Based on the finding that the proscribed Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) has ceased its military and terrorist operations since June 2001, the UK POAC ruled de-proscription of the group. The court puts emphasis on the proof that “There is no evidence relied on by the Respondent that the PMOI has at any stage subsequently sought to obtain weapons of any type or undertaken any type of military operations, military training of personnel or recruitment of individuals for potential military operations”. That is a good idea if a terrorist group has decided to renounce terrorism and dissolve military units. But MKO’s aired TV programs, especially following the court’s judgment, are in absolute contradiction with its claims. MKO’s TV network is repetitively broadcasting clips from its military operations, manoeuvres and marches in which women’s presence seems to have greater significance. Even the music concerts are performed in a militaristic atmosphere with choir and singers in military uniforms. Do these programs broadcasted by the official TV network of a proscribed organization corroborate its claims of abandoning terrorism and militarism? These pictures and clips well indicate that claims and words can never be trusted unless proved by action.
Mujahedin Khalq ‘s Function
I have recently posted an interesting piece by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich entitled "Iran Intelligence Report: Another Psychological Warfare?". This was not the first time I had read Soraya’s very interesting and insightful articles about Iran and this latest piece prompted me to contact Soraya and ask her for an interview. Soraya kindly agreed to my request and it is my real pleasure today to resume my "Saker interviews" series with a (virtual) conversation with her.
——-
Q: First, could you please introduce yourself in a couple of words. I know that you have an interesting bio and that you lived in several countries, including Iran. Could you please give us some details about yourself?
A. I am an Iranian-American with a degree from International Relations from U.S. As an independent researcher, I have focused on U.S. foreign policy towards Iran and Iran’s nuclear program and the role of lobby groups in foreign policy decisions. I think of myself as a peace activist and have become a political essayist because I think that building awareness is important and people can make a change. I am also a public speaker and radio commentator.
Q: Also, just to set the record straight, do you consider yourself a supporter or an opponent of the current government of the Islamic Republic of Iran?
A. I support a secular democracy. Having said that, I must emphasize that there is a clear distinction between Iran as a country, as a nation with over 10,000 years of history, and the current government policies. While I disagree with the internal policies of the Islamic Regime of Iran regarding human rights and democracy, I strongly support Iran’s right for independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Q: In your article you mention the Mojahedeen-e Khalgh (MEK) group. In the western corporate media it is very rarely mentioned. This group is listed on the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations but a number of observers have also alleged that this group is supported by the USA and especially the CIA. What can you tell us about this group, its activities in Iran and its relationship with the USA?
A. Mojahedeen-e Khalgh/National Council of Resistance (also known by their acronyms MEK/MKO/NCRI) is a terrorist group in every sense. U.S. and EU also consider them as a terrorist group, and yet they are supported by the United States. In act, it is such an irony that Mr. Bush declares a war on terror, depletes our treasury, American soldiers die in order to keep us safe from terrorists, yet our tax dollars are being spent not on keeping terrorists in comfort. Upon invading Iraq, 3800 MEK terrorists were given special persons status by the orders of this administration. When this order was issued, there was considerable surprise even at the State Department briefing (source: US State Department Daily Briefing).
These sentiments are echoed in Europe where their leader roams around the European parliament. Hardly the treatment a terrorist should receive.
As for their relation with Iran – The MEK is deeply hated by the majority of Iranians because of their [alliance] with Saddam Hossein during the Iran-Iraq war. The MEK are responsible for killing Iranians and the American government now thinks they can install them as a substitute to the Iranian regime.
The MEK claims to have exposed Iran’s nuclear plant under construction “ however, Sy Hersh exposed their Israeli connections. And the essay I wrote, further exposed the role the US/Israel has in mind for them.
Q: Even before the publication of the 2007 NIE it was quite obvious that all this nonsense about an alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program being developed right under the noses of the IAEA inspectors was just a pretext for "regime change" in Iran. But what about the accusation that Iran is training, funding, arming and even possibly directly supporting various Shia factions in Iraq, including the Badr Corps and the Mehdi Army? What do you make of the US accusation that the Pasdaran’s Quds Force is operating in Iraq against US occupation forces?
A. I have not seen any credible evidence to support these accusations. But, the Iraqi government at the highest level such as Prime Minister Nouri Maleki, Minister of Foreign Affairs Hoshyar Zebari, all have repeatedly appreciated Iranian cooperation for Iraq’s stability and security. However, I just find it odd that the U.S. is always losing military equipment. Not only was the war planning poor, but it seems that the arms are coming from the US, and not from Iran. In the latest scandal it has been discovered that $1 billion in military equipment is missing in Iraq.
Laura Strickler, CBS News, said, "Tractor trailers, tank recovery vehicles, crates of machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades are just a sampling of more than $1 billion in unaccounted-for military equipment and services provided to the Iraqi security forces, according to a new report issued today by the Pentagon Inspector General and obtained exclusively by the CBS News investigative unit."
Q: In his testimony to Congress General Petraeus said: In the past six months we have also targeted Shia militia extremists, capturing a number of senior leaders and fighters, as well as the deputy commander of Lebanese Hezbollah Department 2800, the organization created to support the training, arming, funding, and, in some cases, direction of the militia extremists by the Iranian Republican Guard Corps’ Qods Force. A Hezbollah "department 2800" directed by the Quds Force, that sounds very specific. What do you make of that accusation?
A. This is curious indeed. World Public Opinion came out with a poll taken in 4 Moslem countries, Egypt, Morocco, Indonesia, and Pakistan. With a vast margin, they all thought that the US is seeking to undermine Islam. Every time there is news of an incident, it is reported as ‘Islamist radicals, Islamist terrorist, racial Islam’ and so forth. Not a single terrorist is identified by his or her nationality, they are always identified by their religion, I presume because we lack the intelligence to identify the perpetrator’s nationality – unless we want to make a point about Islam being a terrorist religion. – which could explain why the Moslem world is so apprehensive about America. So I am dumbfounded how in Iraq, General Petraeus who I dare say is the Green Zone, managed to know exactly who is training a specific group in such minute detail. One must also understand that Hezbollah has fought hard to become a legitimate group in Lebanon – it is one thing to fight against Israel as a force, another to be ‘terrorists’ in Iraq. Moreover, if Iran wants to do something in Iraq, regretfully, it has its own people.
Q: The Neocons have succeeded in getting Congress to pass a resolution declaring that the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution (Pasdaran) is a ‘terrorist’ organization. Since the latter are under the direct command of Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, does that not amount to declaring him and the entire Iranian government as ‘terrorist’?
A. Since Ayatollah Khamenei is the chief commander of Iranian Army and Revolutionary Guards as well, then one might assume that Ayatollah himself is accused indirectly. I forget how many years it has been since they have said Iran is a state sponsor of terrorists. But, I don’t think those who passed this resolution, really meant the Ayatollah. I think the main purpose of this resolution is to create a dispute between the two main branches of Iranian military organization–the regular Army and the Revolutionary Guards on one hand and also to justify economic pressure on the Revolutionary Guards, such as blocking its assets outside Iran.
However, Mr. Rafsanjani (the former president and the current Chairman of the Assembly of Experts) responded to this law that it is against the entire Iranian nation. And even the moderates such a former president Khatami expressed almost the same opinion, but in a different way. Moreover, it seems that there is not much enthusiasm to enforce this resolution.
Q: Speaking of Ali Khamenei, he is a very interesting figure. According to Wikipedia, he is not Persian but Azeri and even though he is at the helm of a majority Persian country he is also the spiritual leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah and its leader Hassan Nasrallah (even though most Lebanese Shia are followers of Grand Ayatollah Sheikh Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, a Lebanese Arab). What is your take on this little know personality (at least in the West), on his role in today’s Iran, and on his relationship with President Ahmadinejad?
A. Yes, that’s true Ali Khamenei as a religious leader and as an Ayatollah has many followers and not just in Lebanon. In Shia, there is no Pope-like figure that everyone follows. All Shia Grand Ayatollahs, whether Arab or Iranian, while they have common and extremely close perception of Shiism even as they hold different view in many details. For example, the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani in Najaf, who was born in the Iranian city of Mashhad is the most influential man in Iraq, who can send shockwaves through Iraq with a Fatwa. All Iraqi Shias listen to him and follow his command in despite of Iraqis being Arabs.
So, the same holds for Lebanon; many Shias despite being Arabs follow Ayatollah Khamenei as their spiritual leader while others follow Grand Ayatollah Fadl-Allah – These two are close friends. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah is a political leader and not a spiritual leader, though he is a medium rank Shia cleric. Nasrallah came out as a hero for defending Lebanon against Israel during the 33-day war – Ahamadinejad is a hero to many for resisting the U.S. intimidation and defending Iran’s sovereign right.
Q: There have been a number of changes at the head of the Pasdaran recently with Brigadier General Mohammad Ali Jaafari replacing Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi who was appointed to the position of Senior Advisor to the Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei for Military Affairs. Similarly, Saeed Jalili has replaced Ali Larijani as Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and chief nuclear negotiator. What do you make of these changes? Are they are reflection of infighting among various groups inside the Iranian government?
A. It is hard to say, it could be because of many reasons. As you may know, it is a policy in any country that no one should occupy a key position, specially in the military and security for a long period. That is what happens and even in the U.S. high-ranking generals, in spite of their loyalty and service are replaced all the time. I think, this could be the main reason for the recent changes in Sepah (the IRGC or Pasdaran. VS), though, I do not exclude other possibilities.
Q: What kind of political opposition is there in Iran today? What has been going on between the ‘Conservative’ and ‘Reformist’ parties in Iran? What about the so-called ‘ultra-conservatives’ lead by Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi? It is often said that President Ahmadinejad has disappointed his supporters? Is that true and, if yes, who do you believe might succeed him?
A. "Ahmadinejad: rock star in rural Iran" (see CS monitor article)
Q: According to Wikipedia, Iran is only 51% Persian. The US has often used the ethnic diversity of the countries who dared to refuse its supremacy to break them apart into smaller, subservient, parts fully dependent on Washington’s goodwill. One only needs to see how the US financed and supported the various nationalist movements in the former Soviet Union or former Yugoslavia to impose its rule by the old ‘divide and conquer’ tactic. Is there are risk that the USA might repeat this with Iran?
A. Wikipedia is not a very reliable source. As you know, very often some people might change and edit the posted material. Furthermore, nobody knows exactly the precise percentage of ethnic diversity of Iran. Even the Iranian government can’t give the exact figure, what is at hand is based on guestimations. For centuries, Iranians have intermingled from different parts of Iran, greater Persian Empire and even different parts of the Middle East. So, it is really foolish to map out Iran based on ethnicity.
But, the second part of your question about the possibility of creating ethnic problem for Iran, I say yes, there might be small groups of western-supported separatists, like PJAK [Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan] who commit terrorism. Please see the article Movers and Shakes of U.S. foreign Policy
But the analogy of the former Soviet Union or even former Yugoslavia is not appropriate here. The former Soviet Union was made of different Nations occupied by Russia. The former Yugoslavia came to existence only after World War I. On the other hand, Iran has been a nation for more than 2500 years. The sense of national pride and long history is very strong amongst the vast majority of Iranians.
by VINEYARDSAKER
The existing tension between the United States and Iran has compelled the US in the past years to collect intelligence on Iran from various exile organizations including Mojahedin-e Khalg Organization (MKO) that has long been leading a violent struggle against the Iranian regime and was even aligned with Saddam ‘s regime that was at war with Iran. Although its ideology is a blend of Marxism with Islam and from the very initiation strongly advocated an anti-American policy, but in recent years, having taken a 180 degree turn, has begun trying to put forward a thousand and one arguments to prove that it has dropped its Marxist rhetoric and is an apostle of democracy for Iranians.
In December 2002, in spite of being listed on the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, MKO informed the US government of the existence of two nuclear sites in Iran. However, Sy Hersh later revealed in”The New Yorker” that Israel had provided the group with the information that it boasted as its own piece of intelligence to reveal Iran’s nuclear threat. From then on, it worked as a good subject to feed the group’s propaganda machine, an alibi to advance its own cult-like ambitions that had nothing to do with Iranian’s true wills. But the machine seems to be dropping as of the Monday.
The latest release of a collective study by all 16 US intelligence services, known as the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), reveals that Iran has turned its back on its nuclear ambitions since 2003. It is a great disappointment to MKO that a big bulk of its propaganda activities concentrates on Iran’s nuclear threat. Of course, MKO has nothing to lose as an opposition group that hardly respects political ethics in its struggle. It is much a new challenge for the US for having put any trust in a proscribed terrorist group that is heavily built on the structure of a cult of personality.
In a recent article entitled Intelligence on Iran Still Lacking, it is explicitly stated why the US has to remain skeptical of expatriate groups like MKO, aks MEK and NCRI.
Perhaps the MEK’s greatest claim to fame was its discovery of clandestine enrichment activity at Natanz in 2002. Shortly thereafter, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) pressed Iran to open the facility up to international inspectors. The U.S.-based Iranian expatriate community and MEK also provided useful intelligence on the existence of Arak, a heavy-water research reactor in Iran. With the State Department now having a more pronounced role over Iran policy, some experts expect Washington to work less closely with Iranian exile groups like the MEK. Paul R. Pillar, a career CIA officer and professor of security studies at Georgetown University, says it’s wise to remain skeptical of expatriate groups. “Iran has its Chalabis, too,” Pillar says. Ahmed Chalabi, briefly a deputy Iraqi prime minister after Saddam Hussein’s ouster, is widely criticized for providing faulty intelligence to the United States about Iraq’s weapons programs and exaggerating his own ability to win support inside Iraq. “There are some lessons to be drawn from having your intelligence coming from some quarters and not others,” Pillar concludes.
Sattar Orangi comments on Coucil of Foreign Relations Article, December 5, 2007
Referring to recent news released by Washington Post , Reuters , CNN and the Chinese newspaper People’s Daily, Cernig goes through a propaganda claim about how 300,000 Iraqis supposedly signed a petition complaining about alleged Iranian involvement in Iraq. The claim is strongly supported by a globally blacklisted terrorist organization, Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), aka MEK, PMOI, NCRI. It is not the first time that the terrorist group, on the verge of expulsion from Iraq, exaggerates the supposed number of some supporters, this time 300,000. As Cering says:
That’s a lot, isn’t it?
But…
It isn’t as many as when this story was last hawked around, back in June. Then, according to the MeK’s own website, it was 450,000 members of the Iraqi tribes of Diyala who were condemning Iran’s presence as part and parcel of expressing "full solidarity with the Mujahideen Khalq (MEK)"
But…
Even that is nothing compared to the attempt before that to hawk the self-same story. Back in June 2006, the MeK’s political wing – the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which FOX News expert on Iran Alireza Jafarzadeh used to be spokesman for – announced that:
Solidarity Congress of Iraqi People announced the support of 5.2 million Iraqi’s to a declaration condemning Iranian regime’s meddling in their country. The declaration also lends support to People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran [The MeK’s other alias – C] whose presence in Iraq has acted as a major obstacle to mullahs’ fundamentalist ambitions in Iraq. The announcement was made before a huge crowd of Iraqis in Ashraf City on June 17.
Ashraf City, by the by, is the MeK’s own name for "Camp Ashraf" – the rather salubrious location, situated conveniently close to iraq’s biggest munitions dump – where thousands of MeK members are "guarded" by a handful of US and Bulgarian troops.
Back then, the breakdown of the notable signatories to the petition was even more admirable:
121 political parties and social groups, 700,000 women, 14,000 lawyers and jurists, 19,000 physicians, 35,000 engineers, 320 clerics, 540 professors, 2,000 tribal sheikhs and 300 local officials among 5.2 million signitaries of the declaration.
Maybe it was the claim that fully a third of Iraq’s population had signed something supporting such an odious terror group that lead to general disbelief and the story sinking without a trace.
So either the folk supporting the MeK against an alleged infiltration of the Iraqi government from top to bottom are changing their minds – by the millions – or the latest version is just the MeK scaling down their entirely fictitious nonsense to a more believable level.
Were it not for the fact that anti-Iranian rhetoric is currently fashionable, and is being stirred at every opportunity by U.S. neoconservatives both in and out of the White House, this latest story would have sunk without a trace too.
The revolutionary seizure of some members and sympathizers’ properties by the agents of MKO has long been justified in the organization as one of the approaches to raise funds for the group’s budget. Even before the Islamic revolution of 1978 in Iran, MKO and some active armed militia advocated bank robberies and similar ransacking acts as revolutionary deeds to support the struggle. As confessed by Ali Mihandust, a member of MKO tried in Pahlavi’s reign, such acts were justified as part of urban warfare:
A look over the course of struggle during the past year and the extension of blasts, confiscation of the banks, assassinations, kidnapping and similar acts are all evidences of ongoing urban warfare in our society. [1]
The reasoning for involving in these illegal and criminal fundraising activities is more a result of the ideological influences of Marxism and modelling on some other terrorist and militia groups. The majority of the groups that MKO modelled after justifiably followed Machiavellianism in their line of struggle. Of course, the deeds are rationale according to ideological infrastructures, and as Walter Reich explain:
The cause, as codified in the group’s ideology, according to its line of reasoning, becomes the rationale for acts the terrorists are driven to commit. [2]
Believing to be a forerunner in an anti-capitalism struggle, MKO rationalized their illegal accumulation of revenues. They believed that what they did was an inconspicuous and undeclared war against the domination of capitalism. Permitted by MKO’s leadership, a number of members employed by some private and state-owned European firms and factories purloined sums of money and properties both to meet their running expenses and to accomplish the struggle. Ali-akbar Rastgou, an ex-member, quotes Massoud Rajavi justifying theft and purloin:
Through these deeds [theft] we recover our violated rights from the dominant capitalism in the West. It is also lawful according to Islamic laws since the Prophet himself before the reign of Islam 1400 years ago looted the mercantile caravans, being at war with them, and seized their properties to solve his military financial problems. They called it revolutionary seizure. [3]
An important point to mention is that Mojahedin’s leadership had banned the top cadres to be engaged in such activities because of their key role in diplomatic relations. As Rastgou explains:
The outcome of some meetings was Rajavi’s order, except for the members of diplomatic bodies, to all allied associations and sympathizers to take advantage of revolutionary seizure for financial autarky. Consequently, the associations initiated special departments to organize for these crooking deeds. [4]
These are the most common activities among some cults and particularly in MKO as fundraising operations. Another technique manipulated by MKO to raise fund is involving in sophistically organized financial activities.
The organized financial activities
It is the most common technique manipulated by MKO to accumulate big revenues. To involve in illegal financial activities, MKO needs to indirectly register and initiate commercial institutions as well as taking part in private shareholding and investment business under different alias because of the imposed bans following its acknowledgment as a terrorist group. Stealthy and underground financial activities have so far remained as undiscovered. Nobody can believe that accumulation of big sums of money in the organization, as discovered by the French police in its raid into MKO’s headquarters in Paris, come from donations of sympathizers. In this respect, Antoine Gessler believes:
Money remains one of the big unknowns in PMOI’s financing. Must we believe Maryam Rajavi when she flatly claims that the money all comes from fundraising among the Mojahedin and their supporters? This was notably the case in explaining the millions of dollars uncovered during”Operation Theo”. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The PMOI has a lot more at its disposal. [5]
Maryam Rajavi’s claim is in total contradiction with the police investigation that is dubious about the source of the found money:
This statement is in serious contradiction with the police investigators who all note that large amounts of PMOI money circulate around the world through”dirty”networks. [6]
Implicitly stated, it is proven that the organization is involved in a variety of widespread illegal and clandestine activities. According to released information by DST, French Counter-intelligence, certain members on behalf of the organization are involved in dubious, financial activities:
The study of the accounts of certain members of the organisation shows this complexity. The large sums involved and managed by these individuals far exceed their own professional income. They are, in fact, usually without any real profession, or business activity, at least as far as the tax authorities and social institutions are concerned. [7]
Antoine Gessler further points out to the complexity of the organization’s financial networks:
The identification of the financial networks of the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran is anything but easy. The organisation has set up international financial circuits that are very complex. Their opaqueness is such that they are very difficult to ‘read’. The source and destination of the funds are often unknown. [8]
The extension of the fund network makes it a hard task to discover the gathering and channelling of revenues. No credited person can be traced for deposits and redeposits that easily flow in different countries unnoticed:
Information from many sources about the flow of these funds between networks of bank accounts shows a closed circle, difficult to penetrate and evaluate. For example, an account receives deposits from Jordan, Belgium, Germany, etc. and is then debited for new redeposits in France, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Great Britain, Switzerland, Luxemburg, the United States and so on. [9]
Unproved presence of members and sympathizers in the circle of financial activities in the Western countries complicates identification of fund collection. But, there is no doubt that none of these activities are legal since the organization well justifies the means to achieve the end.
Sources:
[1]. The Last Defense of Martyred Mojahed Ali Mihandust; Published by MKO.
[2]. Walter Reich and Walter Laqueur; Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind, 35.
[3]. Ali-akbar Rastgou; Mojahedin mirrored in the history.
[4]. Ibid.
[5]. Antoine Gessler; Autopsy of an Ideological Drift, translated byThomas R. Forstenzer, chapter 15.
[6]. Ibid.
[7]. Ibid, chapter 14.
[8]. Ibid.
[9]. Ibid.
The excerpt from chapter 14 of Antoine Gessler’s “Autopsy of an Ideological Drift” exclusively discussing MKO’s illegal fundraising and financial activities.
Finance
The PMOI needs a big budget to support its activities. These include managing its real estate, its communications system, the travel of its militants and the maintenance of its Anny in Iraq. According to our information, the organisation does not use illegally obtained funds. On the other hand, the PMOI and some of its members are under indictment or civil action for misallocation of funds. This is notably the case in Germany, where significant sums of German private donations and State subsidies were used, in fact, for the purchase of arms for PMOI terrorists and militants in Iraq.
Part of their finances comes from fund raising among individuals and groups of Iranian expatriates. This is done by the PMOI representatives in Europe, North America and the Middle East. Another part comes from its own members dues. They are required to pay regular”tithes”to the organisation. Finally, there was Saddam Hussein. He was the main funder, providing sums estimated at several hundred million dollars.
The identification of the financial networks of the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran is anything but easy. The organisation has set up international financial circuits that are very complex. Their opaqueness is such that they are very difficult to ‘read’. The source and destination of the funds are often unknown. There is a clear policy of hiding the organisation’s financial operations, a source of pride to a membership tempered in clandestine operations.
The financial assets of the People’s Mojahedin of Iran travel through a complicated web of bank accounts in France, throughout Europe, in North America and in the Middle East. The legal holders of these accounts are either real people or private groups, many domiciled in France.
As to the private groups, the Iran Aid Association has as its official humanitarian and social aim the collection of funds in French territory from private donors. They place the vast majority of these monies in foreign personal ban~ accounts, largely in Turkey and the Arab Emirates. These are countries in which all trace of the funds is lost, especially their final destination. Strongly suspected of financing the PMOI’s terrorist war against Iran, as well as its terrorist operations inside the country, the Association succeeds in violating its private, non-governmental status in France, by flouting its statutes and humanitarian basis in law…
Information from many sources about the flow of these funds between a network of bank accounts shows a closed circle, difficult to penetrate and evaluate. For example, an account receives deposits from Jordan, Belgium, Germany, etc. and is then debited for new redeposits in France, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Great Britain, Switzerland, Luxemburg, the United States and so on.
The study of the accounts of certain members of the organisation shows this complexity. The large sums involved and managed by these individuals far exceed their own professional income. They are, in fact, usually without any real profession, or business activity, at least as far as the tax authorities and social institutions are concerned. The account holders are, thus, very difficult, almost impossible to find. They are all housed at ‘convenience’ addresses of”convenience”, where they most certainly do not reside.
Following the released reports of two Mojahedin-e Khalq members going on trial before a French court for allegedly helping a third member burn herself to death during a 2003 protest, the Mojahedin-run media are engaged in a vast propaganda blitz to disclaim allegations. The two are charged with ‘provoking suicide’ and allegedly providing gasoline for a woman to set herself on fire in broad daylight. The propaganda machine of the organization, by furnishing details from the trial, attempts to instill that:
– the committed self-immolations in Paris were unorganized but self-initiated deeds
– the deeds were carried out in opposition to the members’ presumed expulsion from France
– Mojahedin disclaim allegations of involving in terrorist acts against civilians and masterminding self-immolations
– the presence of at least one of the victims of the self-immolations, Marzieh Babakhani, in the course of the trial to announce that her self-burning was a self-decided act is a ploy to vindicate allegations of ‘provoking suicide’ and that, suicides were not pressured by the organization
– although not indicated in the file in the process, defendants insist to disapprove allegations of the group’s being engaged in cult-like activities
Any of the above cases can be discussed in detail, but of the importance is the absence of any acceptable evidence to acquit the defendants of the allegations. According to the existing videotaped evidences, the prosecution can charge that the two were not only aware of the suicide’s intention but also provided for her to commit self-burning. It alleges that the two men on trial were filmed on June 18, 2003, buying fuel from a gas station in the vicinity of the scene where she was abetted to set herself on fire.
In none of the defendants’ defences, as reported by Mojahedin-run media, there can be found evidences in relation to the file in process. For instance, the defense argues that Sediqheh Mojaveri, one of the two women who died of self-burning injuries, set herself ablaze because she had been threatened with expulsion from France to Iran. Not only there exists no evidence to her claimed cause of self-immolation, but in no way such defense acquits the suspects of their allegations. In fact, Mojahedin intend to distract the social opinion of the main issue for which the trial is set. Furthermore, they can present no proven evidence that the French government at the time had reversed her right to asylum.
Her expulsion as a refugee required certain procedures and her political condition as well as any possibility of risking her life would be taken into consideration. Besides, unless she had violated the regulations, the French government had no alibi for her expulsion. Indeed it raises a question that how two people contribute to the act of suicide for their third colleague to save her on the poor supposition that her life might be at risk.
The engagement of the refugees, being known as the members of a notorious terrorist cult, in such appalling activities in opposition to what is not beyond mere supposition indicate that Mojahedin hardly respect the regulations of the country wherein they have been granted asylum. It can also be concluded that they resort to cult-like practices against the civil and democratic laws of a country even before they are put into practice for any justifiable reason.
The propaganda scenario prepared by Mojahedin also attempts to clean Maryam Rajavi’s name of the allegations that her arrest was the cause to initiate such cult-like suicidal operations. But it is so easy a task to prove that encouragement of the members to commit self-immolation was an exalted strategy in the process of the organization’s ideological revolution as a working leverage against any made restriction by France. To wash Maryam Rajavi’s hands of the perpetrated self-immolations following her arrest, Mojahedin’s media quotes Pierre de Bousquet, the DST’s director at the time, saying “unfortunately, Mrs. Rajavi, because of the custody conditions, lost the opportunity of being immediately informed of the events happening outside to stop them”.
Such claims further prove the key role of Maryam Rajavi as Mojahedin’s she-guru to instigate or frustrate these cult activities. Even at the same time, Pierre de Bousquet had said the organisation could no longer claim that its aim was to defend human rights and bring about democracy. He said, as reported by the Observer, “The attempts at self-immolation to protest against the arrest of Madame Radjavi are proof of a new fanaticism. Auvers was to become the Mujahideen’s world headquarters after the loss of bases in Iraq.”
Stated in Mojahedin leaders’ messages at least in the past four years, suicidal activities have been advocated as working leverages against French legal bodies’ verdicts especially after the ruling of the European Court of Justice on December 12, 2006 to unfreeze the organization’s assets. Although the court has never ruled that MKO should be removed from the list of banned organisations, but under the pretext of the ruling, the organization chances orchestrating other activities.
How Mojahedin’s leaders accredit suicidal operations as solutions to encountered problems while denying cult allegations is a matter of consideration. The evidences being so evident, how can they convince the court that the committed self-immolations were the result of an abrupt and self-initiated outburst for personal reasons? And how do they justify their paradoxical mannerism of calling the victims of the immolations as heroes and martyrs?
Regardless of any verdict that the two suspects might face if convicted, for those who have developed a deep understanding of Mojahedin’s internal relations within Camp Ashraf and their European headquarters there remains no doubt that such suicidal activities are provoked by the organization itself. The two on the trial are not the only indictable suspects of the alarming elf-immolations. None of them can truly exemplify the model of the cult and terrorist entrepreneurs who, in both hideout and broad daylight, encourage and provoke such inhuman, undemocratic practices for ambitious, cult causes. They are the chief indictable villains escaping the law.
Rajavi tries to copy Chalabi
The session 131 of Saeed Shahsavandi’s recent interview with the Voice of Iran, originally in Farsi, mainly focused on the issue of MKO’s turning into a plaything in the hands of the West worked against Iran. He said “Mojahedin are a part of a carrot and stick policy the West has adopted to confront Iran”.
Expressing his regret over Mojahedin’s easily yielding to be exploited by the Western powers in their political dispute with Iran Shahsavandi said:
“It is so awful and regrettable to see Mojahedin are gadgets exploited by American’s neocons and hawks.”
Explaining on the disappearance of Massoud Rajavi and the underlying causes, he said that Rajavi had nothing more to present. He has already talked of whatever position and stances he is holding and has nothing more to add. The only fact he has to come and admit is that his past strategies have proved to be nothing more than failure today. “He has to come and admit that we have erred in our policies. Of course, he will be consequently descended of the imam-like status he is holding among Mojahedin.”
Shahsavandi asserted that Mojahedin, and Rajavi in particular, play the same role as did Ahmad Chalabi in winning acceptance for the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq. The same as Chalabi, Rajavi also claims his goal is a democratic government in his homeland. However, Rajavi’s destiny will never be better than Chalabi even if his dreams can find an opening into the world of reality.
www.shahsawandi.com
According to Mehr News Agency, Iran has rejected alligations made by Proscribed Terrorist cult, Mojahedin Khaq Organisation (aka: National Council of Resistance) that Iran is constructing a secret underground nuclear facility. according to Mr. Javad Vaidi, deputy chief for international relations of the Supreme National Security Council, the repetition of the base less lies by Associated Press (AP) broadcasted at the same time as the start of negotiations of permenant security council members in New York is no more than a failed attempt to disturb the positive atmosphere created by the cooporation between Iran and the Atomic Energy watchdog IAEA.
Link to full report by MEHR NEWS (Persian)
http://iran-interlink.org/fa/?mod=view&id=3243
——————-
Press TV also reported the story:
MKO fueling Iran-West tension
Press TV, September 28, 2007
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=24867§ionid=351020104
The terrorist group MKO has alleged that Iran is constructing a secret underground nuclear facility for military purposes in central Iran.
The group claimed on Thursday that the new underground military facility is located near the Natanz uranium enrichment plant.
The MKO made the allegations at a news conference in Paris and said it has passed its information, which it claims came from sources inside Iran, to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, Austria, but has so far not received a response.
The group gave no evidence to back up its claims.
The People’s Mujahadeen Organization of Iran (MKO) has long been placed on Washington’s and the European Union’s lists of terrorist organizations. It is accused of assisting Saddam in the massacre of thousands of innocent Iraqis, as well as carrying out countless terrorist attacks inside Iran
