A defected member of the anti-Iran terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization unveiled that MKO ringleaders had issued an order to assassinate Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and former Head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq Ayatollah Seyed Mohammad Baqir al-Hakim.
The defected MKO member said that the ringleaders of the terrorist group, specially Massoud Rajavi, had called on the members to be ready to assassinate the two renowned Iraqi opposition figures 18 years ago.
The defected member also revealed that the MKO leaders hired a number of spies to chase the defected members and find their living place to assassinate them as well.
Defection has increased in the MKO in recent years. Earlier another defected member of the MKO unveiled that the ringleaders of the group are using every means within their reach to control their dissident members, including life threats, to keep members in the group’s main stronghold in Northern Iraq.
"Massoud Rajavi (the main ringleader of the MKO) has announced many times that if anybody wants to escape from (the camp) Ashraf (in Iraq), he/she will be killed or executed," Abdollatif Chahardari said in April.
Also in March, another defected member of the MKO revealed that the female members of the group have been living under captivity for more than 25 years and are not even allowed to appear in public places alone.
"It can be firmly said that 95% of the women in Ashraf Camp (the terrorist group’s resort in Iraq) have not even been allowed to step in Iraq’s public and recreational places alone all throughout the last 25 years," the defected member said.
The former member of the MKO also revealed that nearly 70% of the female members of the terrorist group are single and have not been allowed to marry anyone in or outside the group.
And only a total 10% of the married members have been allowed to have children, he added.
The MKO has been in Iraq’s Diyala province since the 1980s.
Iraqi security forces took control of the training base of the MKO at Camp Ashraf – about 60km (37 miles) north of Baghdad – in 2009 and detained dozens of the members of the terrorist group.
The Iraqi authority also changed the name of the military center from Camp Ashraf to the Camp of New Iraq.
Many of the MKO members abandoned the terrorist organization while most of those still remaining in the camp are said to be willing to quit but are under pressure and torture not to do so.
A May 2005 Human Rights Watch report accused the MKO of running prison camps in Iraq and committing human rights violations.
According to the Human Rights Watch report, the outlawed group puts defectors under torture and jail terms.
Numerous articles and letters posted on the Internet by family members of MKO recruits confirm reports of the horrific abuse that the group inflicts on its own members and the alluring recruitment methods it uses.
The most shocking of such stories includes accounts given by former British MKO member Ann Singleton and Mustafa Mohammadi — the father of an Iranian-Canadian girl who was drawn into the group during an MKO recruitment campaign in Canada.
Mohammadi recounts his desperate efforts to contact his daughter, who disappeared several years ago – a result of what the MKO called a ‘two-month tour’ of Camp Ashraf for teenagers.
He also explains how the group forces the families of its recruits to take part in pro-MKO demonstrations in Western countries by threatening to kill their loved ones.
Lacking a foothold in Iran, the terrorist group recruits ill-informed teens from Iranian immigrant communities in Western states and blocks their departure afterwards.
The 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).
Iraq had announced earlier this month that members of the terrorist group must leave by the end of 2011.
U.S. government cables revealed by Wikileaks include numerous references to the Mujahaddin e-Khalq (MEK). Details include:
•MEK threatens mass suicide as bargaining chip: “The group’s leadership at Camp Ashraf is prepared to order residents to kill themselves to protest any arrests of Ashraf residents…”
•Evidence of paramilitary activities: “They continue to practice small unit military tactics and maneuvers under cover of darkness.”
•Cases of forced detention at Ashraf: “The MEK was also violating human rights by holding residents at Ashraf against their will.”
•Examples of human rights abuses:”MEK defectors told stories of regular self-denunciations, intimidation, forced hysterectomies, brainwashing, and isolation from family members.”
•False public claims by MEK: “While publicly touting itself as a democratic alternative to the current regime in Tehran, the MEK’s cult-like pattern of psychological and physical abuse of its members suggests otherwise.”
•Repeated instances of cult-like practices: MEK is a”cult-like organization that thrives on maintaining control of its members and those lured to Ashraf under false pretenses.”
•Analsysis of policmakers being fooled by MEK disinformation: U.S. on MEK: “The most powerful myth the MEK has been able to lodge in the minds of most supporters is that they are the democratic alternative to the current regime in Tehran…The majority of Iranians do not regard the MEK as a legitimate force for democratic change in Iran.”
Below, are the relevant excerpts, including details of the 2009 reaffirmation of the MEK’s designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. All excerpts are direct quotes (emphases added):
MEK UPDATE: DEFECTOR CLAIMS MEK HAS CONTINGENCY PLAN FOR MASS SUICIDE (1/15/2009)
“A defector from Camp Ashraf, home to the Mujahedin e-Khalq (MeK) in Iraq, says the group’s leadership at Camp Ashraf is prepared to order residents to kill themselves to protest any arrests of Ashraf residents”
“They claim to have turned over all their arms to U.S. forces in 2003, and their camp 60 miles from Baghdad looks more like a relatively affluent Iraqi village than a military garrison. However, until the end of 2008, residents wore military-style uniforms and flew pre-revolution Iranian flags, and U.S. forces stationed at Forward Operating Base (FOB) Grizzly on the periphery of the camp report that they continue to practice small unit military tactics and maneuvers under cover of darkness.”
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF NEA FELTMAN DISCUSSES MEK (12/15/2010)
“In a meeting on December 14 with NEA A/S Feltman, the Minister of Human Rights, Wijdan Selim…expressed frustration that she was caught in the middle of the GOI-MEK struggle because many in the GOI wanted to resettle the MEK regardless of the merits, but that the MEK was also violating human rights by holding residents at Ashraf against their will.” Ashraf residents “revealed psychological and physical harm experienced at the hands of MEK”, MEK is a“cult-like organization that thrives on maintaining control of its members and those lured to Ashraf under false pretenses”, they continue to practice small unit military tactics and maneuvers under cover of darkness”,
MEK DEFECTORS ON LIFE IN ASHRAF AND RESETTLEMENT (9/18/2009)
“Many revealed psychological and physical harm experienced at the hands of the MEK and reaffirmed existing perceptions of the MEK as a cult-like organization that thrives on maintaining control of its members and those lured to Ashraf under false pretenses.”
“In explaining their motivations for leaving Ashraf, nearly all the defectors felt betrayed by the MEK and dismayed by their psychological and physical degradation at the hands of the organization. One man asked for help in retrieving his confiscated papers and other personal documents, including passport and Iranian identification documents, including passport and Iranian identification cards, from Ashraf.”
“Many of the defectors alleged psychological and physical harm at the hands of the MEK, including solitary confinement in MEK jails in Ashraf. One man in a wheelchair spoke passionately about how the MEK”crushed our personalities”and threatened to turn them over to the Saddam regime if they refused to join the organization.”
“Twenty-year resident [of Ashraf]; self-declared freedom fighter opposed to Iran; left MEK after”their lies were revealed”; considers MEK”the most disgusting and devious organization in the world.”
MEK FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION (FTO) DESIGNATION MAINTAINED (1/8/2008)
“The Secretary [Rice] found that the MEK remains (1) a foreign organization, (2) that engages in terrorist activity or terrorism, or retains the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism, as those terms are defined under relevant statutes, and (3) the terrorist activity or terrorism of the group threatens U.S. national security or the security of U.S. nationals. Further, the Secretary concluded that U.S. national security does not on its own warrant revocation. She therefore determined that the MEK’s FTO designation will be maintained. The determination was effective upon signature on January 7, 2009.”
“We do not view the MEK as a credible advocate for either democracy or human rights in Iran, given its record of terrorism and the abuse suffered by many of its the MEK,s own members. While we have serious concerns about the policies of the Iranian government, we do not condone acts of terrorism under any circumstances.
It is important to keep in mind, however, that the MEK’s advocacy, and our view that such advocacy is not credible, is not germane to the Secretary’s determination”
“(C) While publicly touting itself as a democratic alternative to the current regime in Tehran, the MEK’s cult-like pattern of psychological and physical abuse of its members suggests otherwise. Under the leadership of the husband-wife team of Maryam and Masud Rajavi, the MEK is a largely female-driven organization that promotes equal rights for women but fails to respect the basic human rights of its members, female or male. While Maryam and Massoud are married, MEK rank and file are forced to divorce and are forbidden from having normal male-female relationships or personal friendships of any kind. No children reside at Camp Ashraf. MEK defectors tell stories of regular self-denunciations, intimidation, forced hysterectomies, brainwashing, and isolation from family members.”
“The most powerful myth the MEK has been able to lodge in the minds of most supporters is that they are the democratic alternative to the current regime in Tehran. While we have serious concerns about the policies of the Iranian government, the MEK’s four-decade-long record of terrorism and cult-like repression of its members demonstrates that the MEK is not a credible advocate for democracy or human rights. Furthermore, the majority of Iranians do not regard the MEK as a legitimate force for democratic change in Iran. The Secretary’s decision to maintain the MEK’s FTO designation sends a clear signal that the U.S. Government does not condone the organization’s terrorist activity.”
PM MALIKI, CODEL LEVIN DISCUSS FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN IRAQ, AUGUST 19 BOMBINGS (12/9/2010)
“Responding to Sen. Reed’s question about how the GOI would deal with the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), Maliki said
“We wish they would go in peace to any other state to eliminate the excuse for intervention that their presence here affords Iran.”He stressed that the GOI does not want to force MEK members to return to Iran; however, he emphasized the threat the group posed and claimed an individual involved in the August 19 bombing of the Ministry of Finance was a MEK member.”
EU LIFTS MEK SANCTIONS; SECRETARIAT REQUESTS USG ASSISTANCE (1/27/2009)
“France has an active request for the EU to re-list on a strengthened domestic investigation basis and is appealing the December 4 EU court ruling. Belgium, normally an outspoken human rights advocate in these decision-making circles, has raised security concerns in support of re-listing; thus France will not stand alone despite misgivings of UK or other countries.”
“[EU Council Secretariat Director General Robert] Cooper then asserted that EU Member States actually do consider the MEK a terrorist group, but the EU still must refer to a decision by a”competent authority”to ground an EU designation of the MEK. Cooper proposed to USEU Charge that the USG request the EU to designate the MEK and relist it as a terrorist organization”
IRAN: MEK SUPPORTERS IN PLAN TO PRESS HMG, USG, ICJ ON BEHALF OF CAMP ASHRAF RESIDENTS (3/2/2009)
“As always, the positions of the MEK and its supporters are characterized by hyperbole and distortion. London Iran Watcher has not attempted to engage with MEK supporters (and still less with members), but has kept FCO briefed on current USG public guidance on Camp Ashraf. The MEK, however, remains an issue on which HMG senior levels are fatigued and jumpy, and only too glad to shelter behind the tough line the USG has maintained on the MEK (ref).”
GOI TO ASSUME REPONSIBILITY FOR CAMP ASHRAF JANUARY 1; SECURITY TRANSITION BEGINS (12/22/2008)
U.S. Baghdad embassy says:
“No Delisting of MEK
While Washington considers whether to keep the MEK organization on the U.S. FTO list, as the Embassy deals with the MEK at Camp Ashraf it is our view that for our dealings it is important that the organization remain listed. Delisting the MEK could hinder our cooperation with the GOI (which considers the MEK to be a terrorist organization) and would encourage the [Camp Ashraf residents] to continue to stall the determination of their legal status in Iraq.”
IRAN: UK GOVERNMENT APPEALS MEK DE-LISTING ORDER (12/4/2007)
“The suit had been brought by several of the MEK,s fervent sympathizers in Parliament seeking POAC’s review of the MEK listing. HMG: Leopard Has Not Changed Spots”
Delisting MEK “weakens UK counter terrorism efforts”
An Iranian political group designated by the State Department as a terrorist organization is offering large payments to orators willing to speak at events on their behalf. Among those with 
connections to the organization, Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), are Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s chief foreign policy adviser and liberal politician Howard Dean.
MEK and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, were discovered by Salon to be soliciting speakers for an event in Geneva.
The State Department summary of MEK’s activities claims that the group "uses propaganda and terrorism to achieve its objectives" against the Iranian government, with a worldwide membership between 5,000 and 10,000 and a decades-long history of attempted coups, bombings and terrorist attacks.
Because the MEK holds official designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, it is illegal to provide "material support" to it, such as by contributing directly or by speaking on its behalf. Pennsylvania’s 21st Century Speakers Inc. would be breaking the law with the $10,000 speaking engagement on the MEK’s behalf it is currently floating to its clients.
"This is clearly an invitation to provide a service to a designated group. This would be a clear violation of the law," Georgetown Law School professor David Cole told Salon. He added that the director of the speaker’s bureau, Lourdes Swarts, was already breaking the law by merely attempting to arrange a speaker.
The September 22 event focuses on the MEK members in Iraq’s Camp Ashraf and is scheduled to coincide with the United Nations Human Rights Council meeting.
Both Dean and the Romney adviser, Washington College President Mitchell Reiss, have been paid to give speeches as part of the effort to strip the MEK of its terrorist designation.
Dean told Politico that he gave the speech because he sympathized with the underdog and believed that the MEK had helped the U.S. in Iraq.
"I said to myself, ‘These are obviously not terrorists," Dean said. "The former chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff will obviously not be consorting with terrorists."
By Kase Wickman
A clearer picture of what US leaders really think of the MEK can be found in earlier assessments of the group by the US government—at a time when MEK’s connections in Western governments weren’t as extensively developed. Today the MEK propaganda efforts mentioned in this report are showing their effects.
Excerpts from 1992 report by Congressional Research Service addressed to Lee H. Hammilton, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives (1993–1995). (Note: in this report NCR=PMOI=MKO=MEK=…)
1. We want to be clear that our conclusions about the Mojahedin do not in any way imply support for the behavior of the current regime in Iran.
2. Despite Mojahedin assertions that the group has abandoned its revolutionary ideology and now favors a liberal democracy, there is no written or public record of discussion or debate about the dramatic reversals in the Mojahedin’s stated positions. Moreover, the Mojahedin’s…record of behavior does not substantiate its capability or intention to be democratic.
3. The intellectual contradictions between Shi’a Islam and Marxism… caused the Mojahedin to split in 1975. The organization broke drown into Marxist and Muslim factions. But the religious disagreement between the secular and Islamic factions of the MKO did not undermine their fundamental agreement on the issue of imperialism, nor their strategy of armed struggle against …American interests in Iran.
4. Like their dedication to armed struggle, the Mojahedin’s emphasis on propaganda reflects the influence of other revolutionaries, who sought both adherents and supporters through indoctrination, since its inception, the group has made drafting and disseminating propaganda a priority.
5. … it [MEK 1979 manifesto] recommended that Iran cancel all agreements with "racist" state of Israel.
6. The Mojahedin are known to have assassinated the following Americans in Iran during the 1970s:
Lt. Colonel Lewis L. Hawkins Killed: June 2, 1973
Air Force Colonel Paul Schaeffer Killed: May 21, 1975
Air Force Lt. Colonel Jack Turner Killed: May 21, 1975
Donald G. Smith, Rockwell International Killed: August 28, 1976
Robert R. Krongrad, Rockwell International Killed: August 28, 1976
William C. Cottrell, Rockwell International Killed: August 28, 1976.
7. The very day that 400 university students overtook the U.S. embassy, the Mojahedin issued a proclamation headlined, "After the Shah, it’s America’s turn."
8. [After release of US embassy hostages] the next issue of "Mojahed" [MEK publication] reminded readers that "the Mojahedin-e Khalq were the first force who rose unequivocally to the support of the occupation of the American spy center," and further noted that Mojahedin members spent "days and weeks," "in heat and cold," in front of the embassy in an effort to ensure that the occupied embassy was "an active and zealous anti-imperialist center." It described the release of the nostages as a "retreat" and "surrender" and warned that resumption of diplomatic relations with the United States would be "treason to the people and to the blood of our martyrs."
9. …in radio broadcasts of the "Voice of Mojahed," [circa 1990s] which are transmitted into Iran from Mojahedin bases in Iraq, the MKO has claimed responsibility for internal violence throughout Iran…A number of these self-described operations included attacks against clearly civilian targets, such as automobiles, highways, government buildings open to the public, businesses.
10. After the flight of the Mojahedin leadership from Iran in 1981, the group internationalized its propaganda to gain new adherents and attract Western supporters…Rajavi commenced a campaign of public relations that developed into the formidable Mojahedin outreach program currently operating.
11. The NCR also solicits the support of prominent public figures, and practices a determined lobbying effort among Western parliamentarians.
12. To conduct its propaganda campaign, the group has established offices throughout Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and the Middle East. These offices are responsible for coordinating the public relations effort and through their activities have established the Mojahedin as the best organized Iranian opposition group. They sponsor public demonstrations and marches. Other types of publicity measures include television programming and musical concerts that feature prominent Iranian musicians. The Mojahedin claim the audiences for these performances are indicative of MKO support.
13. The organization also transmits unsolicited faxes and mail of its publications to various U.S. government offices, including the State Department, on a regular basis.
14. The Mojahedin focus their public relations efforts on the objectionable activities of the Iranian government…After the war, the Mojahedin stepped up its campaign to publicize the Iranian regime’s dismal record on human rights.
15. Another common practice of the group is to collect statements issued by prominent individuals. Western governments, the E.U and the U.N condemning Iranian government abuses and to reissue them as a package under the Mojahedin name — although the Mojahedin are not a factor in the Western condemnations. Likewise, the Mojahedin collect Western press reports that describe objectionable behavior by the Iranian government and re-publish them in Mojahedin documents.
16. Mojahedin publications tend to mirror concurrent Western public diplomacy…Through such efforts, the Mojahedin attempt to transform Western opprobrium For the government of Iran into expressions of support for themselves.
17. "By keeping on good terms with enough journalists, they hope to transform their public image in America from terrorists to Freedom fighters." The major objective of the MKO’s public relations campaign is to posit the Mojahedin as the alternative to the current Iranian government, or in their words, the "face of Iran to be," and in so doing gain both new adherents and Western political and financial support. To achieve these objectives, they must ensure their organization and its espoused principles appeal to Western audiences and Iranian expatriates.
18. Current Mojahedin publications assert the group’s advocacy of specific guidelines for a future provisional government, including: "democracy," "peace," "love, friendship, and unity," "separation of church and state," and "recognition of private ownership and a market economy…"
19. [but] These claims present a revolutionary departure from the substantial written record of Mojahedin ideology. Examples of such reversals include the switch from revolutionary Islam to separation of church and state and from nationalization to private ownership. Yet the changes in MKO ideology occurred without any public debate, and there is no public record of discussion or review of Mojahedin principles. It is also unclear when each change in policy occurred, and what internal factors motivated each shift. The absence of dialogue about this critical issue of ideology contrasts markedly with the group’s earlier history of discourse.
20. Nor are these new claims substantiated by the record of the Mojahedin’s activities throughout… Mojahedin organizations do not follow the principles outlined in their revised propaganda. In particular, the Mojahedin have never practiced democracy within their own organization…
21. The Mojahedin’s own publications further suggest the insincerity of their ideological alteration…the Mojahedin have begun to appropriate Iranian national symbols for use in their publications. One…journal is named "The Lion and the Sun" in reference to two symbols used by the monarchy throughout Iranian history. Yet the Mojahedin worked to overthrow the Shah’s monarchy and today refuse to work with monarchist oppositionists…. Similarly, the Mojahedin have abandoned their original flag, whose symbols include a Quranic verse, sickle, and Kalashnikov, in favor of the royal flag used during the Sah’s rule.
22. The Mojahedin have also begun incorporating the "Mossadeq" name into their publications. "The Lion and Sun" journal, for example, contains report on "The Rising that Restored Mossadeq." In fact, the Mojahedin rejects the nonviolent, constitutional opposition exemplified by Mossadeq. The political party that was the heir to Mossadeq’s policies, the National Front, refused in 1981 to work with the NCR because of the Mojahedin’s revolutionary Islamic ideology. These cosmetic modifications appear to be aimed at expatriate Iranian audiences, among whom these symbols would resonate.
23. the Mojahedin’s credibility is also undermined by the fact that they deny or distort sections of their history… It is difficult to accept at face value promises of future conduct when an organization fails to acknowledge its past.
by Ari Siletz
Some in U.S paving ground for another round of violence
If the ultimate goal of delisting the MEK is to create a political entity with military capacity that could come into play when push comes to shove with Iran, then we’re in for yet another foreign policy disaster.
If anything, the whole 9/11 ordeal revealed in a spectacular way that enhancing an extremist organization and tactically allying with it in order to gain strategic advantage over a bigger foe is not necessarily the best long-term policy. Terrorist groups and indoctrinated cults (regardless of how they’re designated) don’t make loyal friends. That’s now a historically proven fact. You could use them for short-term gains –just as you did with Afghanistan’s Mujahidin in early 1980s against the Soviet Union – but once they grow strong, they’ll go by their own twisted agenda.
Certainly, an unethical dogmatic cult like the MEK – which has the capacity of instructing its own members to self-immolate in support of their leaders – a cult that went as far as fighting alongside the troops of Saddam Hussein when he invaded its own country’s territorial integrity – is much less principled and predictable than some hawkish American politicians wish it to be. You may see a potential ally in the fiery group for the time being, but it’s utterly naïve to think that an ideological political formation that took up arms against its own people at a time of war would stay loyal to anyone or to any noble principle it pledges to uphold.
The truth is that enhancing the MEK from a ghostly Marxist-Islamist terrorist organization on the verge of dissolution to a dangerously consequential actor in the inflammable region of the Middle East would most likely be a risky decision that future U.S governments, along with moderate political and ideological forces in the region, will wholeheartedly regret. If left alone, the MEK would probably gradually fade away in the maze of history and spare future generations the hassle of combating yet another fanatical force. If boosted and unleashed however, there would be no guarantee that anyone – including the U.S – would be able to exercise any sort of moderating influence on it. The risk is for Hilary Clinton to take. She could play it safe, call the terrorist group what it is and contain it until it’s dissolved. Or she could boost it up, let it loose and watch it in action.
The Secretary of State should bear in mind though that in its present miserable form, the MEK is one of the staunchest forces against peace and non-violent resistance among all other Iranian political groups. Not yet delisted, the MEK is perhaps devoting as much time and resource combating and weakening the voices of non-violence within the Iranian opposition. It suffices to take a quick look at the MEK’s online media, TV programs and propaganda machine to see the level of hatred and resentment that this group spurs toward the very notion of “non-violence” and civility in political struggle (although the English version of its media productions aimed at a Western audience are much more “peaceful” than its Farsi ones).
So there should be no doubt in her mind that if the MEK’s capabilities and credibility are enhanced through recognition by the State Department, it would not hesitate to unleash all its newly gained impetus to suffocate all voices of rationality and plant the seeds of a new form of extremism that future generations of Iranians, Middle Easterns and Americans would have to deal with.
It is a pity to see that at a time where the Arab spring is promising a new era of rationality and prosperity in the tormented region of the Middle East, some forces within the U.S are yet again paving the ground for another round of violence to emerge.
By Reza Nasri
In 1994, the U.S. Department of State produced a comprehensive report exposing the Mujahideen-e-khalq (MEK) for what it is — an exiled Iranian fringe group with a record of terrorism, violence, political opportunism and the abuse of its own members.
It states
…our mutual distaste for the behavior of the regime in Tehran should not influence our analysis of the Mojahedin.
and that
Shunned by most Iranians and fundamentally undemocratic, the Mojahedin-e Khalq are not a viable alternative to the current government of Iran.
But that was years ago and any day now the MEK could be delisted from the U.S foreign terrorist organizations (FTO) list. Virtually unchecked, its well-funded lobbying blitz in Europe resulted in its delisting from the U.K. and E.U. terror lists. This has enabled it to create a larger support base there than it has in North America. It particularly enjoys a significant audience among past and present British parliamentarians such as Lord Corbett of Castle Vale (Robin Corbett). Corbett is the chairman of the “British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom,” the main British MEK lobby group. In addition to the U.S. heavy-weights with high national security officials that the MEK has paid to appear at its European rallies are Iranians and non-Iranians like the people pictured here and here.
After its successful test run in Europe, the MEK set its sights on the world’s most wanted ally and now its crazed leader Maryam Rajavi (her husband’s whereabouts are unknown) is knocking on Washington’s door saying things about the “Mullahs in Iran” while using key buzz words like “democratic”.
Over the years the FBI, Human Rights Watch, the Rand Corporation and several U.S. mainstream news outlets have produced in-depth investigations detailing the group’s past and present, some revealing the absurdly high “speaking fees” it provides to prominent figures who have appeared at its events. But even with a steady flow of damning information available, it is still spreading non-factual claims through its lobbying representatives. One way it does this is by issuing regular press releases through PR Newswire (a well-known online marketing tool) which are then reproduced as articles on news websites (see here and here for one example). Its lobbyists regularly talk to the press which is forced to quote them and MEK representatives have also been given full editorial slots in major U.S. newspapers.
The MEK’s ongoing delisting campaign is guided by the belief that the American public and the U.S. government are ignorant enough to believe its statements no matter how many times they’re proven false. The breathless claims of seeming support made by former U.S. officials are marketed by the MEK as a testament to its legitimacy, especially when these people conflate the human rights issue at the MEK’s base in Camp Ashraf near the Iran-Iraq border with its FTO delisting campaign as if they go hand in hand. But they don’t. Writing about Mitt Romney adviser Michael Reiss’s advocacy for the MEK the American Conservative’s Daniel Larison states (emphasis is mine):
Like many other pro-MEK advocates, Reiss has confused the issues of the treatment of the population of Camp Ashraf with the question of whether the MEK should remain on the FTO list. The people at Ashraf should be relocated outside Iraq, and they should not be sent to Iran against their will, but this has nothing to do with the MEK’s designation by the U.S. as a terrorist organization. It ought to be possible to address what is properly a political refugee problem left over from the Iraq war without legitimizing a terrorist group.
Dokhi Fassihian and Trita Parsi have also written about how the “international community” rather than just the U.S. can help the people of Camp Ashraf.
Some of my colleagues have called the MEK delisting campaign an “Iranian debate” but this couldn’t be further from the truth. The majority of Iranians don’t support the MEK in Iran or outside of it. Most Iranians aren’t debating the MEK’s merits, they’re either loudly speaking out against it, or consider it an annoying distraction from the widely recognized opposition in Iran. That’s because the MEK killed Iranians through organized terror bombings and assassinations during and after the revolution and because it fought against its own people during the Iran-Iraq war. The war took hundreds of thousands of Iranian lives. It is ingrained in Iranian memory as nearly a decade of suffering imposed on them by the U.S.-backed regime of Saddam Hussein who even used chemical weapons on young Iranian soldiers. Which nation’s people would forgive such an act of treason?[..]
Those who think Iranians would support the MEK simply because of its number one goal of bringing down the Islamic Republic are seriously mistaken. Every anti-IRI Iranian I have interviewed has said something to the tune of: “They are bad, but the MEK is worse.” Those who think the MEK should be supported simply because it detests the Iranian government as much as they do (see Patrick Kennedy) are also misguided. The chances of the MEK being installed in Tehran are very low; the Iranian population wouldn’t allow it.
The only Iranians who support the MEK are family members of those who were persecuted by the regime and those whose understandable hatred of the current government has driven them to blind desperation. At best, its support base among Iranians is under 30,000 and perhaps significantly less, and Iran is a country of over 70 million. If the MEK has such a large support base as it claims, why was its recent rally outside the Washington Department of State attended by “hundreds” rather than thousands or hundreds of thousands? Why did organizers feel the need to bus and fly people to the rally for free from other cities? As with many of its other events, some attendees admitted to not being familiar with the group or its objectives. Others admitted to being paid to attend.
Some may wonder why I am writing all this if the MEK is so obviously illegitimate. That’s because their delisting campaign has been well-organized and somewhat effective. They have, after all, successfully convinced the U.S. government to reconsider their FTO designation. Their campaign is also currently in full swing and should be addressed as such.
But delisting the MEK is unlikely to result in the group being accepted by Iranians, or the fall of the Iranian government. It may not even impact the status of the 3,000+ people who are trapped in Camp Ashraf, all under real threat by the Iraqi government and many held against their will. But delisting it will result in the leadership being able to raise money easier in the U.S. which they can then use to sway Mideast policy by lobbying congress.[..]
A decision to delist will strike yet another blow to the possibility of peaceful U.S.-Iran relations since it will be interpreted by the Iranians as an act of U.S. aggression, adding more fuel to the ongoing Cold War between the two countries. It will also reinforce a well-known stereotype about the U.S. as a country led by people who are indeed gullible enough to believe anything — even the claims of a well-funded terror group that has killed U.S. nationals.
The leadership cannot escape its bloody past. Among Rajavi’s militaristic quotes are: “Take the Kurds under your tanks and save your bullets for the Islamic Guard.” It also cannot erase the abundant information that journalists and other neutral non-state actors have made available about them. The MEK can only counter negative press with fabrications (as it is doing with its cyber army of defamers and lobbyists) and hope that the Obama administration is weak and naive enough to submit to the pressure it has been working furiously to impose upon it.
But as argued by Elizabeth Rubin of the New York Times who visited Camp Ashraf in 2003 and experienced the group’s inner-workings first-hand:
Mrs. Clinton should ignore their P.R. campaign. Mujahedeen Khalq is not only irrelevant to the cause of Iran’s democratic activists, but a totalitarian cult that will come back to haunt us.
We can only hope that Mrs. Clinton is listening.
lobelog – By Jasmin Ramsey
Elizabeth Rubin writes in the New York Times on the Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK) and their controversial claims as Iran’s main opposition group. According to Rubin, Secretary of State 
Hillary Clinton, “should ignore their [MEK] P.R. campaign. Mujahedeen Khalq is not only irrelevant to the cause of Iran’s democratic activists, but a totalitarian cult that will come back to haunt us.” Rubin argues that what is “most disturbing” about the MEK is the way the leaders, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi treats its members that reside in Iraq’s Camp Ashraf. Rubin visited Camp Ashraf in 2003 and after her visit, spoke with many men and women who had escaped MEK. According to her interviews with the former MEK members, ”many had to be deprogrammed. They recounted how people were locked up if they disagreed with the leadership or tried to escape; some were even killed.” Additionally, residents of Camp Ashraf are forbidden to engage in friendships and any other type of emotional relationships. Boys and girls are banned from speaking with one another and residents are also required to report their dreams and thoughts. Rubin also writes that members are forced to divorce and “take a vow of lifelong celibacy to ensure that all their neergy and love would be directed toward Maryam and Massoud.”
Trita Parsi and Dokhi Fassihian list steps in an article published in Tehran Bureau that the U.S., international community and MEK can take to resolve the situation at Camp Ashraf. Parsi and Fassihian recommend that Camp Ashraf should be dismantled from the supervision of the United Nations, the International Red Cross and the U.S. military. Additionally, the rights of the MEK members should be upheld. Residents should also “be offered resettlement in third countries and reunification with their families if they meet the requirement of the United Nations to renounce violence.” Most importantly, Parsi and Fassihian emphasize that the National Council for Iranian Resistance (NCRI)- MEK as a whole, should renounce violence in an official proclamation published in Farsi and English before being considered for FTO delisting.[..]
Project on middle East Democracy
Retired US General: Delist Terrorists as ‘Provocative’ Action Against Iran
Praises MEK as ‘Overt Military Counterforce to the Iranian Regime’
In comments that further underscore the depth of the support the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) has 
generated with its massive pay-for-speech campaign, retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney praised the MEK and called for their delisting as part of a campaign of “provocative actions” against the Iranian government.
“We need a very active tit for tat policy, so every time they kill Americans they have an accident in Iran,” declared McInerney at the pro-MEK conference in Washington DC. It wasn’t too long before he made it clear that the MEK would be arranging these “accidents,” declaring the group a “credible overt political-military counterforce to the Iranian regime.”
Such comments would seemingly go against the MEK’s repeated claims to have transitioned from Islamo-Marxist cult into the non-violent champion of the free market it now styles itself as, but didn’t seem to phase anyone, including the conference’s organizer Ray Tanter, who insisted the attacks the MEK has conducted inside Iran were simply “military activities” and didn’t count as terrorism.
The MEK was a founding member of the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, and conducted numerous attacks against US targets before the Iranian revolution, transitioning into a key Saddam Hussein ally afterwards and eventually into a darling of US hawks who are keen to use them as a proxy force to attack Iran.
by Jason Ditz
Supporters of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) movement are planning their largest-ever gathering in Washington on Friday in front of the State Department. .jpg){kind=logo}
"Join us in solidarity with the Iranian people, Camp Ashraf, and against the dictatorship ruling Iran," reads the flyer advertising the Aug. 26 rally and march at the 22nd and C Street entrance of the State Department’s Foggy Bottom headquarters. MEK supporters have been gathering there for months, imploring State Department employees and visitors to press Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to remove the MEK from State’s list of foreign terrorist organizations.
"Dear Hillary, My name is Shaghayegh. I am 14 and I live in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. I am afraid I am going to be murdered," begins an open letter from an MEK member to Clinton that has been printed in full-page ads in the Washington Post.
The State Department placed the MEK on its list of foreign terrorist organizations in 1999 for its involvement in bombings that killed six Americans, but is reviewing that status now.
The event is the latest and greatest example of the MEK’s multi-million dollar effort to build support among Washington’s political elite. The speakers at the event will include: Congressman John Lewis (D-GA), former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, former Sen. Robert Torricelli, Rep. Patrick Kennedy, and former CIA Deputy Director of Clandestine Operations John Sano.
The MEK also lists among its supporters in Washington former National Security Advisor Gen. James Jones, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, former Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Richard Myers, former White House Chief of Staff Andy Card, Gen. Wesley Clark, former Rep. Lee Hamilton, former CIA Director Porter Goss, senior advisor to the Romney campaign Mitchell Reiss, Gen. Anthony Zinni, former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, former Sen. Evan Bayh, and many others.
So what is the MEK? Well, that depends on who you ask. The group, which has an ideology based on the fusion of Islam and Marxism, was formed in Iran in 1965. It allied itself with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and fought against the Shah and his Western backers. After falling out of favor with Khomeini, the group was given shelter in Iraq by Saddam Hussein, who used them to conduct brutal cross-border raids during the Iraq-Iran war.
MEK leader Maryam Rajavi, who lives in Paris with her husband Massoud Rajavi, reportedly told her followers in 1991, "Take the Kurds under your tanks, and save your bullets for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards."
After the fall of Saddam, the United States helped broker an agreement whereby 3,400 MEK members were confined to a complex in Iraq called Camp Ashraf, which was protected by the U.S. military but then handed over to the Iraqi government in 2009. In an interview on Tuesday, Iraq’s ambassador Samir Sumaida’ie said that the MEK was dangerous and "nothing more than a cult."
In 2005, Human Rights Watch published a report accusing the MEK in Camp Ashraf of enforcing loyalty by subjecting "dissident members to torture and prolonged solitary confinement," and being responsible for "two cases of death under interrogation."
Elizabeth Rubin wrote about her 2003 trip to Camp Ashraf in the New York Times earlier this month. "Access to the Internet, phones and information about the outside world is prohibited. Posters of Ms. Rajavi and her smiling green eyes abound," she said. "Friendships and all emotional relationships are forbidden. From the time they are toddlers, boys and girls are not allowed to speak to each other. Each day at Camp Ashraf you had to report your dreams and thoughts. If a man was turned on by the scent of a woman or a whiff of perfume, he had to confess."
The MEK says it renounced violence in 2001 and professes to be leading the resistance to the Iranian regime. That claim, in addition to lucrative payments to former officials in both parties, has bought it a lot of attention and friends in Washington. But how can senior officials take money from a terrorist group?
"The MEK’s delisting campaign is funded by a fluid and enigmatic network of support groups based in the United States. According to an MEK leader, these groups are funded by money from around the world, which they deliberately shield from U.S. authorities," the Huffington Post reporter Christina Wilkie wrote. "These domestic groups book and pay for their VIP speakers through speaker agencies, which in turn pay the speakers directly and take a fee for arranging appearances. That way, the speakers themselves don’t technically accept money from the community groups."
An event organizer told The Cable that the MEK is expecting between 5,000 and 10,000 people at its rally at the State Department on Friday, which begins at 10 a.m.
Foreign Policy.com – By Josh Rogin
In recent weeks, a number of national U.S. news outlets have documented a strange phenomenon. Dozens of retired U.S. government officials, spanning the liberal-to-conservative 
political spectrum and some paid tens of thousands of dollars in speaking fees, have joined a well-orchestrated lobbying campaign to remove a controversial Iranian exile group from the list of terrorist organizations maintained by the U.S. State Department.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to make a decision on the group’s status within weeks. She should take a close look at the history of the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) before making a decision.
The MEK is a cult-like organization run by Iranian exiles Maryam Rajavi and her husband Massoud. Ms. Rajavi lives in Paris and leads the National Council of Resistance in Iran, a group that claims exile-government status. According to the FBI, it is a front group for the Mujahedeen-e Khalq.
Also known as the Warriors of God, MEK has a history of anti-American rhetoric and unsavory associations over the past four decades under the leadership of the Rajavis. It was initially aligned with the leaders of the Iranian Islamic revolution and later with Iraq’s dictator Saddam Hussein after the group was expelled from Iran. It is accused of dozens of assassinations and bombings, including one which killed six American advisers in Iran, and murdering Kurdish refugees in Iraq at Hussein’s behest. It is currently based at a camp in Iraq protected by the U.S. military but facing expulsion by the Iraqi government. A clash between Iraqi forces and camp members resulted in 34 deaths in April.
Despite the MEK’s ugly history, a power-packed roster of speakers has appeared at forums in the U.S. and Europe to endorse its drive to get off the terrorist list. Among the luminaries are former Vermont governor and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, retired Gen. Wesley Clark, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, former Energy Secretary and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and former FBI director Louis Freeh. Some of the high-profile speakers admit they knew little about the group beyond their briefing by MEK advocates.
According to a study by the Rand Corporation in 2009, the MEK has deceptively retooled its image to that of a democratic, nonviolent organization dedicated to bringing down the Iranian government. As such, the group is cultivating prominent Americans looking for a plausible alternative to Iran’s current leadership.
The MEK doesn’t seem to fit that bill. The Rand study reported that up to 70 percent of the 3,500 people at MEK’s Iraqi camp were deceptively recruited and are held against their will. Even prodemocracy groups inside Iran have denounced the MEK as a totalitarian cult group dedicated to the Rajavis.
An investigation by the Christian Science Monitor reported that millions of dollars provided by MEK have paid those high-profile speakers’ fees and hotel costs for the events. Although U.S. law prohibits Americans from providing direct assistance to or taking payments from terrorist groups, the connection is disguised by running the funds through third parties, usually Iranian exile groups in the U.S.
Prominent Americans should not be accepting payments and supporting a group that has shed American blood in the past and has no viable support inside Iran. We urge Secretary Clinton to keep the MEK on the terrorist roster.
Chron.com