Home » The MEK and the Iranian People » Page 29

The MEK and the Iranian People

Iran

Iran: Joint Takfiri – MKO plot against Iran failed

President of the Supreme National Defense University of Iran described Takfiri (extremist) movements as a scheme to impede Iran’s regional influence, saying Takfiris even look for intelligence aid from the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) to harm Iran.

Addressing a cultural ceremony in Tehran on Friday, Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi said there is clear evidence that Takfiri terrorist groups show no hostility toward the Zionists and make no mention of the US either, but have concentrated on countering Iran’s influence.

Takfiris intend to get intelligence help from the MKO terrorists to carry out operations inside Iran, and seek to establish contact with all anti-Iranian groups, he warned.

The top general also made a reference to the supports that certain regional countries provide for the terrorist groups, saying this has made them argue that Turkey should be the region’s top power.

Takfiri terrorist groups have plans to make safe havens for their leaders in Jordan, General Vahidi noted.

More than two years ago, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei had warned that Takfiri groups have resurfaced to serve the interests of the arrogant powers, and called for a “scientific, inclusive” movement to eradicate the threat of Takfirism.

“The Takfiri movements and their sponsoring states are utterly serving the arrogant powers’ objectives, namely (the objectives of) the US and the European colonialist governments as well as the Zionist regime (of Israel). They are practically serving them under an Islamic guise,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in November 2014.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Probable Trump Foreign Policy cheer the MKO up!

These days we are hearing that Trump may choose the most hawkish American figures for crucial posts in his administration. The majority of these figures are naturally paid supporters of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (the MKO).

Regarding the group’s massive lobbying activities in the US Congress and large amounts of money it has spent to buy supporters, a hawkish warmonger Trump administration is what the MKO has been dreaming of for years. However, the affairs do not look to be as easy as the group supposes.

The MKO propaganda praises certain nominees that Donald Trump has settled for Secretary of State because they are its top paid speakers in its propaganda events. Daniel Benjamin, former coordinator of Counter terrorism Bureau of the State Department was one of the targets of the group before it was removed from the FTO list in September 2012. He writes an op-ed in the Politico Magazine in which he thoroughly discusses the MKO’s huge lobbying campaigns to buy supporters in the US Congress and administration, particularly in the State Department. Based on Benjamin’s experience, he suggests, “No designated terrorist group had ever mounted a campaign like this before. Indeed, as a stampede of hogs to the trough, it was astonishing by any Washington standard.”

As Daniel Benjamin is not sure about the source of the MKO lavishly donated funds, he is sure about five-figure sums that ensure many supporters of the group to ignore its dark background of violence and terror. “Those who embrace the group show an alarming lack of concern about its past and heedlessness about core principles of American counterterrorism policy,” he writes. “Exactly where all the money came from remains unknown. Most of those who hitched their wagon to the MeK appeared to be getting $15,000 to $20,000 or more per appearance at these public events, and they were presumably happy to add their names to whatever open letters demanding better treatment for the group that were put in front of them.”

The former coordinator of counter terrorism office of the State Department warns about the hypocrisy of the MKO leaders and the reality of the undemocratic relations inside the MKO camps. “Even more unsettling was the sheer creepiness of the group,” he asserts. “While Maryam Rajavi was presiding over enormous conferences with American political celebrities and seas of smiling, waving people in Paris, at Camp Ashraf, the MeK leadership treated its people appallingly. Visitors, including from the U.N., painted a picture of relentless intimidation, shaming and coercion of the inhabitants by camp leaders. The MeK, which is often described as a cult, had a long history of requiring that its members divorce and remain celibate.”

 “The love affair with the MeK continues to mystify,” writes Benjamin. “For some, like Bolton, there is clearly an unshakeable certainty that the MeK will play a role in changing the regime in Tehran. Bolton’s reputation for dogmatism is well-earned in this case: Serious scholars of Iran all agree that the MeK is universally loathed in Iran, where no one forgets its service to Saddam or its slaughter of Iranian conscripts and others.”

In case of other MKO advocates such as Giuliani, Benjamin proves that he is mostly motivated by the MKO’s hefty payments rather that its cause. He suggests, “With Giuliani, as perhaps with Gingrich and others, the attraction to the MeK may be more grounded in plain old greed than foreign policy.”

“According to a financial disclosure reported on by The New York Times, Giuliani has been speechifying at hyper speed for years, collecting $11.4 million for 124 appearances in just one year—and that was before signing up for the MeK gravy train around 2011. Perhaps he just didn’t have time to consider the character of his paymaster,” adds Daniel Benjamin.

As a matter of fact,Trump’s White House appointments, with links to the Cult of Rajavi definitely causes concerns over the future foreign policies of the White House but it should be taken into consideration that the MKO lacks any public support among Iranians. So, the US government will be entirely discredited if it follows the illusions of people like John Bolton or Rudy Giuliani. Besides, the US is not independent on its foreign policy towards Iran. As a normal US policy, it might impose secondary sanctions against Iran and on European companies to prevent them from having business with Iran. Obviously, this tactic will not work with Russia, China and India who have taken steps to disconnect their economy from the U.S. economic system. Moreover, the EU states do not seem to be satisfied with the presidency of Trump and evidently they do not seem to agree with his probable aggressive foreign policy. The Cult of Rajavi is betting on the wrong horse again.

By Mazda Parsi

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Iranophobes on Parade

Will Iran be the target of the Trump regime?

One of the most discouraging aspects of the filling out of the Donald Trump cabinet is the array of Iran haters that seem to be lining up in the foreign policy and national security areas. Trump has been personally advocating sensible policies relating to Russia and Syria but he appears to have gone off the rails regarding Iran, which just might be attributed to those who are giving him advice. A reversion to the relationship that prevailed prior to last year’s signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) between Iran and the so-called P5+1 consisting of the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain, and the European Union would be undesirable, to say the least, but that appears to be what is likely to develop. Or it could be even worse, finding bilateral support for “action” as a number of policy advisors in the presidential campaign from both parties were endorsing something like war against the Persians.

The irony is that the argument made then and now for attacking Iran were based on the threat of Tehran deciding to build its own atomic bomb. With the JCPA agreement, however, most would agree that any remaining concerns that Tehran might even be considering the development of a nuclear weapons program were greatly diminished. Iran has since that time been in compliance with the agreement, possible nuclear proliferation has been avoided, and, apart from the fulminations of the inevitable anti-Iranian politicians in the United States, the signatories to the agreement have expressed their satisfaction with the outcome. It has been Washington that has failed to live up to its part of the agreement by easing remaining restrictions that are being imposed against Iranian financial institutions and regarding the purchase of some commercially available dual use technologies.

Candidate Donald Trump did not need much prompting to pick up on the prevailing anti-Iran sentiment. In a number of campaign speeches he denounced the JCPA as a bad deal and vowed to tear it up upon taking office. Some of that sentiment might well have been derived from his desire to distance himself from foreign policy positions promoted by President Barack Obama that were subsequently endorsed by Hillary Clinton so it is no surprise that since being elected he has somewhat modified his stance. He is now veering towards trying to renegotiate the agreement, which would likely be impossible given that it has multiple signatories. He could nevertheless disrupt it by continuing or increasing sanctions on Iran.

The thought of reverting to a state of unrelenting hostility towards Iran is disconcerting. One recalls joint CIA-Mossad operations between 2010 and 2012 that assassinated four civilian scientists connected to the country’s nuclear program as well as the creation of the Stuxnet virus that threatened to spread to other computers worldwide. It is generally accepted that Israel’s Mossad planned and prepared the killing of the scientists with a little help from the U.S., attacks which were almost certainly carried out by associates of the radical Marxist group Mujaheddin e Khalq (MEK), which is now being seen favorably by several Trump advisors even though the group is Marxist, cult-like and has killed Americans.

The assassinations were based on the false premise that Iran had a nuclear weapons program that could be disrupted by killing the scientists and technicians involved. Two comprehensive studies by the American government’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) conducted in 2007 and 2011 determined that no such program existed and that Iran had never taken any serious steps to initiate such research. Israel was also aware that there was no program. Nevertheless, the Israeli and American governments took steps to interfere with Iran’s existing and completely legal and open to inspection atomic energy program by identifying then killing its scientists and also introducing viruses into its computer systems. This was in spite of the fact that Iran was fully compliant with international norms on nuclear research and it was a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Israel, possessing its own nuclear arsenal, had refused to sign.

The history of the Iran-U.S. relationship is significant because several Trump advisors appear to be locked into a time warp regarding the Mullahs and the threat to Americans that they allegedly constitute. Former Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) head Michael Flynn, who will be the Trump National Security Advisor, is the most prominent Iran hater and also the most outspoken.

Flynn, also an unapologetic Islamophobe, has said that Iran represents a danger to U.S. national security and that our friend and ally Israel “lives under the threat of total annihilation from Iran…something the United States must never allow.” He believes that Iran intends to build nuclear weapons as well as the ballistic missiles needed to deliver them on target and thinks that “regime change” is the only solution to the threat posed by the current government. And for Flynn, Iran is not alone, it is part of a “global alliance” that includes China and Russia which seeks to threaten the U.S. and its allies.

Flynn concludes that Iran is unmitigated evil and that Washington should have nothing to do with it, apart from recognizing the reality that it and its government must be destroyed. I personally attended a conference in Moscow last December at which Flynn asserted that Iran is solely responsible for nearly all the instability in the Middle East and is behind at least five wars in the region, an assertion that is just as ridiculous as it sounds.

One might suggest that Flynn is terribly uninformed about a subject regarding which he claims expertise. His comments would suggest that the capabilities of the DIA that he once headed were dangerously overrated, but reports from his former colleagues indicate that he was always guilty of serious overreach in his pronouncements, something they referred to as “Flynn facts”.

If Flynn were just one loud voice braying in the wilderness he would be bad enough since his job is important, particularly with a president who has no foreign policy experience, but the sad fact is that he is not alone. Congressman, West Point grad and former Army officer Mike Pompeo, who will head the CIA, is more-or-less on the same page when it comes to Iran. Her supports new sanctions on the country and, regarding his appointment as Director, he had only one comment to make and it related to the JCPA, “I look forward to rolling back this disastrous deal with the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism.” As in the case with Flynn and DIA one has to wonder what kind of “objective” intelligence CIA will be producing under Pompeo.

Finally, there is retired Marine General James Mattis, who is being considered for a senior position in national security, possibly as Secretary of Defense. He is yet another Iranophobe who opposed the JCPA and calls Iran a rogue state that constitutes the “greatest threat” in the Middle East. As part of the evidence for that assessment he cites Iran’s alliance with Syria, which is at least in part directed against America’s enemy number one ISIS, demonstrating once again how Establishment Washington has difficulty in understanding what constitutes actual national interests. Mattis, in fact, denies that Iran is actually fighting ISIS.

The neoconservative kingpin Bill Kristol is gloating, headlining in his Weekly Standard publication that the “Iran Deal Is Doomed!” He should be pleased. Team Trump’s attitude towards an alleged Iranian threat is delusional, more in sync with Kristol and some Israeli thinking than with any actual American interests. Just as neoconservatives always believe that it is 1938 and we are in Munich, Flynn, Pompeo and Mattis likewise seem to think that it is 1979 and the United States Embassy in Tehran is still occupied.

The three Trumpsmen are not stupid, far from it, but the problem appears to be that they cannot comfortably assess two or more conflicting concepts at the same time, which might be due to the linear thinking derived from their military backgrounds. The Middle East is awash with players, all of whom have separate agendas, few of which coincide with actual American interests. If one is fixated on or obsessed with Iran as the sole disruptive force in the region it becomes difficult to see how Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel are also problems. It is decidedly neoconnish to look at a complex foreign policy issue and only see black and white, but that is what the Trump national security team seems to be prone to do.

Hopefully someone will convince Donald Trump that the real answer to eliminating the “Iranian threat” is not war. It requires building on the relationship established by JCPA to bind Iran more closely to the international community, both economically and culturally. By all accounts, young Iranians, a majority of the population, are dismissive of the rigidity of their own government and are very open to Western ideas and lifestyle. Change will come to Iran if the United States and its European allies encourage more rather than less non-threatening contact. It will not come at the point of a bayonet as Flynn, Pompeo and Mattis appear to be promoting.

Philip Giraldi, The Unz Review,

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Saudis use terrorism as tool against Iran: Pundit

Iran’s security forces have arrested three terrorists and killed another one in the eastern parts of the country. The forces of the Iranian Intelligence Ministry have seized explosive materials from the terrorist cell. Tehran has called on neighboring states to prevent terrorist groups from crossing the joint borders. Press TV has interviewed a commentator to discuss the threat of terrorism against Iran, which comes from outside of the country.

Seyed Mostafa Khoshcheshm, a journalist and political analyst, says after the Saudi authorities have failed to stop Iran’s influence in the region by using terrorist attacks against its allies, the Saudis resorted to proxy war through dispatching terrorists inside the Islamic Republic to undermine its security.

“The Saudis have changed the pattern when they found out they cannot topple the Iranian allies in the region like Iraq and [President] Bashar al-Assad in Syria. They have been trying hard to strike at Iran itself, because Iran is the only country, which is enjoying security in the region,” Khoshcheshm said, noting that the Saudis are seeking “to spread their influence in the region and to contain Iran.”

“This (the use of terrorist groups) has intensified since the nuclear deal [between Iran and the P5+1 group of countries] and they have been trying hard to regroup and to create a chain of these terrorist groups,” he said.

He also noted that “they (the Saudis) have been trying hard to provide financial backup, training, arms and logistics for different terrorist groups that have been operating in Iran throughout the last three decades after the Revolution.”

According to the analyst, the Saudi officials support anti-Iran terrorist groups like the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), which has “martyred over 17,000 Iranians and officials in the last three decades.”

Saudi Arabia has paid “hundreds of thousands of dollars to terrorists” inside Pakistan to arm and regroup them to wreak havoc on Iran, he said, adding that the Saudi consulate in Iraq’s Kurdistan region supported a Kurdish separatist group, which is labeled a terrorist organization by Turkey, Iraq and Iran, to enable it to operate terrorist attacks in the region.

Iranian security forces have arrested dozens of terrorists, belonging to the Daesh Takfiris and other groups over the past months.

In July, the Iranian Intelligence Ministry declared its forces had smashed a terrorist cell, which was planning bombings in Tehran and other cities during the holy month of Ramadan.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Iran’s approach toward Saudi hostility

Saudi Arabia has intensified its anti-Iran rhetoric over the past years.

The kingdom has also been spreading Iranophobia to achieve its regional objectives.

Riyadh has attempted to brand Iran as a country which intends to plunge the region into turmoil. It accuses Iran of fanning the flames of conflicts in the Middle East, particularly in Syria and Yemen.

But it is Saudi Arabia that launched a military campaign against Yemen in March 2015, claiming thousands of lives and causing a severe humanitarian crisis in the impoverished nation.

The kingdom is also accused of backing terrorist groups which fight against the Syrian government. Riyadh has reportedly provided the terrorists with logistic and financial support in a bid to topple the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

In response to such hostile policies, Iran has called for holding political dialogue to end conflicts in Yemen and Syria. Tehran has always welcomed all moves which can help end bloodshed in these countries. The Islamic Republic has also sent humanitarian assistance to these countries to alleviate the people’s plight.

Saudi officials have also explicitly expressed support for an anti-Iran terrorist group known as Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO). The MKO terrorists have carried out numerous attacks against Iranian civilians and government officials since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, killing thousands of people.

Saudi Arabia also threw its weight behind the regime of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, which began an eight-year war against Iran (1980-88).

Apart from such hostile approaches, the kingdom refuses to shoulder the responsibility for last year’s Hajj stampede which resulted in the deaths of thousands of pilgrims, including hundreds of Iranians.

Despite Riyadh’s antagonism toward Tehran, the Islamic Republic has never taken approaches which could have pitted Muslims against each other.

Iran believes tensions among Islamic nations only benefit Israel and those who want to create division among Muslims.

The Islamic Republic is a regional power whose military might enables it to deter any act of aggression. Nonetheless, it prefers to follow up its complaints against Saudis through international bodies rather than get into a regional confrontation.

Iran Daily

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Trusting the cult of Rajavi to fight inequalities is a huge gaffe

Human society is dreaming the day that people will live together in peace regardless of their gender, ethnic, race, religious and national differences. Illuminated, open-minded people think of a society in which people value their most important common characteristic: humanity. Humanity is the basic notion for the qualities that make us human, such as the ability to love and have compassion, be creative, and not be a robot or alien. To achieve such ideals in a human society, one should trust those who actually practice the criteria of humanity not a destructive cult of personality like the Mujahedin Khalq with a dark history of violence and discrimination.

The Iranian nation includes a variety of ethnic minorities living in different parts of the country.  This means that the Iranian territory has the potential capacity for separatist groups. As Mohammad Sahimi the Iranian-American professor suggests, the US and Israel alliance have founded their strategy on using this capacity to create what they call the “new Middle East”. They mostly succeeded to make this strategy work in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon but not in Iran.

“One approach that had been discussed for years and is now being seriously pursued is inciting ethnic unrest and creating puppet separatist groups or “liberation movements” in Iran’s provinces where ethnic groups other than Persians make up a significant portion of the population,” writes Sahimi.  “They include Iran’s two Azerbaijan provinces, Kurdistan, and the oil-rich province of Khuzestan, where a small but significant part of the population is Iranian-Arab.” [1]

As it is known to everyone, the MKO is also one of the US-Israeli backed dissident groups to push Iran to turn into a client state. The MKO in its turn has so far cooperated with separatist group like Kurdish Pejak and now it is endeavoring to attract other separatists like Ahwazi Arabs. This year, the group annual gathering in Paris provided an opportunity for Ahwazi figures like Karim Abdian who might be so pleased to see Saudi Prince Turkie Faisal there calling for the fall of the Iranian government.

Karim Abdian announced his pleasure in an article published by Asharq Al-awsat. He writes about his experience of being in the list of MKO sponsors: “There appeared to be a drive to reach out to others in the Iranian opposition as well as Arab governments, in an effort to forge wider solidarity. Invited to attend for the first time, I headed a moderate Ahwazi Arab delegation as we sought to respond to the MEK’s offer to give our cause a fair hearing.” [2]

Abdian believes that the MKO is a reliable entity to unite with to form a federal state. As a matter of fact, federalism is the aim of certain separatists. Professor Sahimi asserts that in 2005, the American Enterprise Institute, the bastion of the neoconservatives, held a conference, “The Unknown Iran: Another Case for Federalism?” According to him the conference “, as usual, was attended by some who claim to represent a portion of the Iranian population. But the conference also provoked wide protests by Iranians.”[3]

While Karim Abdian resorts to the Cult of Rajavi as a trustable “non-Persian” opposition group, he indicates his ignorance about the current Mujahedin Khalq by recalling Ayatollah Taleqani as “the MEK’s ideological father”. He fails to know that Massoud Rajavi has been the absolute leader of the cult for at least the past 35 years.  He counts on the MKO alliance saying, “In a positive move, Dr. Mohammad Mohaddessin, the head of MEK’s foreign relations, stated in recent interviews with Al-Arabiya and Alkhabriah that MEK seeks the same autonomy for the Kurdish, Arab, Baloch, Azeri, Turkmen and Lur regions as well.”[4]

The recent move by the MKO to embrace Arab states and Arab separatists is just another effort to find financial sponsors to replace Saddam Hussein.  Adam Ereli, a lobbyist for Qatar and former U.S. Ambassador to Bahrain attended the MKO’s recent panel in Washington. He is an often-quoted critic of the Iran deal in the media and lobbyist for one of Iran’s biggest regional rivals, Qatar.”Over the past year, news outlets have consistently failed to disclose his work on behalf of Qatar when publishing his attacks on the White House’s nuclear diplomacy,” writes Eli Clifton of Lobelog. [5]

“Ereli wouldn’t be the first MEK-advocate with Sunni-Gulf ties to jump on the MEK’s bandwagon,” suggests Clifton. “Prince Turki bin Faisal al-Saud, the former head of the Saudi intelligence agency and longtime ambassador to the U.S., praised MEK leader Maryam Rajavi at the group’s annual gathering last July, in Paris. Prince Turki’s appearance, and his show of open support for the MEK, lends new credence to the rumors that the Sunni Gulf states are a possible source for the group’s mysterious funding.” [6]

Professor Sahimi accurately conclude that “the efforts to break Iran up will ultimately fail, as Iran has existed for thousands of years”. [7]Separatists and their allies particularly the Cult of Rajavi should know that Iranian nationality is one single identity that all ethnic minorities of Iran are living under it and brightened Iranians are those who seek a peaceful world together with all human beings of all races, religions and ethnic backgrounds. Mujahedin Khalq have indicated that humanity does not mean to them, what matters to the Rajavis is the survival of their cult of personality.

By Mazda parsi

Sources:

[1] Sahimi, Mohammad, Stop Supporting Separatist Groups in Iran, Antiwar.com, October 15, 2012

[2] Abdian, Karim, How the Iranian Opposition can Unite and Win?,Asharq Al-Awsat, September 4,2016

[3] Sahimi, Mohammad, Stop Supporting Separatist Groups in Iran, Antiwar.com, October 15, 2012

[4] Abdian, Karim, How the Iranian Opposition can Unite and Win?,Asharq Al-Awsat, September 4,2016

[5] Clifton, Eli, Congressional Research Service Expert and Gulf Lobbyist Headline MEK Event, LobeLog

August 31, 2016

[6] ibid

[7] Sahimi, Mohammad, Stop Supporting Separatist Groups in Iran, Antiwar.com, October 15, 2012

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Dirty deals between the MKO, Saudis and their lobbyists in the US

Sunday marks the 15th anniversary of 9/11 and many events have been planned to honor the victims who lost their lives. However, you may be shocked to hear that there are still people who celebrate the violent act of terrorist extremists of Al-Qaida.

These people include the Mujahedin Khalq Organization ( the MKO/ the Cult of Rajavi) whose disappeared leader ;Massoud Rajavi gathered the rank and file in Baqerzadeh Camp and congratulated members on the occasion of the collapse of imperialists’ twin towers, offering candies. He said,” this was reactionary Islam, let’s see what revolutionary Islam will do.” (He refers to his group’s ideology as revolutionary Islam)

Surprising is the recent allegations made by one of the American sponsors of the MKO, former senator “Joe Lieberman” in his piece on the Wall Street Journal in which he has tried to link Iran to 9/11!

Lieberman is a famous pro-war figure against Iran. He was the one who called on bombing Iran in a 2010 speech to the Council of Foreign Relations. Lieberman who is a paid speaker for the MKO, addressed the group’s events promising them he will “be working closely” with them for a change of regime in Iran.”

Not only the support for the cult of Rajavi as a “resistance” or “opposition” group indicates the ignorance of the group supporters, but also it demonstrates the complexity and filthiness of the political deals that the MKO and its supporters are involved in.

The Iranian American Progress Action Center ( IAPAC) has posted a photo of Maryam Rajavi and his American friends such as Joseph Lieberman and Rudolph Juliani former mayor of New York.

IAPAC’s comment under the photo is revealing. The page explains how Lieberman is selling the American’s security to the Israel-Saudi-MKO alliance:

“There was a commission dedicated to fact finding about 9/11, so far all we know is they didn’t release the parts associated with Saudis and  does not point a finger to Iran as a co-conspirator.”

The page believes that Lieberman’s new allegations “seems to have appeared out of thin air to help Lieberman install his radical Islamic friends.”

However, IAPAC fails to note that the MKO celebrated the 9/11 disastrous event in 2001. It does not notify that Massoud Rajavi has promised his followers to accomplish what AL-Qaida didn’t succeed to do.

The page is right to warn about the dirty relations of warmongers. “Clearly Lieberman and his Saudi owners and Bibi ( Benjamin Netantahu) are creating a pre-text for a war with Iran,” IAPAC commented.” We should not allow American blood and treasure to be wasted on another unnecessary war to make Netanyahu and Saudis realize their dreams.”

The truth is that 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia who were honored by the MKO at that time. Leiberman and other anti-Iran Hawks should be prudent enough to at least know what the MEK is , otherwise they can continue their hypocrisy.

Mazda Parsi,

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Washington uses the MKO to fight a covert war against Iran

Muslim Press has conducted an interview with political commentator Yuram Abdullah Weiler to discuss the MKO terrorist group and its recent activities.

Here’s the full text of the interview:

MP: Mr. Abdullah, what’s your take on the MKO terrorist group and its recent activities?

Yuram Abdullah: Known also by the acronyms MEK and PMOI (The People’s Mujahedin and the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran), the Mujahedin-e Khalq organization is dedicated to the violent overthrow of the legitimate government of the Islamic Republic of Iran. With the MKO’s removal from the list, the terrorist organization can legally seek funding from the U.S. government, some of whose officials have already received hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees for speaking on its behalf.

In an especially flagrant display of double standards, the United States removed the Mujahedin-e Khalq from the country’s list of designated terrorist organizations, as announced by the U.S. State Department on September 28, 2012. The delisting and support of the MKO by the United States, a terrorist organization that has killed over 12,000 Iranians, is perhaps is one of its most hypocritical and duplicitous acts of state-sponsored terrorism against Iran in the post-9/11 period.

MP: Can you shed more light on why Iranians despise the MKO members?

Yuram Abdullah: While the MKO did participate in the Islamic Revolution, later on it withdrew its support, refusing to participate in a public referendum and began to directly oppose the fledgling government of Islamic Republic of Iran. The about face came after Ayatollah Khomeini had submitted the proposed constitution for an Islamic government to a public referendum on December 2,1979, urging support of the referendum and warning that abstaining or voting “no” would amount to aiding and abetting the United States, and desecrating the martyrs of the Islamic Revolution.

Following the 1981 impeachment of Abol Hassan Bani Sadr, who was suspected of CIA involvement, the MKO called for massive demonstrations against the nascent government on June 20 compelling security officials to initiate a crackdown on the group. On June 28, the MKO began a series of lethal terrorist attacks in an attempt to topple the government beginning with the bombing of the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party during a meeting of party leaders, killing Ayatollah Mohammed Beheshti along with four cabinet ministers, twenty-seven members of the Majlis and several other government officials for a total of 74 fatalities.

Following the attempted overthrow of the government in June 1981 by the MKO, Bani Sadr along with Masoud Rajavi, and other leaders of the organization fled Iran for Paris on July 29 where they established the National Council of Resistance (NCR). After being evicted from France in 1986, Rajavi relocated the MKO to Iraq, where, receiving asylum and financial support from Saddam, he formed in 1987 the National Liberation Army (NLA), the military wing of the MKO, with himself as commander in chief.

The NLA used Iraq as a base to launch multiple attacks across the border into Iran. In June and July 1988, the NLA participated in a joint invasion into Iran with Iraqi forces, which used chemical weapons against Iranians. The NLA, claiming to have killed 40,000 Iranians in their assault, briefly captured the Iranian border towns of Mehran, Karand, and Islamabad-e Gharb, but were routed by Iranian reinforcements. The Habilian organization puts the number of Iranian victims of the MKO at around 12,000, which is certainly sufficient to account for the despised status of the MKO, whose members are referred to within Iran as “munafeqin” or hypocrites.

MP: Secretary of Iran’s Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei has compared MKO to ISIS in their barbaric acts. What could you say about this?

Yuram Abdullah: A brief examination of the MKO’s recent record will certainly verify this assertion. In 1991 after the first Persian Gulf War, the MKO assisted Saddam in his sanguine suppression of the Shi’a uprisings, which had been incited by George H.W. Bush, and continued to serve the tyrant well as a supplemental internal security force for his regime. On April 5, 1992, the MKO conducted a series of near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian Embassies, diplomatic missions and installations in 13 countries, including the United States, Canada, Germany, France, Britain, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Australia. On July 16, the MKO carried out an attack on an automobile carrying Iranian Foreign Minister Velayati during a visit to Potsdam. Similar MKO terror operations have occurred in other European countries, including France, Italy, and Switzerland, just like Daesh.

The MKO has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks in Iran. On August 20, 1992, the terrorist organization claimed responsibility for a grenade attack on the home of the Majlis deputy in the city of Kudasht in the province of Loristan in a report broadcast on the “Voice of Mojahed” radio. On October 12, the MKO claimed responsibility for twin bomb blasts at Imam Khomeini’s mausoleum south of Tehran, which has thousands of visitors each day. On October 15, they claimed credit for blowing up a gas station in Qom. Then, on October 26, the MKO took credit in a report broadcast on the “Voice of Mojahed” radio for detonating a bomb at a local Revolutionary Guard outpost in the town of Qasr-e Firuzeh.

In 1994 and 1995, the terrorist group carried out a series of mortar and bomb attacks on civilian targets including automobiles, highways, public government buildings, businesses, and private homes. In April 1999, the terrorist organization assassinated the deputy chief of the Armed Forces General Staff of Iran, and carried out mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids on Iranian military and law enforcement units, and government buildings near the Iran-Iraq border throughout the years 2000 and 2001.

MP: Do you think anti-Iran countries are trying to revive this group?

Yuram Abdullah: Just as the U.S. used the Afghan mujahedin for a covert U.S. war to fight a proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, the U.S. is using the MKO in conjunction with Mossad to fight a covert war against the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran. And the U.S. has even trained members of the MKO at the U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Security Site under the auspices of the Joint Operations Special Command between 2005 and 2008. According to an unnamed source, as a result of the Nevada JSOC training, “MKO now has a capacity for efficient operations that it never had before.”

Additionally, senior U.S. officials have confirmed that the MKO, working through the Zionist spy organization Mossad, has been responsible for carrying out the assassinations since 2007 of five top Iranian scientists: Mostafa Ahamdi Roshan on Jan. 11, 2012; Darioush Rezaei-Nejad on July 23, 2011; Majid Shahriari on November 29, 2010; Massoud Ali-Mohammadi on January 12, 2010; and, Ardeshir Hosseinpour on January 15, 2007.

MP: MKO has formed a close relationship with Saudi Arabia and its allies, including Mahmoud Abbas. What’s your opinion about these flourishing relationships?

Yuram Abdullah: On 9 July 2016, former Saudi intelligence chief and former Saudi ambassador to Britain and the United States Prince Turki al-Faisal Al Saud spoke for 30 minutes before a crowd in Paris, France gathered for the annual conference of the MKO. This is not totally surprising, for there has been a long list of U.S. politicians, including Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, Bill Richardson, a former New Mexico governor and U.N. ambassador under Bill Clinton, and former Vermont governor Howard Dean, have spoken to and received handsome fees from the MKO. These fees, in the neighborhood of $25,000 each, may have been funded by Saudi Arabia, so covert support of the MKO may not be a recent development.

In contrast, al-Faisal’s overtly inflammatory rhetoric against Ayatollah Khomeini however was indeed shocking. Stating that Iran was infected with a “Khomeini cancer,” al-Faisal, openly called for regime change by declaring, “I, too, want the downfall of the regime.” The rhetoric directly threatening the Islamic Republic of Iran may have been for its support of the legitimate government in Syria, Lebanese Hezbollah, and for its support of Houthi resistance fighters in Yemen. At a minimum, al-Faisal’s announcement certainly chills any further efforts by Tehran to deice diplomatic relations with Riyadh.

The U.S., the Israeli entity, and the Saudis appear to have convergent interests in destabilizing Iran with the ultimate goal of toppling the Islamic government and installing a pro-western client regime. Certainly U.S. and Saudi support for terrorist organizations to fight their proxy wars is nothing new and the symbiotic relationship dates back to the 1980s, when Washington and Riyadh partnered to fund the Afghan mujahedin, which later morphed into the terrorist group al-Qa’idah.

As far as Mahmoud Abbas’ meeting with Maryam Razavi three weeks after al-Faisal’s disclosure, it is not clear what the aging American puppet hoped to accomplish. As a largely irrelevant figure in the fight for the rights of the oppressed Palestinian people, Abbas may have simply desired to show himself as associating with an opponent of Iran, which is a requirement to remain in the good graces of the U.S. and the Israeli entity. On the other hand, the Abbas-MKO meeting may signal the reestablishment of a Fatah-MKO coalition, which fought together against Iran during the 1980-1988 Iraq-imposed (and U.S.-backed) war.

MP: France has recently hosted a meeting of this terrorist group. How does this affect Iranian-French relations?

Yuram Abdullah: As previously mentioned, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a political front for the MKO, hosts an annual conference in Paris to gather together the diverse elements of the “Iranian opposition.” It is quite telling this year that the keynote speaker was former White House Director of Public Liaison Linda Chavez, who spoke of the “Iranian resistance,” by which she meant the MKO, as the only way to establish democracy in Iran. Chavez’s speech along with those by a number of other American officials demonstrates the untrustworthiness of the U.S. to live up to its commitments in the JCPOA.

As far as the effect of the MKO conference and relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and France, recall that back in January, President Rouhani and French president Hollande signed trade agreements worth billions of U.S. dollars; the deal with Air Bus for 18 planes was worth $25 billion alone. But relations between Iran and France have had their vicissitudes. France appeared to take a hardline approach to the JCPOA, but in view of the state of the French economy, I doubt that Hollande is going to squelch the lucrative deals he has cut with Iran because of another conference held by the MKO.

By Yuram Abdullah Weiler ,  Muslim Press

Yuram Abdullah Weiler is a former engineer educated in mathematics turned writer and political critic who has written over 130 articles on Islam, social justice, economics, and politics focusing on the Middle East and U.S. policies. His work has appeared on Tehran Times, Mehr News, Press TV, Iran Daily, IRIB, Fars News, Palestine Chronicle, Salem-News, Khabar Online, Imam Reza Network, Habilian Association, Shiite News, Countercurrents, Uruknet, Turkish Weekly, and Hezbollah. In addition, he has frequently appeared as a guest commentator on Press TV, Al Etejah, and Alalam. A dissenting voice from the “Belly of the Beast”, he currently lives in Las Cruces, New Mexico USA.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia’s ambivalent relationship to terrorism

Saudi Arabia is often accused of supporting jihadist groups. Now, the monarchy is helping Berlin’s security authorities in the fight against terror. What appears to be a contradiction is not.

A jihadi inspired rampage in a regional train near Würzburg; and a bomb attack – designed to kill a large number of people but gone awry – in Ansbach: Both attacks were supposedly orchestrated by men in Saudi Arabia that gave the attackers instructions from afar, via chat.

That is the story the German magazine “Spiegel” is reporting in connection to chat protocols in the possession of federal agencies. The magazine also refers to information provided by a high-ranking government official in the Saudi capital Riyadh. According to the official, several telephone numbers show that the two young men were in close contact with the terrorist organization “Islamic State” (IS) in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi government has now announced comprehensive cooperation with Germany in investigating the recent attacks in Bavaria.

For years, Saudi Arabia has been the source of what has appeared to be contradictory information. First, the country is accused of exporting an extremely conservative strain of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism, which also happens to be the kingdom’s state religion. Shortly after the outbreak of war in Syria, accusations that the monarchy was financing jihadi groups that were not only seeking to topple the Assad government but also create a new “caliphate” under the control of the terror organization “Islamic State” (IS), grew louder. And finally, for years the West has considered Saudi Arabia to be an important partner in the fight against jihadist terror.

Dubious commitment

Sebastian Sons, Middle East expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP), tells DW that the news is not as contradictory as it initially seems. “The Saudi government has been involved in the fight against terror since the attacks on America in September 2001. That was partially a reaction to US pressure. But it was also because institutions in the kingdom were increasingly the target of jihadist attacks as well, first by al-Qaeda and later ‘IS.’”

At the same time there are a number of religious foundations in the country, and some of these, as well as a number of wealthy individuals, have great sympathy for the aims of “IS” and provide the organization with financing. “Such money transactions are now being very closely monitored.” Yet, there is no way to exert total control over them. “Firstly, Saudi Arabia doesn’t have the capacity to do so. And secondly, one has to say that there is serious doubt about whether they have the political will to do so.”

Nevertheless, even if the royal house had the will, it would be able to do little about it. Because the House of Saud, which has controlled the country since it was founded in the eighteenth century, is totally dependent upon the conservative Wahhabis. It is the religious movement that lends the Sauds the ideological legitimacy upon which their rule is based.

Alliance between religion and politics

The moral foundation for the rule of the Sauds was established by a religious scholar hailing from an area near what is now the capital Riyadh. Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, as the scholar was known, was born in 1703, the son of a judge.

Ibn Wahhab developed an entirely new criteria with which to judge the legitimacy of regional rulers. This legitimacy, he said, only existed as long as rulers abided by the tenets of religious faith. Political leaders, according to Wahhab, must comply to the will of god in all that they do. Should they fail to do so, they forfeit their legitimacy.

Thus, subjects were given a clear criteria with which to judge their rulers: Do their actions express the will of god, or not? It was a radically emancipating idea, yet it carried the seed of later abuses in it from the start: For who determines what god’s will is?

Ibn Wahhab came up with a unique solution to the problem: He directly tied religious power to political power. And he did so by seeking out an alliance with the most powerful partner of his day: Prince Saud l., ibn Abd al-Aziz ibn Muhammad al-Saud, the conquerer of the Emirate of Diriyah, the first Saudi state. The prince secured the theological power of his religious partner with his own military might. And in return, the legitimacy of his political rule received the scholar’s religious blessing.

The alliance between these two families, the ruling Sauds and the descendants of ibn-Wahhab responsible for answering all religious questions in the kingdom, has continued to hold until this day.

Unresolved dilemma

This alliance, by necessity, also determines the royal family’s current reaction to terror. “The royal family sees terrorism as an extreme security threat, but it still has to align itself with the Wahhabi scholars in terms of ideology,” says Sebastian Sons. This means that the monarchy is constantly forced to tolerate its – at times radical – world view. They rarely have the luxury of refusing to give their support. “The structure of the Saudi state is based upon the alliance between Wahhabi scholarship and the House of Saud. That is a unsolvable dilemma for the royal family, even today.”

That means that the rest of the world will have to live with the reality of more attacks being orchestrated from Saudi Arabia. As long as ideological extremism cannot be overcome, security measures can only help to a point.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Iran destroys 4 overseas terror groups, invites Saudi Arabia to be rational

Iran’s FM Spokesman Bahram Ghasemi said Mon. that Nojeh airbase in Hamedan is no longer in use by Russian fighter jets and the cooperation has come to an end for the time being.

Bahram Ghasemi in his first press conference as Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman discussed the issue on Iran’s providing of an airbase to Russia whence Russian fighter jets would take off to target and destroy ISIL strongholds in Syria, adding “we had signed no agreement with Russia on this cooperation and our relations are strategic. What matters the most to us and our people is security and we will spare no efforts in securing the country in whatever way possible.”

Ghasemi went on to add, “we have had an understanding with the Russian side on fighting terrorism wherein we agreed to take certain joint measures against terrorists. The Russians’ recent move took place with Moscow’s prior request and Tehran’s confirmation so that they could use our airspace to target terrorists in Syria.”

About Turkish President Erdogan’s visit to Tehran, he said “no exact date has been defined yet, but we will inform the public as soon as a date for President Erdogan’s visit is decided.”

He went on to add, “talks between Iran and Turkey will continue on various levels and in all political, parliamentary, and economic dimensions. We are making efforts to expand our bilateral and regional cooperation with Turkey.”

Ghasemi further stressed that there is no insistence on Iran’s part to persuade Turkey to change its positions in regard to Syria; “we will never impose our views on others, the same way that others cannot impose their views on us. We will only declare our own positions and may reach some common grounds with other countries during negotiations.”

About the upcoming visit of the head of MEK, Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, an anti-Iran terrorist group exiled in France and Iraq, Maryam Rajavi, to Saudi Arabia, he called Saudi officials to take rational and wise measures since stability and security of the region would also benefit the Arab kingdom.

In regard to Iran-UK relations, he said “one of the objectives of the Foreign Ministry is to normalize its relations with the countries that we have no problems with.”

He went on to add, “embassies in Tehran and London are active at the level of Charge d’affaires, and there is the possibility to improve the relations to the level of ambassadors and we are hoping that it will happen in the future.”

He also clarified certain confusions about two cases regarding foreign diplomats in Iran. In regard to the two European diplomats that had faced some problems in one of the western provinces in the country, he said no offense has been made and that the diplomats have travelled there with prior notice and legal permit.

About the news on the arrest of Japanese ambassador, he said “I do not confirm the arrest. I am informed that a misunderstanding had taken place since the Japanese ambassador to Tehran had not been carrying his identification card and was therefore questioned.”

_________________________________________________________

4 terrorist groups annihilated overseas: IRGC

TEHRAN, Aug. 22 (MNA) – Commander of IRGC’s Quds base has announced they have destroyed four anti-Iran groups of terrorists outside Iran.

Major General Mohammad Marani made the remarks in a joint meeting with officials of anti-drug organizations from five provinces in southern and eastern Iran and asserted that “IRGC pursues security in all areas and in issues such as human trafficking, smuggling, and anti-Iran and terrorist groups which are conducted out of borders, we carry out missions overseas with necessary coordinations.”

Gen. Marani described missions in current year as successful and dubbed the fight against anti-Revolution groups trying to infiltrate through eastern borders among most important efforts.

He further elaborated on the terrorist groups which have been destroyed overseas; “one of the groups was known as ‘Furqan Vasl’ led by Amanallah Raeisi and was trying to enter the country to carry out terrorist attacks in central parts of country,” Marani said. “four members of the group were killed about two months ago and Amanallah Raeisi and other four members of the group were arrested with 150 kilograms of drugs.”

Quds base commander in southeast Iran emphasized that borders of the Islamic Republic of Iran are under vigilant protection of security forces and that Arab intelligence services, especially from Saudi Arabia, are trying to insecure eastern borders.

0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts