi Shiites, in exchange for having a base in Iraq. The source of their budgets remains murky, but MKO maintains an underground system in most European and North American cities, with lobby networks and a few chameleon fronts and disguised names that mask the organization.

MKO’s Camp Ashraf base was under protection of American forces and, despite the terrorist designation, they did “business” with Mr. Rumsfeld’s secret Task Force 20 for a few terror jabs at Iran in a hostile, ill-conceived regime change dream concocted by Mr. Cheney & Co. After the pullback of American forces in Iraq, the Iranian and Iraqi government have negotiated to close Camp Ashraf north of Iraq and extradite the key figures, the final round of which has been postponed until after elections in Iran. Hence the tsunami of one-way, ill-informed pressure on mostly English-speaking media by the MKO-MEK lobbies machine, an attempt to derail recent events beyond reality and divert attention away from formation of democracy. In other words, modern politics is snuffed out by a wave of violence, using uninformed young protesters as a shield—many of whom were not even born 28 years ago and are clueless about it all.

Otherwise, why would a legitimate Iranian “protester” hold up a sign in English, a foreign language, and pose for cameras if the idea is to protest against the Iranian state in Persian?
Recent developments in Iran are two distinct different matters, albeit foreign media have stitched it all up into one big bubble of insane hype. Somehow, all have forgotten about the purpose of an election. Simply put, the foreign mass media has been duped by a terrorist organization with modern (terror?) techniques of vilification in an abusive manipulation. Polluted prejudice and a lazy default on absurd vocabulary and zingers such as “regime change”, talk of “rogue behavior” or relapse to the perception of the 1953 coup has hijacked reality.

It is time for the world to realize that the Iranian political system is maturing. It is futile and silly for foreigners to insist upon their perceived views of Iran, even if media outlets turn to full time bullhorns of hostile policies of their governments. In the real world, in a territory about the size of Western Europe, Iran conducted a peaceful and historical election without peer in the region and Iranians have embarked on a new course of democracy, not a violent revolution or a coup or a crackdown plan to serve divide-and-dominate games of hostile foreign governments.

It is sad to see civil disorder in any place. But it must be framed in perspective and it is nothing short of a travesty to see the essence of a democratic process is summarily trampled in favor of sensationalist views of the relative few troublemakers with a questionable past and foul intentions.

Democracy is a process, not a project. It must be encouraged with cool heads and it must even-handedly left to the indigenous people to find their own way over time. Within living memory, meddling by foreigners in Iranian politics bluntly delayed and damaged the century-old desire of Iranians for a democratic system.

Iranians have not forgotten that and chances are that an absolute majority of Iranians are not going to let such meddling happen again.
Dr. Ali Ettefagh,

(Dr. Ali Ettefagh serves as a director of Highmore Global Corporation, an investment company in emerging markets of Eastern Europe, CIS, and the Middle East.)
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal
/ali_ettefagh/2009/06/democracy_as_usual_in_iran.html

June 27, 2009 0 comments

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Judge Underlines Iraq’s Resolution to Expel MKO

Head of Iraq’s Court of Appeal judge Munir Haddad said that Iraq’s people and government are resolved to expel the anti-Iran terrorist group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) from the country.

“The great powers, the US in particular, are seeking to reach many of their goals through terrorists, specially the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization,”Haddad said in a meeting with Secretary-General of Habilian Association Seyed Javad Hasheminejad.

Habilian Association is an Iranian non-governmental entity formed of the bereaved families of terror victims.

Haddad further condemned the US support for terrorists in Iraq, and underlined that the MKO has played an active role in sowing discord and violating peace in the country.
“Wherever the US sought to create sabotage and terror, the MKO has played an active role,”Habilian website quoted Haddad as saying.
Haddad further pointed out that the MKO has long sought to stir political feud between Iranian and Iraqi brothers, but its efforts have backfired and caused closer ties between the two Muslim neighboring nations.

Hasheminejad, for his part, noted that the presence of the MKO in Iraq is a violation of the international law, reiterating that the hues and cries by a limited number of pro-MKO media and supporters in Europe can in no way sway the law in this regard.
He further expressed hope that terrorism in Iraq would disappear in the near future.

The MKO, whose main stronghold is in Iraq’s Diyala province, is blacklisted by much of the international community, including the United States.
The MKO is behind a slew of assassinations and bombings inside Iran, a number of EU parliamentarians said in a recent letter in which they slammed a British court decision to remove the MKO from the British terror list. The EU officials also added that the group has no public support within Iran because of their role in helping Saddam Hussein in the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988).

Many of the MKO members abandoned the terrorist organization while most of those still remaining in the camp are said to be willing to quit but are under pressure and torture not to do so.

A May 2005 Human Rights Watch report accused the MKO of running prison camps in Iraq and committing human rights violations.
According to the Human Rights Watch report, the outlawed group puts defectors under torture and jail terms.

Numerous articles and letters posted on the Internet by family members of MKO recruits confirm reports of the horrific abuse that the group inflicts on its own members and the alluring recruitment methods it uses.

The most shocking of such stories includes accounts given by former British MKO member Ann Singleton and Mustafa Mohammadi – the father of an Iranian-Canadian girl who was drawn into the group during an MKO recruitment campaign in Canada.
Mohammadi recounts his desperate efforts to contact his daughter, who disappeared several years ago – a result of what the MKO called a”two-month tour”of Camp Ashraf for teenagers.

He also explains how the group forces the families of its recruits to take part in pro-MKO demonstrations in Western countries by threatening to kill their loved ones.
Lacking a foothold in Iran, the terrorist group recruits ill-informed teens from Iranian immigrant communities in western states and blocks their departure afterwards.
The group, founded in the 1960s, blended elements of Islamism and Stalinism and participated in the overthrow of the US-backed Shah of Iran in 1979. Ahead of the revolution, the MKO conducted attacks and assassinations against both Iranian and western targets.

Leaders of the group have been fighting to shed its terrorist tag after a series of bloody anti-western attacks in the 1970s, and nearly 30 years of violent struggle against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The group started assassination of citizens and officials after the revolution in a bid to take control of the newly established Islamic Republic. It killed several of Iran’s new leaders in the early years after the revolution, including the then President Mohammad Ali Rajayee, Prime Minister Mohammad Javad Bahonar and the Judiciary Chief Mohammad Hossein Beheshti, who were killed in bomb attacks by MKO members in 1981.

The group fled to Iraq in 1986, where it was protected by Saddam Hussein and where it helped the Iraqi dictator suppress Shiite and Kurd uprisings in the country.
The terrorist group joined Saddam’s army during the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988) and helped Saddam and killed thousands of Iranian civilians and soldiers during the US-backed Iraqi imposed war on Iran.

Since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, the group, which now adheres to a pro-free-market philosophy, has been strongly backed by the neo-conservatives in the United States, who argue for the MKO to be taken off the US terror list.

June 25, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

In Iran Crisis, Paris Exile Group Plays Disputed Role

As millions of Iranians took to the streets of Tehran over the past week to protest the presidential-election results, exiled opposition group the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) saw its moment. "This uprising is the result of 30 years of murder, oppression and corruption by an Iranian regime we’ve dedicated our entire lives to fighting," Mohammad Mohaddessin, chairman of foreign affairs for the Paris-based group told TIME. "Even if protesters aren’t calling for [the NCRI] to take power, it’s only natural that, given our organization’s experience, our clandestine networks are playing an important role informing and assisting the Iranian people to achieve its desire of regime change."

Iranian police accused the NCRI and its "terrorist" supporters of fomenting the violence. As evidence, Iran said several NCRI-linked operatives had been arrested after smuggling guns and explosives into the country and carrying out "terrorist acts." On Sunday, the NCRI dismissed the story and mocked what it called the "preposterous and threadbare claims to justify the suppression and killings inside Iran.

Dramatic as all that sounds, it doesn’t square with the reality described by Iran experts. Diplomats, academics and intelligence officials say most people inside Iran want nothing to do with the NCRI or its primary member organization, Mujehadine-e-Khalq (MEK) — whose bloody attacks on the Iranian regime in the 1980s and ’90s landed it on the U.S.’s terrorism list. Experts say the NCRI’s support in Iran is now tiny and its international base is shrinking. The NCRI and MEK, say Iran watchers, have become little more than an excuse — or handy alibi — for Tehran’s crackdown.

"The Iranian population is generally frightened of or repelled by [the NCRI], and the supporters in [Iran] … have all mostly vanished," says Olivier Roy, one of France’s leading experts on Middle East politics and Islam. "It now basically operates abroad as a sect with international branches whose membership is dwindling as its base grows older and young people shun it."

The group’s officials disagree. They claim the NCRI has thousands of members in Europe and North America. As evidence, they point to a rally outside Paris on Saturday that drew as many as 90,000 people to protest the situation in Iran. NCRI leaders are also quick to point out that the organization supplied information from inside Iran that was pivotal in documenting Tehran’s military nuclear ambitions — a fact acknowledged by Western diplomats.

While conceding that the NCRI’s clandestine networks in Iran have been hit by the execution of what he says has been thousands of members and sympathizers over the past two decades, foreign-affairs chairman Mohaddessin says a recent burst of recruiting and activity has restored some of the group’s ability to operate inside the country. Operatives there, he says, are busy gathering intelligence and organizing to undermine the regime. According to Mohaddessin, sympathizers secretly monitored more than half the polling stations during the presidential election, providing the NCRI with enough information to claim that scarcely 15% of Iranian voters bothered casting ballots at all, a number at odds with the reportedly massive turnout seen by foreign media and other observers and the government figure that put participation at 85%.

The NCRI was founded in 1981 to serve as an umbrella organization to Iranian opposition groups, and its dominant force has always been the MEK, which espouses a curious mix of Marxism and Islamist militancy. MEK originally worked with radical Islamist organizations to topple the Shah and rid Iran of what it described as Western imperialism. In the wake of the 1979 revolution, though, the group found itself under attack by its former allies in the new Islamic regime and took up arms. Its military wing was based in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. From there, MEK carried out assassination and terrorist strikes inside Iran and fought alongside Saddam’s army in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.

"Many Iranians know victims of MEK violence or still feel the fear and fury its name provokes," says a French counterterrorism official who has followed the NCRI and MEK. "Because MEK remains widely hated in Iran, the mere threat by Iranian leaders that it and NCRI are waiting to take over in the event of crisis tends to chill musings of regime change in Iranian streets."

The U.S., Canada and European Union put the MEK on terrorism blacklists nearly a decade ago. Those governments also alleged that the NCRI was essentially the political arm of the MEK, a claim the NCRI says misrepresents the relationship between the two groups. Though the resulting blacklisting has withstood legal challenge in the U.S. and Canada, a European court this year struck down the MEK’s terrorist listing in the E.U. The new ruling was based on an earlier British court decision that ordered the terrorist designation be lifted because of a lack of evidence that the MEK had been involved in terrorist activity since it renounced violence in 2001. (In Iraq, the U.S. Army disarmed MEK’s Ashraf compound in the country’s east in 2003, calling it a security threat. The Iraqi government has indicated it will close the camp completely.)

Middle East expert Roy says the claims and counterclaims miss the bigger point. While Iranian leaders obsessively hate the NCRI for historical reasons, he says, the NCRI is largely an irrelevancy these days..
TIME – By BRUCE CRUMLEY – Jun. 22, 2009
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/
0,8599,1906172,00.html?xid=rss-world-cnn

June 24, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Masud Rajavi’s Marriages

Memoirs of Ms. Batoul Soltani – Part 16
Before my involvement with MKO I had no indication of Masud’s marriages. I just knew that Rajavi had fled from Iran but I didn’t have any idea of what had happened after he left Iran along with Masud Rajavi got married with Firouzeh Banisadr Banisadr. I had no idea about the "ideological marriage"! In 1981, when the office of MKO in Iran was shutdown, I was studying at school and I was completely unaware of activities of the organization. At high school I expressed some sort of opposition. For Example I complained about inspecting students’ bags at schools or why they forced the students to take part in group prayers. These were my challenges against the regime. In fact, I didn’t have enough knowledge about MKO in the way that I could arrange my activities along with their goals. Basically, all the information I could get about MKO, Masud and Maryam Rajavi, and the Ideological Revolution was in 1985 and 1986 when I arrived into the organization. When I entered into the group, I started knowing about the elevations in their movements.

During the training process that I passed after I entered into MKO, they never dealt with Masud’s marriage with Firouzeh Banisadr in open organizational arguments. Later on, it was discussed in the higher levels of the Leadership Council. In 1994, we had a meeting in which the arguments about the MKO’s second founders were presented and Masud pointed out his marriage with Firouzeh. I don’t think the issue was transmitted to the meetings in lower levels of the group. Masud said that he was forced to marry her due to political affairs and this was the cost he had to pay to maintain the existence of the National Council of Resistance and Abul Hassan Banisadr as an ally in NCRI. Actually he claimed that he was not willing to marry her but he did it for political interests only. As he said, he wanted to make a family relationship with Banisadr in order to prevent him getting close to the Islamic Republic. He claimed that Banisadr’s position against the Islamic Republic was not clear and he was likely to return back to it. In fact, Rajavi wanted to say that his marriage was supposed to be an obstacle to stop Banisadr tending towards the Iranian Regime. He only spoke of such an issue in private meetings of the Leadership Council and never presented it in lower ranks.

When I entered into the organization, the members were not able to think of these questions at all, since the superiors assigned so many duties for the members that they never found time to think about such questions. They even were sensitive about what members were reading or were thinking about. I don’t remember that I made any questions on this issue during broader meetings. But since I left the organization, I have thought on it and I believe that they didn’t talk about it because they wanted to hide Rajavi’s immoral or sensual desires.

When I got to knew it for the first time, it was long after my involvement with MKO; I asked myself why they avoided talking about it while they discussed a lot of other unimportant cases for a long time. Deep in my mind, I guessed that it was to cover Rajavi’s sensuality. They had nothing to say about that marriage. On the other hand, they always voiced Masud’s marriage with Maryam Qajar Azdanlu discussing its outcome. ”This marriage is the path that leads you to be dissolved in the leadership. Members should abandon their spouses " they asserted. So how could they justify or theorize the marriage of Masud Rajavi with Firouzeh Banisadr. I suppose that they didn’t mention it because of the sensual motives behind that marriage.

Until four years after my involvement with MKO I had no idea of that marriage at all. Nothing could be found in the archive or media of the organization. You should find no news or analysis on this second marriage in MKO’s resources.

I even think that a large number of forces have no idea about it.

When I was aware of such a marriage, I wanted to learn more about her but I never asked a question. I remember a meeting where a woman stood up and asked: ”what was Firouzeh’s case?” Maryam immediately replied but she didn’t make it clear, she just said: ”Firouzeh is still in love with Masud and she’s not married since her divorce from Masud”. Actually, Maryam wanted to promote Masud’s personality. Also she noted that their marriage was in result of a public suggestion and due to an organizational decision so she explained that the marriage, as well as the divorce, was imposed to Masud Rajavi. She meant that Masud didn’t want to divorce Firouzeh because he didn’t find it moral but the public opinion forced him to do so.

It is worth knowing that she used the same justification for her own marriage with Masud. She clearly said:”I imposed myself to Masud and caused him to go under accusations but I wanted to put away all obstacles and to belong to the leader, not to any other man. I just wanted to walk along the leader.’ She said the fact that she didn’t want to be owned by another man is opposed to leadership’s ideal. She discussed it for both men and women inside the group.

Translated by Nejat Society

June 23, 2009 0 comments

Fox News

Communist Terrorist Television for Dupes

Fox News Channel: Communist Terrorist Television for Dupes

On October 1, 2007, I posted “Fox News Channel: Communist Terrorist Television for Dupes”.
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-iongVIwherPSJekBajGbbDj1yv4Tfku0?p=193

(Massoud Rajavi and his pay master Saddam Hussein)
On June 20, 2009, the Fox News Channel devoted the entire day of live programming to coverage of the unrest in Iran. For supporters of the Iranian communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, NCRI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) terrorists, there was no need to watch their Sima Azadi television channel via satellite. Throughout the day, the Fox News Channel provided favorable coverage for the communist terrorists. Some examples were:

During the 11:00 – 11:30 AM (PST) segment, Fox News Channel showed MEK supporters in front of the White House waving their communist flags. The panelists for this segment, Charles Krauthammer and Courtney Kealy, failed to identify or to condemn the supporters of the communist terrorists. These terrorists have murdered American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of Iranian and Iraqi civilians. In September 2002, former President George W. Bush’s White House published a background paper for Bush’s remarks at the United Nations listing the MEK as a pretext for the Iraq War. In 2003, American and coalition forces attacked and killed some of the MEK terrorists at Camp Ashraf, Iraq.

In a later segment, Congressman Darryl Issa (Republican—California) commented that empowerment of people has changed Communist China for the better!
During Shepard Smith’s segment, Smith showed a video of the MEK rally in Paris, France and identified them as the PMOI. The only negative reference to the MEK occurred when Amy Kellogg speculated that the MEK might be responsible for a possible suicide bombing at Ayatollah Khomeini’s shrine in Tehran. Shepard Smith neither responded nor indicated that PMOI and MEK are two names for the same communist terrorist organization.

During Geraldo Rivera’s segment, former Senator Rick Santorum, who was a strong supporter of the MEK in the United States Senate, noted that former Senator (and now Vice President) Biden had originally opposed the Iran Freedom Support Act.
http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=792
Then, Geraldo Rivera showed video of Maryam Rajavi’s MEK rally in Paris, France and interviewed Fox News Channel Foreign Affairs Analyst, who headed the NCRI office in Washington, DC until the Federal Government closed the office.

In 2007, Fox News Channel viewers could claim to have been duped by relying upon the Fox News Channel for news. Now, Fox News Channel viewers have no excuses. Those who rely upon the Fox News Channel as a source of accurate news are traitors to all Americans who fought or died fighting communists. Americans do not need to look to Iran or to the Middle East in search for America’s worst enemies. America’s worst enemies are in America.

http://360.yahoo.com/paulsheldonfoote

June 22, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Suicide operation; a solution or sidestepping it

An interview with Batool Soltani on MKO self-immolations – Part two

Sahar Family Foundation: Our greetings Mrs. Soltani. We are ready to continue the issue of suicide operation if you will. I will pose the first question unless you have some preliminary remarks to add.

Batool Soltani: before we continue with your question, I deem it necessary to add explanations on the previous session’s discourse. First, what motivates an operator to commit suicide when he happens to come face to face with the security forces and the police? Does it mean that there is absolutely no other way? Is it not really possible for a militiaman to strengthen himself physically and psychologically to bear pressures of probable tortures, prison and investigations instead of committing suicide as the last solution? It might be the easiest way to protect some information but for sure it fails to be equal to the value of a man’s life. Another point is that it may be regarded an act of bravery in itself, but can it not be considered an act of the ultimate weakness and a sense of inferiority? These questions may seem illogical in an obsessive atmosphere where anything is routinely scrutinized from a security point of view that may threaten the existence of the organization. But it does not mean that in no condition there is a logical and rational solution to any issue. Although a conjecture, I think it can be confirmed if discussed in detail with the wise and elite.

But how the organization justifies the suicide operation as the first and the last solution? What are its good reasons for exchanging such an easiest and simple way for a man’s life? Within the organization they say the capacity of enduring interrogational torture varies from person to person. I think I have read things in the organization’s sources about the applied inconceivable measures to assess the members’ resistance and response to the tortures by exposing them to a diversity of physical pressures like flogging, depriving them of sleeping, suspending them handcuffed from the ceiling in a variety of conditions and the like. Then they would conclude that in spite of varying degrees of resistance, it could be measured but the exact degree would always remain a matter of obscurity. In fact, nobody could stand the tortures that could continue to no definite degree. Of course, they knew that not all members would be put under the same tortures; it depended on the ranks and the extent of the information they held. Thus, an arrested key element and cadre to whom the survival of the organization depended would break in some point under the tortures, so suicide would be much more guaranteed than making a risk. It is instilled into him that suffering and torture are inevitably awaiting him and nothing is known to what degree he can hold out the arbitrary tortures that warrant the agents’ access to the concealed information. This is the angle of the organization’s look at the issue that needs to be studied in depth in itself.

As I pointed out earlier, the organization’s standards are absolutely different. The organization unrelentingly persisted that the ultimate solution to any problem was to offer a sacrifice. Somebody had to be sacrificed for the cause of the organization, which has been regarded more precious than the life of a militiaman, through suicide, self-harming operations or other similar acts. In one instance, as I remember, Rajavi in justification of the failure of the Operation Eternal Light stated that he had known from the very beginning that it was a futile operation from a military viewpoint, but he did it as it was tied to the survival of the organization that required so many lives. So worthless are evaluated the lives of the members that he sends them to their death in swarms to prove that the organization and the Rajavis are still breathing.

In a message he stated that if anybody set himself on fire in Camp Ashraf, it would be a cost paid to minimize the limitations imposed on the camp by the US forces. I mean the suicide case by Yaser Askari who was said to have committed suicide because of the imposed pressures on Camp Ashraf. The act is no more a countermeasure to protect the organization against any threat of annihilation but rather a means to further certain organizational, and even personal, ambitious objectives. Here the intention is no more measuring a member’s resistance degree in case of undergoing torture, rather suicide turns to be an imposed means to serve the survival of the organization, a purpose he, the member, has been destined from the very beginning to sacrifice himself for. I mean to say that the organization’s innovated self-burnings like that of 17 June and that of Yaser Askari in Camp Ashraf have been the easiest chosen solutions to overcome the crises. Even beyond that, the act is sanctified and glorified as a model for others to follow fervently instead of criticizing its exploitation for vague and hollow purposes. And as an alternative, the organization looks for belligerently innovated means that devour more sacrifices; crushed, scorched, crumbled bodies with no identity.

To be continued
Translated by Mojahedin.ws

June 22, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

MKO agents arrested in Tehran riots

Tehran – Agents of the terrorist group Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) have been found and arrested among the agitators of Tehran streets in the past few days.

Arrested people have confessed that after being trained in Iraq, they have infiltrated into Iran and that they were guided and supported by MKO operation room in Britain.

Iranian television broadcast their confesses and their telephone conversations with a number of leaders of that group in which they ordered them for sabotage like setting fire on buses, gas stations, attacking the Bassiji barracks and demolishing public properties.

The commanding headquarter of the group which supports and finances terrorist actions in Iran and Iraq is located in the outskirt of Paris, France.

The British government removed the group’s name from the terrorist group list last year, so that they could expand their centers to guide operations in the country.

June 21, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

One more defector of Rajavi’s Cult joined his family

Mr. Hamid Hajipur who has experienced the bitterness of being captive in exile for more than 20 years, managed to release himself from the bars of Rajavis’ Cult and returned home and joined his family in Nejat Society office, Gilan Branch.

Declaring his separation from MKO and expressing his hatred towards the organization’s compulsory work camp; Camp Ashraf, Mr. Hajipur returned to his homeland and to his warm family center to shape his own life as he wishes.

Nejat Society, Gilan Branch welcomes Mr. Hajipur and congratulates his family on the return of their beloved son.

Nejat Society looks forward for the release of all captives of Rajavis’ Cult in near future.

June 21, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts