The MEK; the Hypocrites

Waves; Invisible fighters of the cult of Mojahedin

The June 17th dossier of MKO is already 6 years old. Despite the emphasis of French officials on the significance of this legal case on terrorism, it has not been given a verdict yet. However, this is not the end of the story. Mojahedin consider this delay as a subterfuge for calling its accusations baseless and asking to be acquitted on all charges. The silence of France on the issue intensifies its complexity and ambiguity. Whatever the vote of the court, it is evident that the DST operation in 17 June 2003 has been very significant for French authorities. The future will demonstrate whether France government and Nicolas Sarkozy take a realistic stance not to endanger the interests of France for the sake of expediency and negligence or not. He once as the Minister of the Interior emphasized that the materials seized at Auvers-sur-Oise justified the operation (1).

However, what is of more significance is reviewing hidden aspects of this operation and the evidences by which French police and judiciary have managed to prove its legitimacy. Now, this question arises: What are the precautionary measures taken by France in recent years for controlling the illegal activities of Mojahedin in its soil after finding a huge amount of facilities used for terrorist and espionage activities? The activities of MKO in recent years in France indicate that not only no measure has been taken for controlling Mojahedin but also France has acted passively paving the way for extending the activities and facilities of the organization.

The basic question is that while according to the police, this raid was "one of the biggest undertaken by the DST (French Counter-intelligence) in the last 30 years" and international press agencies reported that it was the result of more than three years of investigation (2), what have been the practical, judicial, and controlling measures of French officials in this regard? The discovery of more than eight million dollars in cash and 150,000 Euros as well as computer equipment and dozens of satellite dishes (3) is just a part of the illegal activities of MKO in France. According to the following report by French resources, Mojahedin planned to use these facilities for furthering their cultic objectives:

The Associated Press underlined the significant means deployed by the French police authorities. This shows that the French security services did not take this raid lightly: even bringing in aerial surveillance helicopters. The operation was aimed according to the Ministry, above all, "at the leaders of an organization which threatens public order and is planning or preparing to finance terrorist acts". During the raid, it was necessary to use explosive charges to break open "blocked doors", the police stated. "The People’s Mojahedin are the military wing of Massoud Rajavi’s National Resistance Council, based in the Paris suburbs… The raid, carried out under a search warrant issued by the Paris-based anti-terrorism investigative magistrate, Jean-Louis Bruguiere, mobilised more than 1200 officials, including 80 members of the elite GIGN: France’s SWAT team. It was carried out by the Directorate for National Internal Security (DST or French counter-intelligence) with the support of the Central Command of the Judiciary Police and under the technical direction of the RAID (France’s specialised unit for hostage and terrorist incidents). Thirteen targets were surrounded in the Val d’Oise and Yvelines departments, with a particular focus on the Auvers-sur-Oise camp which was suspected to be a refuge for many active PMOI members… ‘Its bases in the Paris region are considered to be used for questionable organisational, logistical and financial purposes’, added the Ministry…". 4

Undoubtedly, the consequences of 17 June operation were far beyond the discovery of some facilities. In fact, it attracted the attention and aroused the sensitivity of French officials to MKO camp in Auver-sur-Oise as their main headquarter. This is the reason why Mojahedin took a hostile position toward our warnings on the strategic nature of Auver and initiated a propaganda war to distract the attention of international organs from the dangers of this strategic and ideological bastion. France is to identify the real objectives pursued by Mojahedin in Val d’Oise to foil their illegal and terrorist plans. There is no doubt that Auver has turned to the main headquarter of MKO and Mojahedin are after connecting it to their remnant members in Camp Ashraf. After their disarmament and the fall of Saddam leading to the end of his alliance with Masoud Rajavi, Rajavi realized that he no more could use Camp Ashraf as an operational unit. Therefore, his base was transferred to another safe haven, Auver-sur-Oise. French officials found out his objective and performed the operation 17 June. According to an Interior Ministry source:

Auvers-sur-Oise had been turned into the Mojahedin’s "International HQ". Up until March-April [2003], their command structure was in Iraq and only moved with the outbreak of war. 5
This transfer was far from a mere physical one. Mojahedin made use of technology for reorganizing their members and activities all over the world. Despite the necessity of human control of their camp in France by police forces, it hardly suffices since they carry out the greatest portion of their operations through electronic waves that are intangible far from the eyes of inspectors. They no more grab at historical and reactionary means of communication used by cults like Batinis and Al-Qaeda. On the contrary, they have access to the latest scientific achievements and further their objectives through lines and waves. According to French officials:

In 2001, the PMOI had claimed responsibility for more than 195 terrorist attacks on Iran from its base in Auvers-sur-Oise. 6

The same resource refers to the cultic structure of the organization based on Masoud Rajavi and Maryam Azdanlu, the cultic leaders of MKO:
It was more like a sect, a cult of personality for Massoud Rajavi and his wife. 7

In a nutshell, Mojahedin open their way easily for the achievement of their predetermined objectives wherever they settle or even have least physical presence by manipulating means of the modern media and communicational techniques to run its propaganda machine.

References:

1. Gessler, Antonie, Autopsy of an Ideological Drift, Chapter 1: The end of tolerance
2. "Coup de filet centre les Moudjahidin du peuple iranien" – dispatches of Agence France Presse (AFP) and Reuters, 17 June 2003.
3. Associated Press, Operation de grande envergure contre les Moudjahidin du people en region parisienne, 17 June 2003.
4. France News, Coup de filet contre les Moudjahidin du people iranien, 17 June 2003.
5. ibid
6. Associated Press, Les Moudjahidin du peoples’appretaient a commettre des attentats selon la DST, 10 June 2003.
7. ibid.

June 30, 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

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

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

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Iraqi official denies MKO camp under siege

Al-Arabiya Television at 1327 gmt on 9 June reports the following: "The Iranian opposition group, Mojahedin-e Khalq, whose headquarters in Iraq are confined to Camp Ashraf in Diyala Staff Major General Abd-al-Karim Khalaf, chief of operations at the Iraqi Interior Ministry Governorate, has reported that the Iraqi Police’s Rapid Response Forces tightened their embargo on the camp’s occupants and banned the entry of goods and people to it.

The Iraqi Committee for the Defence of Camp Ashraf had issued a statement denouncing the tightening of the noose around the group by the Rapid Response Forces as well as threats to the camp’s occupants of murder and arrest, warning of a possible humanitarian disaster."

Eight minutes later, the channel interviews Staff Major General Abd-al-Karim Khalaf, chief of operations at the Iraqi Interior Ministry, via telephone from Baghdad.

Asked if the government is planning to close down Camp Ashraf, Staff Major General Khalaf says: "As an Interior Ministry, we are responsible for certain matters relating to the camp, such as providing protection for the camp and securing its outer perimeter; guaranteeing the entry of humanitarian goods as stipulated by international agreements – a matter that we handle in transparent fashion; and ensuring that the camp’s residents do not interact with security forces, and all three of these objectives are being met."

He adds: "Some of the security units were replaced – the brothers dispatched by the Interior Ministry left certain positions – and the Interior Ministry is bound by the constitution to provide protection – and is capable of doing so – but its work is hampered by these people [the Mojahedin-e Khalq], who are escalating the situation with certain positions and statements and are providing wrong and highly exaggerated accounts. Interior Ministry personnel have not interacted with them at all, and no siege has been laid around the camp. The camp has certain outlets through which some humanitarian goods and basic necessities are allowed to pass, and they remain operational."

Commenting on the accusations made by the Committee for the Defence of Camp Ashraf, the major general maintains that "there has been no interaction with the camp’s residents, and the protection forces are stationed around the camp’s perimeter, so how can there be a tightening of the noose? How can the noose be tightened when the camp has specific outlets and when more than one party – not just the Interior Ministry – are overseeing the camp? One of these outlets is located near a Multinational Forces position and these forces can see what is happening."

Asked if "you have any political or military orders to close the camp in the near future," Staff Major General Khalaf says: "No, not at all." He reiterates the role of the Interior Ministry in securing the camp and regulating the flow of goods into it.

Source: Al-Arabiya TV, Dubai, in Arabic 1327 gmt 9 Jun 09
Reported by: BBC Monitoring, June 9, 2009

June 11, 2009 0 comments

European Union

MKO ex-members’ letter to the President of EP

Letter of a number of former members of the MKO in Iraq to the President of the EP concerning the deeds of the proxies of the Rajavi terrorist cult in parliament

President of the European Parliament, Mr Hans-Gert Pöttering, Brussels

On Thursday April 23, 2009, a motion for resolution was tabled in the European Parliament by a number of advocates of the Rajavi terrorist cult including Mr Alejo Vidal-Quadras who has recently been an exceptional guest of the MKO destructive cult in Ashraf garrison in Iraq. In that motion the situation that has been described is quite contrary to the actual facts as well as baselessly accusing the Iraqi government.

The text of the speech delivered in the Chamber of the EP by Mr Alejo Vidal-Quadras to defend such a motion and ruling out the other proposed amendments which in reality defended the inhabitants trapped in the Ashraf cult garrison is brought below as a reminder:
Friday, 24 April 2009 – Strasbourg

Alejo Vidal-Quadras, – Mr President, this morning we will be voting on a joint motion for a resolution co-signed by four political groups on the situation of the Ashraf refugee camp in Iraq. Three thousand five hundred Iranian men and women, members of the democratic opposition to the fundamentalist regime in Iran, live there completely defenceless. In the last few weeks they have been under pressure and harassment by the faction of the Iraqi Government under the influence of the Iranian regime, and there is a high probability that at any moment a tragedy could happen that would parallel the ones we witnessed in the Balkans not so long ago.

We all remember Srebrenica, and I have no doubt that no Member in this Chamber wants a second Srebrenica in Iraq. Our motion for a resolution is a call to alert public opinion all over the world before a disaster takes place. Unfortunately, some colleagues have tabled amendments that could increase the danger for the residents in Camp Ashraf and provide the Iranian regime and its proxies in Iraq with arguments to massacre them.

I recently visited the camp myself and I assure you that the allegations included in the amendments tabled are absolutely unfounded. People in Ashraf are there on a volunteer basis. They are free to leave whenever they want and they live in the best friendly relations with the Iraqi population of the region. The intention of our motion is to protect these people. Nobody would understand – but if these amendments are adopted the result of the motion would be exactly the opposite.
This is not a political issue, colleagues: it is purely humanitarian and it is very urgent. I beg you to vote against all amendments tabled to this joint motion supported by these four groups and support the motion as it has been agreed by these four groups that are of very different political stances. The lives of many innocent and harmless people depend on your vote. Please do not let them down.

As you are well aware, the proposed amendments which Mr Vidal-Quadras so strongly opposes are based on the testimonies given by many rescued former members of the Rajavi terrorist cult. They describe the situation of human rights inside Ashraf garrison as disastrous and remind us that visits by international human rights organizations to this cult garrison, which lacks the minimum individual rights, were sought. According to Mr Vidal-Quadras this just demand would provide the Iraqi government with the excuse to massacre all of them!

It is worth mentioning that the speech delivered by Mr Vidal-Quadras as well as the contents of his motion for amendment to the resolution is exactly coordinated with the bizarre stances of the leaders of the MKO. For instance nobody in the whole world claims that a faction of the Iraqi government is a proxy of the Iranian regime which is determined to massacre the inhabitants of Ashraf.

The aim of the leaders of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), which Mr Vidal-Quadras is pursuing in the European Parliament very determinedly, is to keep the people in Ashraf cult garrison isolated from the outside world since only in this case could they be trained to execute sabotage activities inside Iraq.

We wish to ask Mr. Vidal-Quadras through you, why he and the MKO leaders are so severely against the visits of international human rights organizations and direct interviews with the people over there without the presence of the MKO officials and also their free contact and visit with their families, and why he just repeats the MKO leaders’ excuses.

We of course do agree with him that a disaster is about to happen and also the fact that the issue of the Ashraf cult garrison is not a political matter but a human rights one. But those who have lost many years of their lives being captive in that garrison would also like to alert international public opinion to the threats against the innocents in that garrison from the MKO leaders. We do fear that the end of the Rajavi terrorist cult will be like many other cults such as that of Jim Jones in Guyana.

Individuals such as Mr. Vidal-Quadras are certainly responsible for the continuation of the mental and physical captivity of the inhabitants of the Ashraf cult garrison and all the consequences resulted against these people from the cult leaders.

With regards

A number of rescued former members of the Rajavi terrorist cult in Iraq
Baghdad, May 25, 2009

May 26, 2009 0 comments

Spain

Open letter of Mr. Sobhani to Prime Minister of Spain

Honorable President of the Government of Spain
“Mr. Jose Luis Rodrigers Zapatero”

Respectfully, I would like to introduce myself before anything else. I am an ex member of the Central Committee of Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (MKO). This can be verified from their own propaganda outlets including Mojahed Publication (Special Edition, Autumn 1992) which mentions my name as a Deputy Executive Committee member.

In 1992 I became an outspoken critic of what is known as the “forced divorces” and of what is known as “armed struggle”. More than that, I criticised what was apparent about the special relations between the organisation and Saddam Hussein, the ousted dictator of Iraq. I was imprisoned for a few months in solitary confinement inside Ashraf camp and over all spent about 8 years in different prisons.

In January 2001, after 8 years of imprisonment and physical and mental torture, they turned me over to Abu Ghuraib prison where I was held for more than a year.
I would like to inform your Excellency that MR. VIDAL QUADRASS, Member of the European Parliament from Spain is supporting and backing up the leaders of MKO, MRS. MARYAM RAJAVI and MASOUD RAJAVI and their terrorist cult in European parliament.

MR. VIDAL QUADRASS visited from Camp of Ashraf in Iraq for more help to this terrorist cult last year. But without any human rights Organisation representative accompanying his good self., He visited the camp without even investigating the allegations as to what is really going on behind its closed doors. MR. VIDAL QUADRASS visited from Camp of Ashraf in Iraq, but he did not notice that the camp has no children inside and he did not think that this is because the cult leader has banned marriage and family relations?

I would like to remained you that self-immolations done by some members in European capitals after the arrest of their leader Maryam Rajavi in Paris on 17 June 2003, is one obvious example of the kind. Like all cults, this organisation needs a remote site to be able to isolate the members from the outside world. The residents of Ashraf Camp in Iraq and Auvers-Sur-Oise Camp in France have no contact with the real world, not even with their relatives.

At the end, I would like to remain you that the Mojahedin Khalgh Terorist Cult has a similar place as the terrorist organization “ETA “in the hearts and minds of people of Iran. Is it certainly a justlyable position for a Spanish member of parliament to support a terrorist cult?

Sincerely
Mohammad Sobhani
19.05.2009
Postfach 90 06 63
51116 Köln – Deutschland

Telefon: +49 (0) 1774829905
Email: sobhani_m_h@hotmail.com
Iran Ghalam, May 19, 2009

May 20, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

The illusion of calling Camp Ashraf a city – 2

Calling Camp Ashraf as Ashraf city is one of the self-fabricated terms of MKO and investigating its semantic, geographical, social, and political aspects is necessary. Ashraf is the military camp of Mojahedin that has surrendered to a superior power by force and still has the parameters and indices of a military camp like putting on military uniform, running morning rituals, military discipline and tens of other instances of practices exercised in most military camps. The fact is that calling Camp Ashraf a city is so irrelevant and ridiculous that in the report about Camp Ashraf written by Manoochehr Hezarkhani, a member of NCRI, he looses his control and is strongly impressed after finding some parameters like the existence of marketplace and a graveyard therein and writes:

I consider the entrance of business to Ashraf as a sign of “urbanization” in this military camp.

Or he refers to another sign of urbanization of Camp Ashraf as follows:

Graveyard is another structure of this (unfortunately) developing city that is not newly built and its establishment goes back to the post Kuwait war period as the monument of those Mojaheds who were martyred in the riots of that time and their body was not found. Until then, Mojahedin buried their martyrs in Karbala yet since then they bury them in this cemetery. The great, pleasant, and orderly graveyard that I saw in this trip is in fact one of the most interesting scenes of this city and as it was said one of the places that all newcomers visit first. The regular line of glittery tombs decorated with flowers, the photo of martyrs of Ashraf as well as the light and mournful music played therein leaves no visitor indifferent.

Let alone the fact that any gathering even comprised of few families needs a place as cemetery and if it is an index of urbanization, any gathering of any size and characteristics is a city if it has a graveyard and the presence or absence of graveyard is the index of urbanization in social and political classifications. Surprisingly enough, Mr. Hezarkhani pays his most attention to the structure of the graveyard of Ashraf and describes it compared to other places. The reason may be that Mojahedin value the dead more than any other issue and the stylish and orderly graveyard therein acts as a motivation for others to die to receive the greatest respect. Likewise, it can be concluded that Mr. Hezarkhani himself has no basis for his statements and there are other objectives behind his report.

Evidently, the best resource and reference for finding if Ashraf can be called a city is the existing encyclopedias and dictionaries. Surprisingly enough, in the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, Camp Ashraf has been considered a city whereas various sociological, geographical, and political definitions given of city in the same encyclopedia and classification of its indices imply that Camp Ashraf lacks many parameters to be called a city. However, in Wikipedia there are some contradictions too where the residents of Ashraf are quoted calling it “Ashraf city or Camp Ashraf” considering its military nature. Such fabricated definition is much owed to Mojahedin lobbies and payments rather than geographical facts to legally refer to an area not even as a village or town but city!

It seems that according to the dualistic viewpoint of Mojahedin consisting of Marxist as well as religious outlook toward all phenomena and issues, the definitions given by Marx and Engle on city are more relevant here since they define city materialistically. Marx defines an urbanized society based on some characteristics and features: A city is the place of centralization of population, production means, resources, demands and needs wherein social working division is made.

It seems that population is the sole commonality found between the definition of a city and Camp Ashraf. However, according to a conventional rule, 3500 residents are not enough to be considered a population. Moreover, according to geographical and sociological definitions, a city has to have at least 50000 hectare width and 50000 residents. In this regard, geographers consider a city as an artificial landscape of streets, buildings, facilities, and structures that make an urban life possible. Moreover, historians define city based on its history and antiquity. Economists refer to city as a place where the livelihood of the most residents is not based on agriculture and demographers take the population of an area as the main factor of its urbanization. These are the classic factors for distinguishing between a city and other geographical divisions. The factors of modern urbanization like designation, body, ideals, and activities are to be added to the above factors. Intelligentsias consider an urbanized structure as a complex and organized design consisting of three main factors of body, ideals, and activity that is changing constantly. Some others define city as the result of removing the earth from life and replacing it with thinking.

Now, taking these factors into consideration, it is very difficult to find the traces of facilities and parameters of a city in Camp Ashraf. The extent to which these definitions and characteristics are accepted by Mr. Hezarkhani depends on the extent to which he has relied on them in his report. For example, if he refers to the index of marketing for proving the urbanization of Camp Ashraf, it means that he takes classic definition of a city into consideration and fails to exempt Camp Ashraf of those definitions. He has to either confirm the standard definitions on city or give a definition other than that of encyclopedias, dictionaries, and theorists. Referring to a marketplace and bank (that are symbolic), and also a standard football field like that of European countries, mosque, hospital, etc , it seems that he recognizes the classic definitions of city and urbanization. The content of these symbols and their true nature is another issue to be discussed.

May 16, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

MKO instrumental misuse of individuals

Memoirs of Ms. Batoul Soltani – Part 11-2
When Masud Rajavi fled to Paris from Iran, he managed to maintain some financial sources through different means. He could get some youth away from their homes. They were innocent young individuals whose natural right was to live a normal life, but MKO could deceive them to join the group. I remember that at the time each person needed 30 thousand Tomans (roughly 30 American Dollars) to flee from Iran. The organization recruited those who were out of job or those who had other problems and sent them out of the country through various ways. There were also individuals who were introduced to the organization. For instance my husband was introduced by a member who had already joined the group. Then the organization sent a guy to recruit him in Iran and sent him abroad. There were some smugglers who took the recruited ones passing the borders and the journey was very dangerous. But it didn’t matter to Rajavi. When the organization tricked my husband and me, we were supposed to join MKO’s courier. We got out of Iran on camels. We risked our lives so many times but finally we could survive. I remember a lot of young couples were killed in the way.

They took both financial and manpower resources via this way. The duty of manpower part was to recruit those who had social problems and to send them abroad. They tricked many people outside and inside the country. They manipulated them using long-term emotional methods or they tried to control their thoughts in order to recruit them. Hence Masud Rajavi could gather a number of them in France. I read about that period after I joined the organization. The Iran-Iraq war had already started. Saddam Hussein had imposed a war on Iranians. He later attacked Kuwait. And Masud Rajavi became the accomplice of such a person who had no respect for his neighbors.

I just don’t know how Masud Rajavi can justify his cooperation with Saddam and accept his so called peace agreement. Unfortunately Masud Rajavi visited Saddam Hussein under the pretext of his ridiculous peace treaty. He cooperated with the enemy of Iran and named it “struggle for peace and freedom”. He also made his supporters to believe in his second marriage with Firouzeh Banisadr and his third marriage with Maryam Qajar Azodanlou – his so-called ideological revolution – as “struggle”. He came to Iraq where the enemy of Iran was killing Iranian people every day. Then he brought all his supporters from Europe to Iraq for the so-called “struggle”. Indeed, he used all his tricks to achieve political power over the organization. This was a treason that Rajavi committed against the freedom movement of the Iranians.

When he wanted to come to Iraq from France, I was one of those supporters who were deceived by him because I was in Iran and I didn’t have enough knowledge about MKO. They even recruited unemployed and addicted young people promising them to find jobs for them out of Iran. Somehow, we all were the victims of MKO tricks, because we had some social problems. The deceitful recruitment techniques of MKO were completely opposite to what is called voluntarily acceptance. Once the MKO was founded, the recruitment methods were based on supreme human principals. Now there was a big difference.

MKO used any trick to deceive the depressed and dispirit youth of the society in order to take them to Iraq as its modern slaves. After they entered the organization, the officials of the group did everything to force them to stay in Iraq. These members were forces to fight against the Iranian soldiers who were defending their country.

Sometimes MKO fighters helped Iraqi battalions to win the battles. Then Rajavi used to go to Saddam to get his reward and of course money for the services MKO fighters offered the Iraqi Army. Rajavi could arrange and equip his so-called National Liberation Army by the funds Saddam Hussein offered to him. So the so-called National Liberation army was formed on the base of the blood of some innocent people.

He started his operations by sending his terror teams inside Iran. He organized some operations in cooperation with Iraqi Battalions. He also arranged his forces to assist Saddam’s army against Iranian soldiers. However he named this treason as struggle for freedom. This shows a big division between what the primary principals of MKO were and what Rajavi did.

No member could escape from MKO because if someone wanted to escape one would be arrested by Iraqi Intelligence services in a few hours time, and one would be punished by them and then sent back to MKO Camp again.

When the Iran-Iraq war ended, Rajavi found a new pretext to slaughter Iranian people and also his own supporters and sympathizers. He infiltrated his forces into Iran to launch mortar attacks in Iranians cities.

After the fall of Saddam Hussein, he used a new trick and dropped all his organizational responsibilities. He went to achieve what he was hysterically looking for. He defined a new position for himself to become an ultra-organizational leader. It was very surprising that Rajavi who chanted slogans against Imperialism, sat at the negotiation table with American generals. We saw the MKO authorities became US Army advisors. They began their collaboration with the Americans by launching intelligence operations over Iranian borders.

To gain the support of US officials, they arranged parties and meetings with them. They spent large amounts of money to collect signatures of the alleged 5 million Iraqis whom MKO claims to have their support. NOW, we can see what happened to the “struggle” I talked about. Today, MKO is resorting to every mean to gain the support of US administration. All the victims who are kept in Ashraf Castle work day and night to be used in favor of MKO leaders’ goals.
Translated by Nejat Society

May 12, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Maryam Rajavi’s cult representative in European Parliament

Alejo Vidal-Quadras has already scurriously attacked the Iraqi government in the European Parliament alleging them ready to commit a “second Srebrenica in Iraq”

With the withdrawal from European politics of Portugal’s Paulo Casaca, Maryam Rajavi – who is following a Zionist-style regime change agenda – has apparently selected a replacement in the shape of Spanish MEP Alejo Vidal-Quadras from the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European
Democrats. Vidal-Quadras has already scurrilously attacked ‘a faction’ of the Iraqi government in the European Parliament alleging them ready to commit a “second Srebrenica in Iraq” in relation to MKO cult members in Camp Ashraf.

Previously Maryam Rajavi posted her cult representative Firouz Mahvi in Casaca’s office. We await with interest to see if he is moved to the office of Vidal-Quadras, if he is changed with another of Rajavi’s cult members, or if another of Rajavi’s MEP’s has her cult representative based in their office.

Some western observers may still be wondering whether the MKO’s supporters in various parliaments are acting out of ignorance or stupidity or sheer wickedness.

Unfortunately, those who know the MKO best, particularly its victims in Iraq, when they see the orchestrated and vigorous insistence on lies and deception cannot be blamed for believing in the corruptibility of parliament and that these MPs must be being paid for their activities.

Sadly the failure of western governments to challenge the undemocratic activities of the MKO is not a new story.
http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/News4/eucitizen2006.htm
Anne Singleton

May 12, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts