The MEK; the Hypocrites

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

MKO has huge medicine supplies

Despite the MKO hue and cry over the lack of medicine and doctors in camp Ashraf and accusing the Iraqi government of not allowing trucks t enter medicine and food to this garrison, this terrorist organization has several warehouses full of drugs inside the camp.

As reported by a Habilian database correspondent, since the handover of camp Ashraf protection from the hands of Americans to Iraqi forces, MKO has repeatedly tried to create a media mob and spread rumors against the Iraqi government. This is while Iraq’s national security adviser, Muwaffagh Al- Rubaie has announced the freedom of movement of trucks of medicines and food to the camp.

The report also says: In last march Manouchehr Hezar Khani, a high-ranking member of MKO who lives in the Europe together with Maryam Rajavi and some other MKO members, published a book in which he referred to his recent visit to camp Ashraf.

In a part of his book, hezar Khani referrers to Ashraf hospital and says: "Ashraf hospital is now the unique source for the treatment of patients within Ashraf city and fortunately, as I’ve already mentioned, not only we enjoy the support and cooperation of Iraqi doctors but also as the officials of the hospital say, it was equipped by many sophisticated medical equipments and tools (a part of which I saw myself) for testing and treatment and this development is still ongoing. The day I was at the hospital, there were only a few patients in bed.

According to the officials, the hospital is now able to treat all kinds of diseases the fact I couldn’t believe until I saw the warehouses of medicine and medical equipments."

The report also adds: National council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), the so-called MKO parliament in exile, has recently issued a ridiculous hasty announcement in which they accused the Iraqi government of refraining from allowing Iraqi surgeons enter the camp to treat two patients with cancer and appendicitis.

Meanwhile in an interview with Habilian database Dr. Walid Al- Araji, a specialist in Iraq’s Ministry of Health, stated: MKO elements which were backed by American forces repeatedly robbed medicines from the stores of Ministry of Health in Baghdad via trucks at the time camp Ashraf protection was in hands of Americans.

April 18, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Rajavi depicts truth at will

A further review of the message given by Masoud Rajavi on December 27 reveals more contradictory and threatening points to be elaborated on. For instance, somewhere in this message, it has been stated:

[Iranian] regime wants to take his chance once more in the gap of the replacement of the last US administration with the new one for evacuating Ashraf and getting a more stable position in its next negotiation with the US.

Evidently due to Rajavi’s illusionary ideas and megalomania that seems to be intensified after the fall of Saddam, he assumes a major role for Mojahedin in the future of the US-Iran conflict. Likewise, he even dares to tie global security with his decision makings. Doing so, he aims to deceive the public opinion and make the ground for the settlement of Mojahedin in camp Ashraf. In fact, he makes an attempt to inculcate his advocators with the idea that any political decision making in the challenge posed by Mojahedin for Iraqi government is unlikely without taking his will into consideration. However, he is well aware that there are significant issues on the agenda of the US-Iran to be discussed in which the issue of Mojahedin is beside the point. This claim is made in a condition when despite the removal of MKO from the EU terrorist list provided Mojahedin stop terrorist activities, the US shows no turnabout and still recognizes MKO as a terrorist organization. Although in recent years, Rajavi has made considerable effort to exaggerate his trivial political victories and by means of fabrication and perversion has pretended that the US position toward MKO has changed, all his efforts have been futile and he failed to ensure the security and stabilization of camp Ashraf and its residents. He knows that the US would never bet a dead horse like him for thousands of reasons.

Rajavi is to determine the factors based on which he predicts that the issue of Mojahedin would be the focal point of the US-Iran negotiation; a point that he refrains to elaborate on clearly. It seems that his claims of enjoying a determining role in the region are mostly baseless aimed at deceiving his European advocators and sympathizers. He is aware that pursuing the strategy of “survival in gap” toward Americans is useless for thousands of reasons one of which is the familiarity of the US with the true terrorist nature of Mojahedin. In case the US decides to select an alternative for the Iranian government, it would be a democratic one hew to human rights and international conventions not Mojahedin whose internal as well as external relations are based on the most reactionary and non-democratic doctrines. In this regard, the statement of the US department state in April 2007 can be referred to in which the terrorist nature of Mojahedin and the US unwillingness to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran have been focused on.

In another part of his message, Rajavi addresses Ashraf residents and says:

If Iraq is a legalized country and has a legal government, rules of civilization necessitate it that firstly, the lawyers of two parties sit together and express their reasons and explanations in a peaceful and logical environment according to international rules to find out the rights Iraqi government recognizes legitimate for Ashraf residents. As I said, 27 European countries have removed Mojahedin from their terrorist list up to now. The US has also declared that Ashraf residents have been interrogated one by one and it has been concluded that they are not terrorist. In addition, the name of MKO has not been in the terrorist list of the UN. Therefore, I say once more that there is no longer any subterfuge at the hands of the dictator regime of Iran and its leader to put Iraqi government under pressure. It’s better that justice and law win in the dialogue of the lawyers of two parties, yet if religious dictatorship of Iran annulled the decision of Iraq and dictated its own will, then you will see.

Rajavi ignores the sovereignty of the legal Iraqi government and overtly states that its decisions are under the effect of the Iranian and also perverts the clear position of the US on the terrorist nature of Mojahedin. He further warns that in case he fails to achieve his objectives, an all-out war would be waged against Iraqi government. His emphasis on “then you will see” is an instance of his cultic literature and jargon used at the end of all his statements as a warning to those against him. The peak of his perverted claims is where he calls Ashraf residents both as real and legal entities at his own will. Furthermore, he claims that Ashraf residents have been interrogated one by one and it has been concluded that they no longer support terrorism; however, somewhere else he depends their rearming on the will and decision of the US:

All Ashraf residents dismissed the support of violence and terrorism and asserted that they would never get armed illegally.

Although he equals carrying arms to terrorism and states that Mojahedin no longer have access to their arms hence it is proved that they have stopped their terrorist activities, he contradicts his own statement and declares that they never get armed illegally. In other words, their legal equipment with the arms is likely. Non-refulement that is recognized by Rajavi as an international convention necessitates individual asylum seeking of MKO members whereas Rajavi refrains to accept this international rule. Iraqi government has repeatedly asserted that if Ashraf residents seek individual refuge, it may prepare the ground for their transfer to a European country and would recognize the legitimacy of their temporary presence in Iraq despite their terrorist activities; however, Rajavi avoids recognizing Ashraf residents as individuals rightful to be master of their own destiny.

As it was mentioned, in case of Mojahedin’s rearming for any reason, it is likely that the EU nullify its vote on the removal of MKO from blacklist. Therefore, Rajavi tries to draw a boundary between terrorist activities and legitimate defense and openly considers the group’s arsenal in Iraq as their absolute and legal right. He further points out that MKO has been initiated its activities based on two factors of ideological and strategic armed struggle since 1967 and insists on their recognition as such. Surprisingly enough, he refers to this point as the red line between them and Iraqi government as well as international bodies. He also quotes Mrs. Claire Miskin, the prominent English judge: “A very interesting point about MKO is that it is not only a legitimate resistance movement but has been under the full control of law more than any other movement”.

Then he concludes that:

Keeping the securing of Ashraf and its residents is on American forces up to the time when their destiny is determined.

The way the interests, rights, sovereignty, and legal demands of Iraqi people are to be achieved despite the possibility of Mojahedin’s committing terrorist activities is an issue to be answered by Rajavi. The fact is that Rajavi solicit the US for paving the ground for its rearming and cares not for Iraqi government. His remarks concerning the US are suppliant and as concerned with Iraqi government are threatening as a result of the temporal removal of MKO from the terrorist list of the EU. Now, we understand what Rajavi meant by a barrier in his way of achieving his objectives in Iraq. It seems that the removal of MKO from the EU list has led to the destabilization of the region and endangering the peace and security of Iraq rather than posing a threat to the Iranian government. It takes too much time for MKO advocators and sympathizers to understand the true terrorist nature of Mojahedin.

April 4, 2009 0 comments

Iraq

MKO Members Bribe Iraqi Politicians

"Available intelligence reports, which are very accurate, indicate that several political figures and groups have taken bribes from the MKO in exchange for their support," Iraqi National Security Advisor Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, said in remarks translated from Arabic.

"From a legal perspective, these briberies have reached a stage where they can be considered criminal activity," Rubaie told reporters following a Saturday meeting with top Shiite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, press tv reported.

However, the senior Iraqi advisor refrained from implicating any particular individual.

Rubaie said that Baghdad does not recognize the MKO cult to be a legal group nor is it allowed to carry out its activities in Iraq.

"Those 3,418 individuals who are currently residing at Camp Ashraf in the Diyala province are there as Iranian nationals," he explained.

Rubaie pointed out that although Iraq will not force occupants of Camp Ashraf to return to Iran, many of them are willing to go back to their homeland voluntarily.

The MKO, whose main stronghold is in Iraq, is blacklisted by much of the international community, including the United States.

Before an overture by the EU, the MKO was on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. Yet, the MKO puppet leader, Maryam Rajavi, who has residency in France, regularly visited Brussels and despite the ban enjoyed full freedom in Europe.

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.

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.

In recent months, high-ranking MKO members have been lobbying governments around the world in the hope of acknowledgement as a legitimate opposition group.

The UK initiative, however, prompted the European Union to establish relations with the exiled organization now based in Paris. The European Court of First Instance threw its weight behind the MKO in December and annulled its previous decision to freeze its funds.

The group started assassination of the 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 neo-conservatives in the United States, who also argue for the MKO to be taken off the US terror list.

The MKO has been in Iraq’s Diyala province since the 1980s.

In August 2008, the Iraqi parliament passed a resolution setting a six-month deadline for all MKO members to leave the country or face possible expulsion.

Tehran has pardoned several former MKO members who have expressed remorse, allowing them to return to the country.

March 26, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

MKO called INSA’s statement “false and misleading”

Following the reports by the Iraq’s national security advisor saying that the leadership of camp Ashraf prevented the entry of survey team of the Ministry of Human Rights, MKO’s political wing, NCRI, issued a statement claiming that what the office of Iraq’s National Security Advisor has issued is a “categorically false and misleading statement”. First MKO quotes the exact words of the statement that reads “The leaders of Camp Ashraf have refused to allow a committee from the Ministry of Human Rights to conduct its duty to establish the residents’ choice to return to Iran or leave for a third country.” It further adds that “The leaders of the camp also exercised their hegemony and control and deprived the residents of the camp the freedom of returning to Iran or to choose a third country. The government will not back away from its decision to close the camp.”

In a hasty, angry backlash, NCRI’s statement reads; “These entirely false claims are part of a new plot against the residents of Ashraf and at the same time a cover-up for recent unlawful positions and measures by Iraq’s National Security Advisor against Ashraf residents which have aroused widespread protests by the international community”.

In an attempt to justify its act of preventing the entry of survey team, the statement adds; “The truth is that the residents of Ashraf and its officials have extended their full cooperation to an Iraqi delegation which apparently wanted to interview the residents. Ashraf camp’s officials prepared buildings and premises for interviews at a location desired by the delegation”.

But of the most noticeable part of the statement is its threatening tone stating “the Iranian Resistance warns that such actions prepare the grounds for a human tragedy, and calls on all international organizations and specially the International Committee of the Red Cross and UNAMI to be present in Ashraf and to neutralize the conspiracies dictated by the Iranian regime”.

We also believe that all international, humanitarian organizations should be concerned about the tragic condition of members in Camp Ashraf and watchful of its cultic plots that may lead to a human tragedy. It is natural for a terrorist cult to react against legal moves by a country’s authorized body when it has its own advocates that thoroughly close their eyes on its atrocities and even strive to remove it from terrorist lists. They are also accountable for MKO’s anti-human deeds.

March 17, 2009 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

Required recruiting tool

Love Bombing & Relationship Control; required recruiting tool

“They flatter you in a way that you don’t even realize they are doing so” says Ann Singleton who has once been an MKO member. She explains the ways the Organization treated her when it needed to recruit her;” they really put BEWARE OF “INSTANT FRIENDS”, REMEMBER TRUE FRIENDS DEVELOP OVER TIME themselves on a pedestal so that when you want to join them you feel special.”

Cults know that if they can control your relationships then they can control you. Whether we like it or not we are all profoundly affected by those around us. When you first go to a cult they will practice "love bombing", where they arrange instant friends for you. It will seem wonderful, how could such a loving group be wrong! But you soon learn that if you ever disagree with them, or ever leave the cult then you will lose all your new "friends". This unspoken threat influences your actions in the cult. Things that normally would have made you complain will pass by silently because you don’t want to be ostracized. Like in an unhealthy relationship love is turned on and off to control.

The same as all cults, MKO bombards the individuals with love and emotion while recruiting them. Mrs. Singleton was so bombed by MKO’s love that she believes :

“They replaced my family, relationship and I rejected all my old values.”

Cults also try to cut you off from your friends and family because they hate others being able to influence you. A mind control cult will seek to maneuver your life so as to maximize your contact with cult members and minimize your contact with people outside the group, especially those who oppose your involvement.

BEWARE OF “INSTANT FRIENDS”, REMEMBER TRUE FRIENDS DEVELOP OVER TIME.

BEWARE OF A GROUP THAT TELLS YOU WHO YOU CAN AND CAN NOT SEE.

Now that the members are cut off from their whole relationships and individuality, the cult of Rajavi practices mind control techniques on them. Ann Singleton says:” I loved the camp and it felt liberating to obey the orders, because you lose all your responsibility over yourself … If the leader has said kill yourself, I would have killed myself.”

Mazda Parsi

Reference: HowCultsWork

Iran pushes Iraq to close MKO camp

Pressure is growing on Iran’s main opposition group to leave Iraqi territory after living under US military protection in a camp north of Baghdad since 2003. Some 3,400 militants of the Mujahideen- e Khalq (known by the acronyms MKO or MEK) face eviction by the government of Iraq, which has tired of a group that once fielded its own army under the tutelage of Saddam Hussein and remains on Washington’s list of terrorist groups. On Saturday, Iran’s supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei, encouraged Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to follow through with Baghdad’s longstanding desire to disband Camp Ashraf, which came under Iraqi control on Jan. 1. "We await the implementation of our agreement regarding the expulsion of the hypocrites," Ayatollah Khamenei told Iraq’s visiting president, referring to the MKO by the term often used by the Islamic Republic. Mr. Talabani was quoted as saying that the MKO "have committed many crimes against the Iraqis, and the Iraqi government is determined to expel them and will go forward with its decision." His words echo those of Iraq’s national security adviser, Muwafaq al-Rubaie. "The only choices open to members of this group are to return to Iran or to choose another country," Mr. Rubaie said in Tehran last January. "Over 3,000 inhabitants of Camp Ashraf have to leave Iraq, and the camp will be part of history within two months," said Rubaie, adding that more than 900 are dual nationals and that he would be holding talks with officials of 12 countries. Those options are limited for the controversial cultlike group, whose armed wing came under Pentagon control after the fall of Mr. Hussein. Despised in Iran for bomb attacks and the killing of government officials and civilians in the first years after the 1979 Islamic revolution – and later for fighting alongside Iraqi troops against Iran during the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s -the MKO was disarmed in 2003 but kept intact as a possible tool for use by the US against Tehran.

Terrorist list status

In January, the group toasted its removal from the European Union terrorist list. But it was delisted for legal reasons – using its removal from the British terrorism list in 2008 as part of its case. The decision has been appealed by France, and the group remains on the terror lists of some individual member states. The delisting, though, may enable some militants to be accepted in Europe. Many fear returning to Iran, though more than 300 "quitters" – as the MKO calls those who leave the organization – have gone home with little incident. "This is the end of the terrorist label," says Alireza Jafarzadeh, the group’s spokesman in Washington until 2003, when the MKO, with its several arms and variety of names, was closed down in the US. Removal from the EU list is a "major victory for the MEK and the resistance movement overall," he says. Mr. Jafarzadeh says the EU decision "strengthens" those at Camp Ashraf who refuse either to return to Iran or to leave the camp for Europe. "Any justification to expel them [from Iraq], which has been always coming from Tehran, is now gone," he says.

Still, Baghdad announced that it planned to close the camp last December, the same month the US reaffirmed the MKO’s "terrorist" status. Last year, the State Department’s global terrorism report noted the group had "planned and executed terrorist operations against the Iranian regime for nearly three decades;" had killed several Americans in Iran in the 1970s; and "displayed cultlike characteristics," such as vows of "eternal divorce" [to avoid competing loyalties] and weekly "ideological cleansings." For years, Tehran has offered amnesty to members who voluntarily return to Iran, facilitated by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Returns have almost stopped in the past year, as Iran now wants Iraq to first screen potential returnees. "For those who wish to come back to Iran, we hope the Iranian government would give again this green light," says Peter Stocker, the head of the ICRC delegation in Tehran. Concerns in Camp Ashraf that returnees could be mistreated in Iran have not proved true in cases the ICRC has handled. "It is important to know that if anything happened to them, I don’t think it could remain hidden," says Mr. Stocker. US officials say Iran wants to prosecute 50 top MKO leaders, and has provided a list, but that perhaps only 20 are at Camp Ashraf. Returning to Iran is "absolutely not" an option, says Jafarzadeh, now an Iran commentator for Fox, contacted in Washington. "These people who are staying at Camp Ashraf are the people who are determined to oppose the Iranian regime."

Lenient treatment for returnee

Still, at least one high-ranking MKO member forced back to Iran received prison time but relatively lenient treatment. Ebrahim Khodabandeh, a British passport holder, was arrested by Syria while facilitating the exit of MKO leaders to Europe from Iraq after the fall of Baghdad in 2003. The Syrians told him he was being taken to London, but then flew him to Tehran. If he had had a cyanide pill, he says today, he would have committed suicide. "The first time I was in Evin prison, I told them: ‘My bones, my blood, my flesh is all made with the name Rajavi, so the best you can do is execute me,’" says Mr. Khodabandeh, referring to the surname of the husband and wife leaders of the MKO. "It took me two years to come to the point of realizing the MKO was a cult and I had been manipulated." He was driven around Tehran by his case officers, who wanted to show him how the capital had changed in the decades he had been away – and to show how different it was from the world described by the MKO.. Khodabandeh says Iranian intelligence understands the need to avoid the death or abuse of MKO members who return, to avoid creating martyrs. "This was very much to the benefit of the Islamic Republic," he says, now free in Tehran. "If I were executed, I would be a martyr and have my picture in the newspapers. The problem for the organization is they haven’t had a martyr for many years."

Scott Peterson Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

March 3, 2009 0 comments

The Ideology of the MEK

Ethics defined by the cult of Mojahedin

One of the prevalent issues in studies on cultic relations of MKO is to determine to what extent the group acknowledges application of ethics in its internal as well as external relations. A review of the manifesto and publications of the organization and their ontological viewpoints indicate that MKO tend to equate ethics with their political feelings and ambitions. On the other hand, for MKO ethical standards are defined as whatever they relatively accept as the right and essential to the ultimate ends. It may give us a better understanding of the correspondence between MKO ethical standards and that of Machiavellianism as well as Marxism that incorporate a belief of “ends justify means”. In Machiavellian viewpoints, the application of levers including pressure, deception, breach of promise, betrayal, fabrication and all possible means for achieving and preserving political power is legitimate. Furthermore, in contrast to some contemporary thinkers who make an attempt to interpret ethics as a relative issue by means of complicated and equivocal philosophical discussions and theories, Machiavelli and his followers are outspoken in disregarding ethical principles.

However, the ideology and methodology of Mojahedin is based on the former policy. They managed to integrate philosophy and science to find a way of expressing their Machiavellian ideas in a novel form. As Machiavelli justifies using all means for achieving and maintaining political power, Mojahedin grab at ontological issues and the ultimate goal of creation. They feel much attachment to philosophical terms like dispensing of existence and absolute truth by which they try to justify their philosophical, political, social, and historical dogmatism. Here, the main viewpoints of Mojahedin on ethics as reflected in their pamphlets and organizational principles are to be reviewed.

Mojahedin distinguish between good and evil with regard to the factor of achieving objectives. In other words, they do not believe in substantive status of ethical values rather define them based on the extent to which they succeed to make the ground for attaining objectives. According to theoretical principles and doctrine of Mojahedin “Good and evil are always determined with regard to the objective”. 1

But what is the objective meant by Mojahedin? As it was mentioned before, Mojahedin believe in absolute good and absolute evil in their worldview yet on the other hand, recognize the legitimacy of using all possible means for achieving that absolute truth. In addition, they maintain the universality of material world and consider evolution as a general law governing all phenomena including man and the society. Consequently, all activities aiming at achieving absolute truth are considered an ethical issue and in contrast, all activities hindering the attainment of that absolute truth are regarded unethical. They define absolute truth and ethical values as follows:

The process that moves the society toward retaining the most dominant humanistic features, (unlimited to a certain time and place), is known as the absolute truth. Absolute good is those actions done for the achievement of absolute truth in any circumstance. 2

Therefore, according to Mojahedin, absolute truth and its opposite are two sides of a coin and there is no third option:

Non-truth is all actions done against truth as a barrier in its way unlimited to a certain time and place. 3

Also, absolute evil has been defined in the theoretical sources of Mojahedin as:

Absolute evil are all actions correspondent to non-truth unlimited to any certain form, time and place. 4

From this viewpoint, ethical standards have no value in themselves and it is only social and political conditions that determine their values. Consequently, in such a context individuals follow their own demands which may make them recoil from doing what is right and thus, they are frequently deviated from what is ethical. As a result, the concept of truth is metamorphosized into a relative issue, too, and is defined according to predetermined objectives as posed by Mojahedin. According to Mojahedin:

Based on circumstances, truth takes various forms. In other words, it is likely that a procedure in a certain time and place is considered as truth because of its furthering us in achieving our objective, yet in other circumstances it is considered false since it fails to help us and rather hinders the achievement of our objectives. 5

Undoubtedly, the terms “good” and “evil” have their roots in all acts that are accordingly evaluated and defined. It has to be pointed out that the terms objective, evolution, and truth are used as equivalence and complementary whenever needed. Mojahedin have elaborated on the integration of these concepts and their function, stating:

Truth is a practice moving parallel to evolution and all actions carried out in this regard are good. Non-truth is a practice done in opposite direction that is in the direction of decadency hence all actions done in the way of untruth are considered evil. 6

Coming to political power is the first step of achieving the stated objective, evolution, and truth. From this viewpoint, all actions are evaluated based on the extent to which they lead to getting the objective, evolution or truth:

All actions needed for achieving the final objective are evidently essential and necessary. 7

In a nutshell, positive ethical concepts like honesty, sincerity, … in contrast to negative ones like crime, absolutism, dishonesty, and betrayal cannot be evaluated and defined separate from conditions and their relation to the intended objectives rather they are defined according to external issues.

References:

1. Evolution, Second book of ideology. Theoretical sources of MKO, Mojahed publication, Tehran, 1979, p.97.

2. ibid, p.93

3. ibid.

4. ibid

5. ibid

6. ibid

7. ibid, p.96.

March 2, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

The use of politics for MKO

In the politics arena, the politic men come to the scene either to achieve power or to serve people. Naturally, if the politic men work for the profit of their own pockets or their own ambitions, their reputation will be damaged soon because the people will no more tolerate the abuse of their support or funding. The true use of politics is in fact to bring freedom to people.

Unfortunately, for MKO leaders the only definition for politics is the power over their victims including their cult members and Western politicians. Given the use of politics is only to achieve power; the means to reach such a goal is justified to be anything. The means could include resorting to deception and lie to deceive western powerful governments, so dependence has no place in such a policy, an organization like MKO, without any internal support in Iran, has only one way to not only gain power but also to survive. The deception policy has been a very useful trick to win western support for MKO.

But the west, especially the US government has had various groups on its payroll at one time. Now, they are funding MKO, a decade ago, they funded and trained Bin Laden to fight Russians and even further back, they worked with Ho Chi Minh to bring change in China. As it has been the fate of any group depended on US administration, the role of MKO for the US will also be expired finally, as well as what happened to AlQaida.

All the above-mentioned groups, as well as MKO, used politics to gain control over people to practice their extremist revolutionary ideas and eventually as soon as they lost their western support, they lost their existence. The history has always witnessed various examples of extremist movements’ attempts to gain the support of superpowers for their ambitions and their collapse after missing the external support.

As a matter of fact, if any movement regards the politics as a means to serve people and to bring about freedom and democracy for people, they will definitely win public support and any movement which enjoys the support of the masses is never concerned about its survival.

Mazda Parsi

February 28, 2009 0 comments

USA

Washington may court moderates WITHIN Iran

Washington may court moderates within Iran rather than outside opposition
The change in tone from Washington toward Tehran is complicated not only by historic acrimony but also by a complex relationship with Iranian opposition movements.
U.S. officials have made it clear that the Obama administration represents a possible opening for Iran.
"With respect to Iran, there is a clear opportunity for the Iranians … to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community," in the words of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
This is in stark contrast to the previous administration and its policy of isolation. Gary Sick, a top White House aide on Iran during the Iranian hostage crisis and now senior research scholar at Columbia University, says though the administration of George W. Bush had hoped for a better relationship with Iran in the wake of the conflict in Afghanistan, that policy was largely abandoned when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.
Ali Safavi, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran — a Paris -based group calling itself the Iranian Parliament in exile — said the approach to the Iranian regime, as well as its opposition, would be a litmus test for the Obama administration.
"There has been no shortage of goodwill gestures from the Americans toward Iran with the goal of moderation, but so far this course has failed," he said.
The NCRI, which includes members of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, a dissident group based in Iraq’s Diyala province, has lobbied the international community to back a 16-point plan for regime change in Iran. It led a successful campaign in January to remove the PMOI from the terrorist list adopted by the European Union.
Maryam Rajavi, the controversial leader of the NCRI, hailed the decision as a victory for the Iranian resistance, saying the move paved the way for democratic change in Iran.
But the group’s image as a cult with a storied history of terrorist activity, both in Iran and across the globe, makes courting the opposition as a viable avenue for regime change in Iran tenuous at best.
The PMOI and the NCRI are both listed by the United States as terrorist organizations for their links to violent opposition to the Iranian regime.
President Bill Clinton in 1997 included the PMOI on the U.S. State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations following the election of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. Sick says that effort was part of a broader policy of appeasement toward the moderate Khatami, adding the State FTO list is a reflection of who Washington likes as much as who it doesn’t.
The PMOI arrived on the scene in the 1960s as a movement opposing the Western-backed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran, and supporting the Iranian Revolution in 1979 that brought Ayatollah Khomeini to power. The ideology of the PMOI, centered on Marxism, was in contradiction to the Revolution, however, and the group was exiled to Paris in 1981.
With France recognizing the Iranian regime in 1986, however, the group established itself in various camps throughout Iraq from which it ran a campaign of violence against Tehran. Though largely targeting Iranian government officials, its killing of American contractors in Tehran in the 1970s, participation alongside Saddam Hussein’s forces in suppressing Kurdish and Shiite rebellions in Iraq in 1991 and its later attacks on Iranian embassies in 1992 earned it a spot on the terrorist lists of several nations.
Its reputation for militancy, however, was not supported by recognition as a major fighting force. The PMOI surrendered its tanks and heavy artillery to U.S. forces following the 2003 invasion. Its members are now considered protected persons in Iraq under the Fourth Geneva Convention and claim to have abandoned their militant agenda in favor of peaceful opposition.
The PMOI, and its representatives in the NCRI, claim to hold valuable intelligence on Iranian operations, including Iran’s controversial nuclear program. The group often touts its unveiling of the nuclear program at the Natanz weapons facility in Iran, though several analysts note developments at Natanz were all but flaunted by the Iranian regime.
Massoud Khodabandeh, a former member of the PMOI, said those claims, and the intelligence value of reports from the NCRI/PMOI in general, are at best questionable, at worst useless.
"It is widely believed that intelligence given out by the PMOI about Iran’s nuclear facilities was given to them by Western intelligence contacts," he said.
Meanwhile, allegations have mounted that the U.S. intelligence community has funneled money to the PMOI for operations against the Iranian regime. An article in The New Yorker magazine in 2008 suggested the Bush administration had set aside some $400 million for covert operations against Iran, with a portion going to the PMOI.
The NCRI’s Safavi, however, called those allegations "completely bogus," and U.S. intelligence officers contacted for this story said there was no evidence to support those claims, though the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said he "wouldn’t be surprised if the allegation turned out to be true."
Meanwhile, with Iraq emerging from U.S. occupation with a shaky democracy, the relationship between Baghdad and the PMOI remains tense.
With the PMOI widely reviled in Iraq for supporting the violent suppression of the Shiite and Kurdish rebellions, and in Iran for its historic assassination policy, the group has few friends outside its groups of supporters in Europe and the United States.
Though Iraq does not have an extradition treaty with Iran, several top Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, have said the group is no longer welcome in Iraq.
Both the NCRI and PMOI, through persuasive and astute campaigns aimed at generating sympathy both in the media and among world leaders, including those in the United States, have pushed for a delisting campaign with an effort to sever its ties to its terrorist past.
International lawyers in Washington, D.C., representing the PMOI filed a petition in July with the U.S. State Department seeking removal from the FTO list there, but U.S. officials say the FTO designation is appropriate.
Speaking to reporters following the Jan. 26 EU delisting, State Department deputy spokesman Robert A. Wood said "nothing has changed from our standpoint" concerning either group.
Meanwhile, the outcome of the January provincial elections in Iraq may indicate a subtle shift in Iraqi relations with Iran as the pro-Tehran Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council was trounced in the elections, largely by Maliki’s more secular State of Law slate.
Former Iranian President Khatami — widely seen as a moderate — has announced plans to run for president again in June, and though an appeal in the PMOI FTO listing case is expected to reach the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit this summer, with U.S. policy currently leaning toward courting moderates within Iran, rather than outside opposition groups, little seems likely to change in the future.

By DANIEL GRAEBER, UPI Correspondent,
http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/02/20/
Washington_may_court_moderates_within_Iran_rather_
than_outside_opposition/UPI-42961235157864/

February 23, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

MKO’s violence originated in its theory Structure

MKO’s violent acts and atrocities are originated in its theory structure

The presence of the organization [MEK] in Iraqi territory has nothing to the Iraqi nation except danger.
MKO’s violent acts and atrocities are originated in its theory structure The recent annual report of the Department of State might not have anything new on the status of the Iranian Mujahedin Khalq Organization which has been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization since years ago. But the speech made by Condoleeza Rice following the publication of the new list, which called the group as substantially terrorist, should be taken as serious.

The MKO tries to pretend that it has denounced terrorism and represents a peaceful struggle because they claim to have abandoned violence for years. But, the investigations by the State Department’s experts did not include its recent acts but the terrorist nature of MKO of which its ideology and strategy completely originates and will never get separated. MKO is a destructive cult with a terrorist potential, according to the experts, and will not lose such potentiality without arm and camp and will never miss its real nature.

Therefore from a technical viewpoint – if one doesn’t want to work on political interests and benefits – the investigation on the nature of a group is prior to its short-term functions. If we don’t evaluate the nature correctly, we will make mistake in viewing its short–term function, as many unprofessional people made the same mistake.

Terrorist designation of the groups or entities by various countries is primarily done due to the national security (although sometimes the lists get a political flavor) and its objective is to determine the organization with terrorist potentiality and take them under direct supervision.

However, the designation of the terrorist nature of a group is based on the interests and acts of the group through its background and many other criteria, so it requires a deep and multilateral investigation.

We do not intend to punish before the commitment but we want to investigate this case more deeply trying not to view MKO’s short-term claims as a base.

The nature we are discussing includes long-term functions and we would like to confirm that the potential capacity of MKO will be definitely actualized if the condition is appropriate and when the facilities are provided eventually the previous status will be revived.

In the recent report on MKO published by German federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, there is no difference between MKO and NCRI and also it is mentioned that there is no evidence to approve that the organization has denounced its violent acts. The report also notes that the organization is a cult, the fact that many experts agree.

The cult-like and terrorist nature of MKO requires it to commit terror acts in case of necessity, because it has theorized the engagement in violence in its theory system. Therefore such an organization is always dangerous for its environment. It is a destructive risk for the security of every society and could be considered as a substantial threat. Thus it must be restricted and neutralized.

Unfortunately, today the main body of MKO is located in our country. Saddam Hussein brought them to our territory due to his own benefits as well as other disasters he left for us. The west that has once used the group against the Islamic Republic, now doesn’t want to accept them in its soil. This is exactly like they want to get rid of their nuclear garbage that they have used it and now that it is a threat they want to get rid of it. The presence of MKO in our territory brings nothing except danger and threat to Iraqi nation who has no reason to suffer the risks of this nuclear garbage. The west should keep them in its own territory since they are well aware of their threats.
Al Mo’tamar Newspaper

The presence of the organization [MEK] in Iraqi territory has nothing to the Iraqi nation except danger.

the investigations by the State Department’s experts did not include its recent acts but the terrorist nature of MKO of which its ideology and strategy completely originates

February 19, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts