Mr. Shaygan, The most recent escapee from the notorious terrorist cult of MKO, returned home and joined his family on 4th July,2010 after twenty two years of membership in the organization, reported Nejat Society Fars Office.
Mr. Alamdar Shaygan, escaped the MKO terror group on 24th April, 2010 after 22 years, and joined the families behind the Ashraf gates.
Mr. Shaygan was welcomed warmly by his family who had been awaiting his return for many years.
In order for any political group to be successful in achieving a political agenda, the group must have national, public support. And yet, in order to gain public support, the group must—in the 
public’s view—be legitimate. The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) aka MKO,PMOI is such a group that has little national, public support, and in turn lacks legitimacy. By and far, most Iranians will assert that the group is neither an authentic nor viable opposition group and it must be examined more closely by foreign nations, particularly Western foreign nations.
Political figures, particularly in the US and Europe, are largely uninformed of the MKO’s enduring and ugly strategy due to heavy and sneaky lobbying by MKO officials who have scarily managed to gain an ear among some politicians and neoconservative think-tank activists. Journalist, Abigail Hauslohner, who writes for Time asserts that, “despite its position on the U.S. terrorist list since 1997, and reports by former members of abusive and cult-like practices at Ashraf, the MEK has gathered support from some surprising places abroad — especially since the U.S. invasion — by pitching itself as a viable opposition to the mullahs in Tehran.” Hauslohner interviewed Gary Sick, a Persian Gulf expert at Columbia University’s Middle East Institute and the author of All Fall Down: America’s Tragic Encounter With Iran. Sick describes that “the MKO have been extremely clever and very, very effective in their propaganda and lobbying of members of Congress." Sick says, "They get all sorts of people to sign their petitions. Many times the Congressmen don’t know what they’re signing." [1]
Raymond Tanter, a professor at Georgetown University is among those who have “sided” with the MKO, but his pledge to them involves a lot more than just a careless signatures. The Georgetown Voice, Georgetown University’s weekly news magazine since 1969, published an article by Will Sommer, on Tanter’s ties to the MKO which among other findings, exposes Tanter’s influence among congress members in the U.S. and parliament members in Europe. Sommer points out that Tanter uses his own pro-MKO books in class, and many students wonder what makes him loyal to the MKO. One student he interviewed concluded that Tanter sounded like he was “a lobbyist for the MEK.” [2]
Sommer furthers that “as the president of the Iran Policy Committee, a non-profit organization that promotes using Iranian oppositionists against Iran, Tanter is a tireless booster for the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK/[MKO]), an armed group of Iranian exiles that seeks to overthrow the Iranian government. Its efforts are hampered by its placement on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations, a classification Tanter says should be reversed so the MEK can counter Iran […] Tanter does not consider himself a lobbyist—because the MEK is considered a terrorist group, advocacy on their behalf is illegal.” [3] And yet, as of 7/12/2010, the MKO shows a photograph of Raymond Tanter at its “Grand Gathering” in Paris.
Since 1979, the Iranian government has had little or limited and fragile support from Western nations; it struggles diplomatically as it tries to establish respect among its own population. Meanwhile, the leaders of the MKO have a lofty plan to save Iran, while peddling the idea that the situation Iran will improve if they themselves replace the Iranian government. While this is a noble and exciting cause, and may appear to naive Westerners to be the solution to the “Iran problem”, in fact it is not. The reason why is because, even in the name of peace and democracy, they lack legitimacy and support both abroad and at home—from which they have been exiled.
The MKO evolved from radical beginnings in 1963 to a full blown cult by 1987. By 2006 in order to boost its image and divert the public from its affinity as a cult, (on behalf of the Israeli government) provided dubious information to U.S. officials regarding Iran’s nuclear program. [4] Currently they are focusing on hard lobbying and a massive propaganda campaign which aims to wipe out its cult-image and ugly terrorist activities, with their main goal of being removed from the U.S. State Department’s terrorist list. In order to do this they broadcast their own cable TV program. They publish their own news magazines. Their website epitomizes their effort to glorify themselves while selling the idea that they are the only option for a “free” Iran despite their brutal and dubious past—a past which includes numerous bloody incidents. The Council on Foreign Relations, a think tank which publishes Foreign Affairs, defines the MEK/MKO as having “targeted Iranian government officials and government facilities in Iran and abroad, and during the 1970s, it attacked Americans in Iran. While the group says it does not intentionally target civilians, it has often risked civilian casualties. It routinely aims its attacks at government buildings in crowded cities. MEK terrorism has declined since late 2001. [Some specific] incidents linked to the group include:
– The series of mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids during 2000 and 2001 against Iranian government buildings; one of these killed Iran’s chief of staff;
– The 2000 mortar attack on President Mohammed Khatami’s palace in Tehran;
– The February 2000 “Operation Great Bahman,” during which MEK launched twelve attacks against Iran;
– The 1999 assassination of the deputy chief of Iran’s armed forces general staff, Ali Sayyad Shirazi;
– The 1998 assassination of the director of Iran’s prison system, Asadollah Lajevardi;
– The 1992 near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian embassies and institutions in thirteen countries;
– Saddam Hussein’s suppression of the 1991 Iraqi Shiite and Kurdish uprisings;
– The 1981 bombing of the offices of the Islamic Republic Party and of Premier Mohammad-Javad Bahonar, which killed some seventy high-ranking Iranian officials, including
President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei and Bahonar;
– The 1979 takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran by Iranian revolutionaries;
– The killings of U.S. military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran in the 1970’s. "[5]
For years MKO operatives inside and outside Iran have committed premeditated murder against civilians and government officials, and the murders stem from a terrorist substance, taking place boldly and randomly. The MKO and its supporters call these attacks acts "resistance against the regime," writes Washington Times journalist Kenneth Timmerman. [6]
After the Rajavis’ fled from Iran to France in 1985, France became their sponsor. And then following the rapprochement between France and Iran, the leaders were expelled to Iraq where they became Saddam Hussein’s proxy force against Iranians, Iraqi Kurds and Iraqi Shiites. Following the collapse of Saddam Hussein, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki wanted them to be expelled from Iraq. In 2009, Abigail Hauslohner documented for Time that, al-Maliki “warned that an Iranian resistance group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), would no longer be able to have a base on Iraqi territory.” [7]
Recently, as the MKO focuses on cleaning up their image, their violence against civilians has dwindled—and so has their ability to influence Western politicians and intellectuals, especially the U.S. figures who view MKO’s terrorist acts against their fellowmen unpardonable. In his June article, Timmerman, with a sense of urgency, addresses American readers, that “the MEK has a long record of carrying out violent attacks inside Iran. During the period leading up to the 1979 revolution, the group proudly murdered U.S. military officers and civilians working in Iran. And while the group’s current leadership and its apologists claim that those attacks were carried out by a splinter group no longer associated with the MEK, eyewitnesses tell me that the MEK continued to celebrate the anniversary of those murders in ceremonies and song in their training camps inside Iraq all through the 1980s.” [8]
As Timmerman and other journalists continue to outline the MKO’s history of aggression and eccentricity, perhaps Westerners will become aware that the MKO is counting on the West’s gullibility. In their homeland however, support from foreign aggressors—particularly Iraq and the United States—works against them. Daniel Byman, the author of Deadly Connections: States That Sponsor Terrorism theorizes that “many terrorist groups fight in the name of liberation, whether national or religious. If a group is perceived as being controlled by a foreign power, however its credibility as a liberation force diminishes […] The Mujahedin-e-Kalq (MEK), a terrorist group that opposes the clerical regime in Tehran, lost any legitimacy it had when it began to conduct operations out of Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war.” [9]
The MKO should never replace any form of government in Iran simply because they are not a legitimate group. They are terrorists.
Sources:
[1] Hauslohner, Abigail. "Iranian Group a Source of Contention in Iraq." Time 5 January 2009: Web. 13 Jul 2010.
[2] Sommer, Will. "Foreign Policy Maverick." Georgetown Voice 28 February 2008: Web. 13 Jul 2010.
[3] Ibid
[4] Porter, Gareth. "Iran Nuke Laptop Data Came from Terror Group." Anitwar.com 1 March 2008: Web. 14 Jul 2010.
[5] Fletcher, Holly. "Mujahadeen-e-Khalq (MEK) (aka People’s Mujahedin of Iran or PMOI)." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 18 April 2008. Web. 14 Jul 2010.
[6] Timmerman, Kenneth R. "IRANIAN OPPOSITION: Who are the terrorists? PJAK is a danger only to the Islamic regime.”Washington Times 22 June 2010. Web. 14 Jul 2010.
[7] Hauslohner, Abigail. "Iranian Group a Source of Contention in Iraq." Time 5 January 2009: Web. 13 Jul 2010.
[8] Timmerman, Kenneth R. "IRANIAN OPPOSITION: Who are the terrorists? PJAK is a danger only to the Islamic regime.”Washington Times 22 June 2010. Web. 14 Jul 2010.
[9] Byman, Daniel. Deadly Connections: States That Sponsor Terrorism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 76. Print.
By Mazda Parsi
In the Alborz Mountains of northern Iran there is an isolated area known as the Valley of the Assassins. It is here where Hassan Sabbah, a charismatic man who died in 1124, founded a 
notoriously violent radical Islamic sect referred to by historians as the Hashaashiyun (the Druggers). Interestingly, this word, hashaashiyun is the origin of the English word assassin, which means killer. In this valley, Hassan Sabbah created a small and very successful empire of dedicated followers from whom he demanded total devotion. Iranian literature and lore preserve the fascination and opinion that Hassan Sabbah systematically created one of the most effective terrorist groups in history. Sabbah’s magnetic personality and uniquely efficient leadership promoted such intense belief and devotion that members, with the pledge of martyrdom, were able to commit assassinations without hesitation. The zealous follower’s committed ferocious acts of killing, believing that there was a purpose to their heinous acts—and that they would be sent to paradise if they were killed while serving their leader. In effect, martyrdom was an essential element in Hassan Sabbah’s power scheme. Indubitably Hassan Sabbah and his followers in the infamous Valley of the Assassins helped lay the foundation for today’s continued fascination of—and for a few, total acceptance of—suicide .
Hassan Sabbah was an educated, well travelled, intelligent man who spent many years as a missionary. When he chose to gain power and control over the community in the Alborz Mountains, his plan worked because he was able to inspire commitment and action as well as kindle complete obedience from his followers—to the point that followers’ previous sense of right and wrong was phased out of their mindset. Hassan Sabbah knew how to wash a brain—to erase all notions of good and bad—to let fade right and wrong. He replaced followers’ thinking with distorted morals: the notion of “good” became obedience toward the leader, and the notion of “bad” became disobedience towards the leader. With this immense power, Hassan Sabbah’s wishes were the followers’ commands—if it was his wish for a follower to kill, the follower killed. If it was his wish that a follower die, the follower died. Thus became the association of the word killer with the word assassin.
Hassan Sabbah’s group was by today’s definition a cult. He had created a deliberate agenda in order to serve himself for the purpose of creating power for himself. The Hashaashiyun devotees martyred themselves believing that they would attain fulfillment only through servitude. In this way, they gradually earned degrees, which put them closer to their leader who they believed represented God.
The cult created by Hassan Sabbah was successful given that it lasted upward of three decades . Hassan Sabbah’s cult epitomized the idea of suicide killings, and had a significant impact on other subsequent cult leaders particularly the husband and wife team, Maryam and Massoud Rajavi of the Mojahedin-e Khalq, a modern radical religio-political group (based in Paris) who bedevils Iran. Because there is an acceptance of this radical notion from a tiny minority in the Middle East, it is only natural that the MEK would take advantage of it, and then exercise such a “killing device” in their programme de formation. For the naïve MEK members, leaders implementing this contrivance would not be abnormal in the hearts and minds of the 
truly dedicated; and committing suicide would not be out of the ordinary because culturally the idea is still present, although most Middle Eastern people and certainly most Iranians would not support such an outrageous “opportunity.”
In a strikingly similar fashion to Hassan Sabbah, in the early1980’s Massoud Rajavi, came to realize that in order to achieve organizational efficiency and maintain his own power, a system must be implemented for the MEK. Professor Ervand Abrahamian—one of the world’s foremost experts on the cult, whose 1989 extensively researched book, The Iranian Mojahedin is still being used to educate professors, politicians and policymakers all over the world—details the cult’s history and evolution. Although it is common knowledge among politically- minded Iranians, Abrahamian affirms that the group officially began in 1963, as a small university student-discussion group. Shortly thereafter, with a revolutionary ideology, they took up arms, and after almost twenty years of growth and some support from Iranians, membership began to dwindle due to the sociological factors which determined their function was not really useful for the Iranian public. Because of this, the group restructured itself into a religio-political sect, and in the mid-1980’s, the Mujahidin, from an outsider’s perspective, had qualified itself as a cult. After renaming itself the “National Council of Resistance of Iran,” the group declared that it was actually founded in 1981. [1]
Abrahamian confirms that “by mid-1987, the Mujahidin Organization has all the main attributes of a cult […] the organization had granted unlimited power to its charismatic leader, [Massoud Rajavi].” He furthers, “Immediately the group had created a rigid hierarchy in which instructions flowed from above and the primary responsibility of the rank and file was to obey without asking too many questions. It has produced its own handbooks, censorship index, world outlook, historical interpretations and, of course distinct ideology—an ideology which, despite the organizations denials, tried to synthesize the religious message of Shiism with the social science of Marxism. It had its own slogans, insignia, icons, relics, ceremonies, rituals and liturgy. It had formulated its own esoteric terminology injecting new meaning into old Islamic words and sometimes coining entirely new terms. It had its own history, martyrs, hagiographies, honored families. It even had its own calendar.
“The organization had adopted its own dress code and physical appearance. It had begun to see the world as divided into two contradictory forces: on one side was the Mojahedin, the vanguard of the select, and those willing to accept its leadership; on the other was Khomeini, the forces of darkness and anyone refusing to accept Mojahedin leadership.
“Essentially the “Mojahedin became increasingly a world unto itself.” [2]
Sadly, in the name of Islam, and in the name of freedom and democracy, after the mid 1980’s, MEK members became increasingly devoted, increasingly isolated—as they were forced to stay on compounds and in camps based in Iraq—the biggest one being Camp Ashraf, where many members are still being housed and are prevented from knowing about the outside world. The MEK leaders, Maryam and Massoud Rajavi remain idols. Members worship them. Today the innocent devotees “volunteer” as suicide bombers or hunger strikers, willing to die for their cause and for their leaders. But the MEK, will never openly admit this practice is required. In January 2009, Iraqi national security adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie’s made a statement to the Washington Post declaring that “a member of the organization had turned himself in to Iraqi security forces and told them that group leaders had instructed him to detonate explosives at the headquarters of the Iraqi security forces.” [3]
In July 2003 upon the arrest of MEK leader Maryam Rajavi, MEK members took to Paris’ streets and engaged in self-immolation. [4] [At least ten] members set themselves on fire in cities across Europe. [5]
The MEK suicidalists are the modern parallels of Hassan Sabbah’s “Druggers” in the Valley of the Assassins. MEK defectors describe the group as a cult. [6] Former MEK members told Human Rights Watch that when they protested MEK policies or tried to leave the organization, they were arrested, in some cases violently abused and in other instances imprisoned. Two former recruits told the human-rights group that they were held in solitary confinement for years in a camp operated by MEK in Iraq under the protection of Saddam Hussein. [7]
The MEK is a group of misguided individuals who do evil things to themselves and others—not out of malice, but out of faith and devotion to a pair of twisted leaders.
References:
[1] Abrahamian, Ervand. The Iranian Mojahedin. London, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. pp.260-1
[2] ibid
[3] Londoño, Ernesto. "Iraq Accuses Iranian Exiles of Plotting Attack". The Washington Post.Wednesday, January 21, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article
/2009/01/20/AR2009012004051.html.
[4] United States Department of State, Naval Post Graduate School. “Mujahedin-e Khalq organization (MEK), Country Reports on Terrorism, 2007”. Dudley Knox Library. April 2008 ‘
<http://www.nps.edu/Library/Research/SubjectGuides
/SpecialTopics/TerroristProfile/Current/MujahedineKhalq.html>.
[5] BBC News, "Iranian fire protests at Paris arrests". June 18, 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2999652.stm.
[6] Allam, Hannah. "Middle East Diary: MEK in Iraq". McClatchy Newspapers .
August 14, 2009
http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/cairo/2009/08/mek-in-iraq.html.
[7] Isikoff, Michael. "Terror Watch: Consider the Source". Newsweek. May 18, 2005
<http://www.newsweek.com/2005/05/17/
terror-watch-consider-the-source.html>.
By Mazda Parsi
Mr. Shaygan, The most recent escapee from the notorious terrorist cult of MKO, returned home and joined his family on 4th July,2010 after twenty two years of membership in the organization, reported Nejat Society Fars Office.
Mr. Alamdar Shaygan, escaped the MKO terror group on 24th April, 2010 after 22 years, and joined the families behind the Ashraf gates.
Mr. Shaygan was welcomed warmly by his family who had been awaiting his return for many years.
Nejat Society congratulates Mr. Shaygan and his family for their reunion after long years of separation.
The complementary report will be published shortly.
On July 26th, when MKO propaganda champagne held a gathering in Jean bouin stadium in a small town called Taverny, Maryam Rajavi had nothing to say except repeating her previous nonsense. She was even unable to present new ideas for MKO members. She could not suggest a solution for the mire MKO was stuck in although MKO made efforts to get rid of it.
I listened to Maryam Rajavi’s speech on Simaye Azadi[MKO’s TV channel] carefully. The conclusion I made was that she implicitly expressed depressing pulses just like those wrinkles on her face which signifies her senility.
As usual she repeated some mottos and clichés, crying loudly but there was no sign of her harmony with the modern world and its evolutions, neither no sign of understanding the reality in her words. The names and positions of people who attended the gathering as MKO sympathizers seemed also astonishing to me. Besides some trivial political figures including the mayors of Ouver Sur d’Oise and Taverny who were generously funded by MKO, you could see John Bolton former American ambassador in UN, who is anti UN and an anti-Iran neo-conservative. Maryam Rajavi might know better than everyone that inviting John Bolton to attend MKO’s gathering and to speak as an MKO sponsor, in fact signifies the refusal of all principals of the struggle once MKO founders insisted on. Being trapped by politic men of the alleged Imperialists and warmongers such as John Bolton and siding with such an anti-Iran person, shows an extreme scandal of the self-assigned president Maryam Rajavi.
A look at thoughts and personality of this warmonger element reveals shocking facts to those who still have a sense of nationalism and patriotism. These facts may clarify the border between right and wrong.
During his speech in the gathering, John Bolton clearly described his anti-Iranian ideas. "I don’t think that sanctions will prevent the regime from its nuclear weapon program. In my opinion, the sanctions can be helpful for the day the regime falls. We need much more than sanctions.
But, who is John Bolton? He is a senior member of American Enterprise Institute, Council of National Policy and an analyst of FoxNews, also an active member of Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.
He is an extremist rightist neo-conservative who was imposed to Collin Powel by Dick Chenny the then American vice-president Iin order to supervise the moderate policies of that retired General. He believes that international treaties and even the UN limit America’s hegemony over the world.
At the time of the meeting of vote of confidence he resorted to dissimulation and deception so he could win 57 pro votes against 43 cons. During that meeting Jesse Helms, the extremist senator who approved the "Helms-Bolton" law to impose sanctions on foreign oil firms in order not to invest in Iran, supported her henchman John Bolton by saying words that revealed Bolton’s nature. "John Bolton is the kind of man with whom I would want to stand at Armageddon …[or what Bible calls] the last battle between good and evil."
Ian Williams, UN’s Washington Report correspondent is completely familiar with John Bolton. He warns:"it is not clear where Bolton stands on Armageddon, but it is clear he has the greatest sympathy with the Christian Right’s world view." among these rightist one may find Dick Chenny, Donald Ramsfeld and his under secretary Paul Wolfovitz. "It would be very dangerous to ignore Bolton’s statement. These are harbingers of endless wars" Williams continues.
Mrs. Maryam Azdanlou [Rajavi] probably invited John Bolton to her gathering despite her perfect awareness of his anti-Iranian views including "the relations of America with other countries should be like that of a hammer and a nail."
Richard Curtiss, a contributor to Washington Report reveals that "Bolton seems very dogmatic in his prejudices. He has champagned tirelessly against the International Criminal Court".
Bolton is a supporter of Wolfwitz’s "Opposite Domino Theory", according to Mark Perlman, a correspondent of Forward journal. Wolfowitz believes that invading Iraq would serve as a domino to extend the US’s influence in other parts of the region.
John Bolton who once played an important role in mobilizing the White House and Pentagon to invade Iraq, is now seeking more tensions between Washington, Tehran and Damascus Public opinion, believes that Bolton operates as a radical figure to create a balance against some American moderate politicians. Bolton views Iran and Syria as serious threats to Israel and never allows them to harm Telaviv’s security and esteem. During Bush, the father administration, he prevented the approval of a law that would see Zionism equivalent to Racism. Also, when in London he was asked why Washington would not take a similar approach towards Israel’s nuclear program, he answered:"the US is concerned about the threats against us and our allies ….we do not protect Israel but we protect the benefits of the US."
American famous journalists and experts think that what makes Bolton’s call for Iran’s ban (according to NPT) on its nuclear program funny, is that Bolton himself never believes in respecting international laws.
About four years ago, John Bolton declared clearly: "It’s a big mistake for us to grant validity to international law even when it may seem in our short-term interest to so."
Despite what public opinion expect "Bolton has been a staunch advocate of the Bush administration’s revival of the "Star Wars" missile defense system and its rejection of the anti-Ballistic Treaty." Richard Curtiss writes.
"John Bolton is to diplomacy as Jack the Ripper was to sugury, said Ian Williams to Nation Magazine.
Now, there is a question to ask Maryam Azdanlou: when you and other leaders of MKO terrorist cult are in the same campaign with anti-humane and anti-Iranian politicians and supported by them, what is your position?
Are you in position of a patriot or that of a traitor or our enemy’s mercenary?
By Arash Rezaiee
In the 1920’s Joseph Stalin, in the spirit of socialization, had plans for justice, democracy and peace. He envisioned a classless society. But his narrowness of perspective combined with an ethnically and politically diverse population became a major challenge in building unity and 
consensus. Slavery flourished. And ultimately what became central during his tenure was the building of his cult of personality. His totalitarian leadership, perpetual lying, and deception eventually ushered in the near-destruction of Soviet Russia. Eventually Stalin had no support from the people he so desperately wanted to save.
More than half a century has passed since the world has known of Stalin’s terror and his cult of personality. But beware: There is similar potential retribution toward the country of Iran as the dissident group, Mujahedin el Khalq (MKO) attempts to use the media to sell a message that they exist in the name of justice, democracy and peace. Former members of the group have compared its leaders to Stalin. [1]
Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the MKO, like Stalin, is also a cult of personality and her justice-democracy-peace campaign is deceitful. Her cheap catch-words for the organization’s ultimate goal of overthrowing the Iranian regime—and this goal has been in place for more than three decades—are wrong. In the MKO’s grand effort to achieve power in Tehran, they have stepped up their focus on trying to erase a weird, violent, and bloody past while increasing effort to legitimize their current fiction.
Sam Dealey, a journalist, who in January 2010 became Editor in Chief for the Washington Times, specified eight years ago how the MKO managed to win the support of mainstream US politicians. Dealey’s well researched claim is that “the [MKO’s] political representatives in the U.S. have worked hard to repackage the group as a legitimate dissident organization fighting for democracy in Iran—whitewashing its record and duping our leaders.” [2] And Dealey’s statement still applies today because currently the same political representatives—the crisis mongers of the MKO—are challenging the West’s policy towards Iran while feeding the public mendacity. After a 30-year track record of fabrication, the group’s latest headliner sham proclaims that Iran has nuclear capabilities. But fortunately some US politicians who are aware of the MKO’s track record of producing false and misleading information, along with weapons inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are very suspicious about what MKO leadership says. [3]
After all, in 2003, ten MKO members (two of whom died) staged a bizarre show of solidarity towards their leader, Maryam Rajavi, by setting themselves on fire in cities around Europe. Before the self- immolations even took place, Sam Dealey wrote, “Despite its violent history, the People’s Mujahedin would like to gain international legitimacy as Iran’s ‘government in exile.’ Its immediate goal is to get its name off the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations; to that end, it now purports to support a host of democratic ideals, from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to freedom of religion and the free market. It has even abandoned its revolutionary flag — composed of a Koran verse, a sickle, and a Kalashnikov assault rifle — for that of the former shah, whom they worked to depose.” [4]
As early as 1997, TIME ran an in depth article about the group, citing the State Department’s report that the MKO “has Marxist leanings,” and “few democratic tendencies.” TIME’s journalists, observed that “[MKO] troops wear no insignia of rank, live communally and receive no pay. They have taken a vow to remain celibate until Iran is freed. And all express near fanatical loyalty to the woman they hope to install as the next President of Iran: Maryam Rajavi.” Michael Eisenstadt, an Iran expert at the Washington Institute on Near East Policy asserts that there is an unhealthy cult of personality around Maryam and Massoud Rajavi. He writes, “If they were to achieve power, it is unlikely they would give it up. The [MKO] are simply not a viable alternative to the current regime because of their ties to Iraq.” [5]
Most recently, Ali Safavi, the MKO’s primary lobbyist in Washington DC, and also a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post, is making a huge effort to deviate the public’s attention away from the group’s strange cult practices and history of terror. He’s pushing the message that the MKO is a legitimate option for the future of Iran, and opportunistically maintains that Maryam Rajavi is the "most prominent Iranian opposition leader" who "has called on the West to support democratic change in Iran by the Iranian people and their organized resistance movement.” He urges President Obama to “strengthen Iran’s democratic opposition,” and “set his sights on a strategic Iran policy by removing obstacles on the path of democratic Iranian opposition groups,” and also criticizes the US administration’s smart and cautious policy towards Iran, claiming that “the track of [US] pressure is insufficient and engagement is problematic.” [6] In short Safavi is suggesting that the Obama administration can and should close dialogue and stop diplomacy with Iran, and then remove the MKO from the State Department’s list of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Safavi’s ideal proposal would make way for a terrorist cult group to replace the Iranian government. But Savafi’s proposal must convince more than just the Americans.
Iranians all over the world will admit that the MKO has no support among the Iranian nation. The MKO turned against their own people, as they sided with Saddam Hussein during the war with Iraq. In 2000, Wilfried Buchta of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and author of Who Rules Iran? The Structure of Power in the Islamic Republic, analyzes the formal and informal power structures in the Islamic Republic and assesses both the future of the reform movement and the prospects for peaceful change in Iran. [7] Buchta asserts, "The large majority of Iranians inside and outside the country reject the MEK [MKO] because of its support for Bagdad during the Iran-Iraq war and for its [continued] alliance with Saddam. As a result it has only a small dwindling power base in Iran." [8]
As Iran remains in the spotlight, for the sake of public edification, the reality of the MKO must be exposed. The details of the horrors committed by MKO—either against Iranians or their own members in the organization—were the direct result of their terrorist and destructive cult-like nature. Be aware that their campaign is strong, and that MKO opportunists, with their shifty arrangement of excuses regarding past terrorist activities, believe that the seat of political power will be handed to them by the West—if they can persuade the unaware powerful. They simply exist in a very wrong way. They will vitally need the support of the Iranian people—and this is what they mostly lack.
References:
[1] Peterson, Scott. "Inside a Group Caught Between Three Powers." Christian Science Monitor. December 31, 2003 <http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1231/p10s01-woiq.html>.
[2] Dealey, Sam. "A Very, Very Bad Bunch." National Review. March 25, 2002 <http://old.nationalreview.com/25mar02/dealeyprint032502.html>.
[3] Collier, Robert. "US Gleans Facts on Iran From Debatable Source: Nuclear Arms Allegation Derived in Part From Rebel Group’s Data". San Francisco Chronicle. Sunday, October 26, 2003 <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/10/26/MNGPE2JMGO1.DTL>.
[4] Dealey, Sam. Ibid
[5] Michael Serrill and Edward Barnes, "Armed Women of Iran." TIME MAGAZINE. Monday, April 21, 1997 <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,986213,00.html>.
[6] Safavi, Ali. "Iran Crisis Needs a Firm Response". Huffington Post. May 11, 2010 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-safavi/iran-crisis-needs-a-firm_b_572045.html>.
[7] Buchta, Wilfried. "Who Rules Iran? The Structure of Power in the Islamic Republic". Brookings Institution Press. 2000 <http://www.brookings.edu/press/Books/2000/who_rules_iran.aspx>.
[8] ibid p. 116
By Mazda Parsi
On 19 June 2010, a large hall in Paris was a place of a meeting of more than 200 former members of MKO (Rajavi cult), families of present members trapped inside the cult in Iraq, and a number of reporters and human rights activists.
In this meeting titled “rejecting violence, terrorism and cultic behavior, as well as aiding the families of the victims of Rajavi cult in Ashraf garrison in Iraq”, dozens of foreign personalities, reporters and camera men from various organizations and media were present.
· US to close base near camp housing Iranian exiles
· Iraq confirms its intention to remove the Mojahedin Khalq and the U.S. offers to host them in Europe
· Report of Secretary-General to Security Council May 2010
· Families lobby for PMOI visitation rights
· A book on MEK "Misled Martyrs"
· Mojahedin Khalq (MEK, MKO) and Iraq – bribery, intrigue and chaos
It has been seven years since the arrest of Maryam Rajavi, the leader and so called president of the Mujahedin–e-Khalq (MKO), a foreign terrorist organization. The arrest took place at the MKO headquarters located in Auver Sur d’Oise, Paris, France on June 17th, 2003. Devoted members faced a shocking challenge as their leader was incarcerated. Some even resorted to a violent extreme political protest over the arrest of Maryam Rajavi when they set themselves ablaze. Two women died as a result. These alarming acts of self-immolation pinpoint a human tragedy in the midst of a cult mentality. The tragedy lies not only in the act itself, but in cult members’ numb emptiness and canopy of devotion for their leader, Maryam Rajavi, who used the Paris headquarters as her private sanctuary.
The 2003 arrest came as part of a raid by French police, whose government felt it was a necessary reaction to the MKO conundrum. Along with the arrest of Maryam Rajavi, the raid ended with about 160 other arrests of members and the confiscation of millions of dollars and technical materials.
After the raid, a judicial source told the la-Croix, a French newspaper, that “The intervention of security forces was conducted as part of a commission issued by the anti-terrorist judge Jean-Louice Bruguiere. It particularly results from a long investigation of financial flows which could fall within the ‘financing of terrorism.’ The raid was led by the Directorate of Territorial Surveillance (DST),” [1]
At the time, the BBC reported that Nicholas Sarkozy, now the French President, and then the Interior Minister, said [during the French Assembly on June 17, 2003] that the MKO”recently wanted to make France its support base, notably after the intervention in Iraq. We cannot accept that.”[2]
Such interest and involvement by authorities was crucial for the French government because the MKO has, in order to further their agenda, conducted and participated in violent political attacks against American, Iranian and Iraqi citizens. For too long, France had been tolerating their presence. In the midst of the crackdown, the head of France’s domestic intelligence service, Pierre de Bousquet de Florian, said the group was”transforming its Val d’Oise centre [near Paris] … into an international terrorist base.”[3] In a bizarre show of devotion, after the arrests took place, it became clear that members continued to be forthright and obliging in their blind commitment towards their leader. Ten members, committed senseless acts of self-immolation in an extreme response to the arrest of the leader—for the sake of the leader—not for the sake of the Iranian people. There was outrage among people who follow European news. A contributor to the French website aufeminie.com who under the name Yelann, posted an Agence France-Presse (AFP) article referred to the stories of self–immolation and found the group’s history shocking—from the immolation to the hunger strikes. She surmised they were posing as martyrs, but speculated, “Are they really doing it for their people? It seems they are extremists and fanatics. And generally these actions do no good.” [4] In 1963, with the self sacrifice of Buddhist monk Thich Quang Duc, self-immolation became spotlighted and has since become a popular tactic for gaining political attention. But historically, the act goes back thousands of years. Psychologists suggest it is the result of extreme mental distress—particularly those who have had distress from being culturally isolated from the mainstream, and programmed with a distorted ideology, and who view self-immolation as an option. The International Study for the Center of Terrorism is developing The Global Self-Immolation Events Database (GS-IED). The database, a multi-year project, seeks to identify and track the prevalence and spread of self-immolation in the context of political conflict. Preliminary results from this project will be published in late 2010/early 2011. [5] While studies are needed regarding the relationship between self-immolation and terrorism, it is important to closely examine the possibility of a disturbing predilection. Will others in the MKO French headquarters use this type of aggressive “protest” on European soil in the form of a suicide bomb or with other emblematic terrorist-type acts?
In an article titled, “Sad Spectacle” published in Iranian.com shortly after the coverage of the raid on the MKO, Babak Mazarei, who at the time was a fourth year political science major at Carleton University in Canada, and who knew the brother of one of the people who set themselves on fire, wrote an opinion in response to the tragedy. Mazarei comments, “I wrote a brief piece on the unconditional right of the Mujahedin to express themselves. I, however, do not believe that self-immolation is a legitimate means of protest. Therefore, it is only logical to write a piece that explains my reasons for holding this view, in light of the Mujahedin’s extensive use of self-immolation and the resulting death of a young girl who had so much more to live for.
“The quasi-terrorism engaged in by Mujahedin of late is a testament to their ideological bankruptcy and the hypocrisy of their pro-human rights stance. I was very much angered and disheartened when I learned of the news of Neda Hassani’s death, if not for the hypocrisy this act of human degradation sheds, then certainly for the loss of life. What remains are the People’s Mujahedin. The record of this organization is marred by acts of violence both historically, and most recently, the materialization of protest-suicide in the form of self-immolation. In the 1970’s the Mujahedin assassinated US military personnel, supported the nonsensical siege of the American embassy, and in 1990 under the operation name ‘Operation Great Bahman’ in February 2000 attacked Iranian military sites and government buildings. These acts of violence have only detracted from the credibility of the exiled opposition movement. The very simple, but nonetheless true rule of conduct ‘two wrongs do not make a right’ comes to mind.
“Finally, recently the Mujahedin have resorted to self-immolation. What is disturbing about these latest acts of non-sensical violence is the purpose for which they are being committed. It is not in pursuit of freedom for Iranians that Mojaheds are now immolating themselves, but rather in protest at the incarceration of select members of their leadership.
“This reaction only proves that People’s Mujahedin are not a flexible, open organization, but rather a dogmatic entity with little hope for survival, let alone a legitimate political claim in Iran.”[6]
According to a June 25, 2003 report by New York Times correspondent Elaine Sciolino, French Counter Intelligence service prepared a classified report on the group and its activities. Sciolino details that “An Iranian opposition group operating in France that was the target of a large police operation last week had plans to attack Iranian embassies and assassinate former members working with Iranian intelligence services in Europe.” [7] The [Intelligence] report also said the group, known as the Mujahedeen Khalq, or People’s Mujahedin, had discussed having their members commit suicide by setting themselves on fire to draw attention to their cause.” [8]
Sciolino furthered in a later New York Times article that “it was devotion to Mrs. Rajavi, who is about 50 years old, that led several of her supporters throughout Europe to set themselves on fire to protest her arrest. Although Mrs. Rajavi sent a message from jail asking her supporters to stop, former Mujahedin members said that in training camps in Iraq, self-immolation was praised as a fitting response to the possible persecution of the Rajavis.” [9]
On July 13, 2003, Elizabeth Rubin wrote an article titled “The Cult of Rajavi” for the New York Times. In this article Rubin details her encounters with MKO members she met in Camp Ashraf. Rubin concluded that the Rajavis lead a sect hated in their home country and clarified that,”While Mujahedin press releases were pouring out last month, taking undue credit for the nightly demonstrations, many antigovernment Iranians were rejoicing over the arrest of Maryam Rajavi and wondering where Massoud was hiding and why he, too, hadn’t been apprehended. This past winter in Iran, when such a popular outburst among students and others was still just a dream, if you mentioned the Mujahedin, those who knew and remembered the group laughed at the notion of it spearheading a democracy movement. Instead, they said, the Rajavis, given the chance, would have been the Pol Pot of Iran. The Pentagon has seen the fatal flaw of hitching itself to volatile groups like the Islamists who fought the Soviets in Afghanistan and, more recently, the Iraqi exile groups who had no popular base at home.” [10]
As we observe the anniversary of this human tragedy where members of this cult were either ordered or felt compelled to set themselves ablaze in several European cities, let us remember the deaths of two women who created dreadful scenes—a shameful way to publicize and denounce the arrest of an alleged “resistance movement” leader. Before any more senseless deaths occur, the reality of the MKO must be re-examined not only by the French but by all by European government officials.
References:
[1] Guillemoles, Allain and Emmanuelle Rejue,”Opération contre Les Moudjahidines”. la-Croix.com. 13 June 2010 <http://www.lacroix.com/article/
index.jsp?docId=494032&rubId=4076>.
[2] BBC NEWS,”France investigates Iran exiles”. BBC MMX. 2003/06/22 07:03:17 GMT <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3010422.stm >.
[
3] ibid
[4] Agence France Presse,”Yelann”.”Maryam radjavi, personnage emblématique des moudjahidine, emprisonnée”. aufeminin.ca/société .
posté le 22/06/03 à 14:40 http://forum.aufeminin.com/forum/actu1/__f12971_
actu1-Maryam-radjavi-personnage-emblematique-des-moudjahidine-emprisonnee.html.
[5] Horgan, John, Director.”International Center for the Study of Terrorism”.
Penn State University. 11 June 2010 http://www.icst.psu.edu/current_projects.shtml.
[6] Mazarei, Babak.”Sad Spectacle”. Iranian.com. June 30, 2003 <http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2003/June/BM/index.html>.
[7] Sciolino, Elaine.”Iranian Rebel Group Had Attack Plans, French Report Says”.
New York Times. June 25, 2003 <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/25/world/
iranian-rebel-group-had-attack-plans-french-report-says.
html?scp=1&sq=Iranian%20Rebel%20Group%20Had%20Attack%20Plans,%20French%20Report%20Says&st=cse 4](http://www.icst.psu.edu/current_projects.shtml>.
[8] ibid
[9] Sciolino, Elaine.”Iranian Opposition Movement’s Many Faces”. New York Times.
June 30, 2003 <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/30/international/
middleeast/30PROT.html?ex=1057550400&en=0d936b988c92e183&ei=5062&partner=
GOOGLE&pagewanted=2NewYorktimes, ELAINE SCIOLINO, June 25,2003>.
[10] Rubin, Elizabeth.”The Cult of Rajavi”. New York Times. July 13, 2003, 2003 <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/13/magazine/the-cult-of-rajavi.html?scp=1&sq=the+cult+of+rajavi&st=nyt>.
By Mazda Parsi
Mr. Ali Barzegar, a former member of MKO, returned home after twenty years of membership in the organization, reported Nejat Society Gilan Office.
Mr. Barzegar was welcomed by his family who had been awaiting his return since he had gone on compulsory military service twenty years ago when he was captured by MKO.
During those twenty years, he was under psychological manipulation by Rajavi’s destructive cult and deprived from enjoying a normal life.
Nejat Society congratulates Mr. Barzegar and his family for their reunion after long years of separation.
To view the Gallery click here
