Home » Sattar Orangi » Page 6

Sattar Orangi

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

MKO Abusing a Nation’s Championship

The championship of the Iraqi national soccer team in the Asian Cup tournament was a praiseworthy feat and the Iraqis burst into a celebration of joy and happiness despite the dominant internal chaos that is tearing their country apart. The championship fosters hope that the country has the potentialities to overcome its overwhelming plights inflicted by insurgent and terrorist groups, majority of who are the accomplices of the ousted Saddam’s regime. But can a national sports team’s success or failure signify efficiency and inefficiency of a country’s nationally elected government and parliament to steer a country that is mainly dominated by alien forces?

That is the way MKO, a proscribed terrorist group that enjoys support of the US forces in Iraq, looks at it much because the group is at odds with the Iraqi government over its decisiveness to expel the terrorist group from Iraq. Once forming close alliance with Saddam against Iran, MKO acted also as his loyal mercenaries in suppression of uprising Iraq dissidents. After the fall of the dictator, in a shift of position the group claimed to be standing beside the Iraqi people in a unified front to secure its stay in Iraq. As it is naturally a terrorist group whose strategy of struggle is founded on armed and violent warfare, it preferred to make coalition with Iraqi insurgent groups.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, MKO’s member who has established a close cooperation with Fox News, in his recent article released by Fox News takes advantage of the Iraq soccer team’s championship and attempts to disparage the legally elected government of Nouri al-Maliki and the parliament. He makes wild accusations against the advocates of the nation and country;

Iraqis are wondering: if 11 young men can instill a sense of unity by playing soccer, can the government of Nouri al-Maliki and the 275 politicians elected to steer Iraq to a brighter future achieve the same result? The people are particularly wary of the government as more evidence surfaces suggesting closer ties between Iraqi officials and the secret torture centers, as well as the death squads meant to heighten sectarian violence.

At the time when there is a nationally unified call for a terror-free Iraq led by a nationally supported government that is determined to uproot terrorism and violence, MKO’ headquarters in Camp Ashraf has turned into a den of conspiracy where terrorist gangs meet to plot. As Jafarzadeh refers to:

In mid June, as many as 10,000 Iraqi tribal leaders and local residents, mostly from the volatile Diyala Province, gathered in the headquarters of the main Iranian opposition in Ashraf City, which is also in the Diyala Province. At this event, which combined speeches and entertainment and was called "solidarity for peace and freedom in Iraq," a statement signed by 450 thousand inhabitants of Diyala called for unity of all Iraqi ranks against foreign intervention, especially that of the Iranian regime.

In an immediate move to confront gatherings of the terrorists, the Iraqi government banned Iraqis’ traffic to Camp Ashraf. No doubt, the people of a country can came together as a whole nation and live peacefully. But the problem lies in the fact that neither can they coexist with the parasites of an ousted regime nor the unwelcome guests consent to the will of a nation to desert the soil once they were housed to conspire against the two nations. MKO in its struggle to survive not only claim a position similar to that Iraqi citizens with all granted rights but also postures as being in the vanguard of accomplishing democracy for Iraqi people. That is what Jafarzadeh cleverly purports in his article by advertising Camp Ashraf as a place of amalgamating solidarity and coalition:

Iraqi sports and music, as well as the large social and political gathering in Ashraf City, are living proof that Iraqis from all political and religious backgrounds can live, work and thrive in harmony.

For sure, hardly any of those, although some unknowingly, who participate in Camp Ashraf’s gathering consider the interests of the nation since a man is known by the company he keeps. These are explicit evidences of MKO’s interfering in Iraq’s political and social sectors to destabilize the solidarity between the nation and the state. Fortunately, Iraqi people and government are well aware of MKO’s masqueraded nature and the objectives it strives to fulfil and are dedicated to work together to overcome problems. The existing anarchy is nothing but the outcome of the negligence of the alien forces that provide for the prowl of the terrorist groups and hold over the will of the nation to be fulfilled.

Sattar Orangi – Mojahedin.ws – August 7, 2007

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

A Prescription of Terrorism for Democracy

In occasions, I feel ashamed because of what other people have done or said to justify felonies of criminals. It happens mostly when I hear people claiming to be advocates of global peace and security but for them the term ‘global’ is defined within the context of their own people and nation, or interests better to say. They walk side by side of groups that are known as terrorists and criminals by the rules of law because they are misled by the enchantments of “have we ever been a threat to your people and country?” totally disregarding the atrocities these groups have perpetrated against other peoples and nations for whom they shed crocodile tears of sympathy.

Once home secretary under Margaret Thatcher’s government, Lord Waddington in his comments, published in The Scotsman, said in defence of MKO stated: “Laws passed to defend our society against terrorism are being used by the Iranian regime to buttress its own position and to make it easier to crush dissent within the country”.

Lord Waddington seems to have forgotten that MKO is hardly a “dissent within the country” for Iranian regime; the group is lying at his own county’s gate at the moment. It is hard to accept that he knows nothing of the group’s past bloody terrorist activities in Iran predating and postdating 2001 when he shows his objection to the EU’s decision of maintaining MKO on its list of terror:

Shamefully, the European Council has refused to honour and abide by the CFI ruling, claiming – wrongly – that the finding was merely procedural. When forced to state the evidence on which it relied, it advanced only irrelevant allegations that do not even relate to the present time, but predate 2001.

The group’s cult-like preaching infused with its old notorious motto of ‘the end justifies the means’ embolden all insiders, at the command of the leaders, to sacrifice themselves along with whoever in wherever to accomplish the ends of the organization. Once they were predominantly active inside Iran and now in European countries. The Iranian contemporary history is full of bloody pages of the group’s terrorist operations and assassinations. But its tactics are different in other countries; Western citizens hardly fail to remember the instances of the group’s cult-like self-immolations in Paris, London and some other Western cities that demonstrated MKO’s potentiality to jeopardize social security and psychological health.

The supporters of MKO, whether being of any political weight or not, that act as the mouthpiece of the organization to remove its name from the terrorist lists are not only betraying their own people but also Iranian nation. Nobody condemned the group’s deeds when it was shedding blood of Iranian citizens following its open declaration of a violent, military war against the regime because it was believed to be struggling for peace and freedom! Look how Lord Waddington justifies terrorist acts of MKO:

The PMOI never belonged on the terrorism list and the CFI has rightly ruled that it be removed. It is high time that our government acknowledged the ruling and removed the obstacles it has placed in the way of the PMOI as it struggles to draw attention to and mobilise opposition to a brutal regime. Surely the PMOI and NCRI deserve our support in the struggle for peace and freedom in their country.

It is really shameful to see that there are people who believe in support of terrorism for the accomplishment of democracy and peace. Only God knows what might happen to the nation whose freedom lies in the hands of terrorists. If people like Lord Waddington believe MKO deserve their support on behalf of Iranian people, then I, on behalf of the same people say oh, God save us from our friends.

Sattar Orangi, Mojahedin.ws, July 21, 2007

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Duplicity of the MEK nature

A Mob Rented for the Cameras

Kenneth R. Timmerman’s recent article No Second Marriages in Iran published in FrontPageMagazine at the first look seems to be disparaging MKO’s extravagantly advertised flamboyant show held in Paris on 30 June. But, regardless of his ever remaining skeptical of MKO’s deeds and claims, his remarks lack nothing of the truth. I think that his article dismisses doubts concerning the real intention of the cult concealed behind staging such multi-media shows now that the group encounters the gravest impassable stalemate in its entire political struggle. And, of course, one unfamiliar with MKO’s artful tricks really gets puzzled to see how a blacklisted terrorist group dupe, buy or does whatever trick to gather a mob of considerable number in a Western capital wherein its activities are banned.

Although one may be disappointed to see how a number of political activists in the West for certain political or personal concerns dance with a terrorist group, but it is so encouraging to notice a great more are well acquainted with the group’s treacherous and misleading moves. If one buries his head under the sand, of course, there are people standing there laughing at him. In no water can Mojahedin wash the blood stains of their past atrocious terrorist crimes which are broadly exposed to the world. Here are excerpts from Mr. Timmerman’s article to read for yourself:

MEK organizers staged a multi-media extravaganza recently at a gigantic exhibition hall on the outskirts of Paris that was worthy of Third Reich propagandists.

The MEK itself claimed that 50,000 people attended the June 30 event. Even their supporters, however, knew the number was inflated and settled on 20,000. The normally level-headed Daniel Pipes, who attended the event, failed to ask how many of those who came to the rally had been paid by MEK recruiters, a common practise I exposed two years ago in covering a much smaller rally in New York.

The MEK has always been able to rent a crowd for the benefit of TV cameras and naïve Western commentators.

Where they have not succeeded, however, is to convince their fellow Iranians that they have discarded the Marxist-Islamist ideology that made them join forces with Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979, when they helped to round up senior officers in the Iranian military for execution by the Islamist komitehs.

Pipes noted that the “slick production” outside Paris was “aimed mostly at an audience outside the hall, especially in Iran,” with the goal of “reminding Iranians that an alternative does exist to today’s theocracy.”

The only problem is that the MEK does not represent an “alternative” to the Islamic regime, but just another flavor of tyranny.

After the group lost its power struggle with Khomeini in 1981 they fled to Iraq, where Saddam Hussein welcomed them with open arms.

He allowed the MEK to establish training camps near the Iranian border, and used MEK units to smash the Kurds in northern Iraq. (And if you believe all the rented names of so-called Iraqi tribal leaders who sign those full-page ads in American newspapers calling for the U.S. to support the MEK, just ask Iraqi president Jalal Talabani what he thinks of the group.)

In April 1988, MEK leader Massoud Rajavi and his political ‘wife,” Maryam, announced the coming liberation of Iran and sent their Iraq-based troops across the border into Iran.

The intended “liberation” quickly turned to disaster. Although there were no Revolutionary Guards or even regular Iranian army units in the vicinity, the MEK were so hated by Iranians that old men and young boys killed the invaders with pitchforks.

Thousands were slaughtered in a matter of days and the Rajavi’s liberation “army” never recovered. (That didn’t prevent these masters of Nazi-style propaganda from claiming a huge victory, even parading about afterwards in “captured” Iranian tanks that had been loaned to them by Saddam Hussein).

When making a revolution, it is critical to choose one’s allies well. This is a group that openly boasts of having murdered Americans, and that aspires to dictatorial power in Iran. Their track record is clear. July 14, 2007

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Terrorists’ Justified Armed Resistance

It is much disappointing to come across accounts that, to appease terrorists for certain personal or political concerns, try to justify blatant terrorist moves perpetrated by a globally proscribed terrorist group as “a just armed resistance”. No doubt, the composers of these accounts can hardly differentiate between terrorism and resistance.

Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization has recently started a new move in Scandinavian countries against the EU to remove its name from the terrorist list. Of course, many of those who concur with MKO to antagonize its proscription, are not fully or at all acquainted with the group’s past history of bloody terrorist moves against innocent Iranian civilians and have not developed a good understanding of its hypocritical nature.

For instance, a Danish columnist, Ole Damkjær, in an article released in Berlingske Tidende, criticizes the EU’s approach to keep MEK in the terrorist list. The writer states that:

Opposition in the Danish Parliament along with other oppositions in EU countries have criticized the government for not abiding by the ruling of the EU Court as well as not presenting any evidence on the reason for inclusion of MEK in the list. The Foreign Minister Per Stig Muller has yielded to Parliament’s European Committee and sent them a top secret letter which specifies the reasons for inclusion of MEK in the terrorist list.

This document which Berlingske has obtained lists five violent activities between 1980 and 2001 and MEK renounced violence in 2001. In none of these 5 operations of the Iranian organization any terrorist activities such as those of Al-Qaeda’s have been utilized. The first reason the EU presented for including the Mojahedin in the list is concerning that MEK in 1980 that carried out operations across the border from their bases in Iraq. Other reasons are as follows:

In 1992 MEK had terrorist operations against 13 Iranian embassies and establishments.

In 1993 right before the Presidential election in Iran, the organization claimed the responsibility for attacks on Iranian oil facilities such as Iran’s largest refinery.

In 1999 MEK assassinated deputy commander of Iran’s armed forces.

In 2000 and 2001 MEK announced that its members were involved in attacks on Iranian armed forces, police and governmental offices near Iran Iraq border.

These are activities that EU lists in a document and emphasizes on and calls them terrorist activities. But their reasons are questioned not only by MEK but increasingly by a great number of EU Parliamentarians. They say MEK has only carried a just armed resistance against the brutal mullahs’ regime.

I do not know if these Danish advocates of MKO would maintain the same idea about “a just armed resistance” in case a group carried out the same “questioned” operations in a European country. The terrorists that demolished the Twin-Towers in 9/11 or blasted the London Subway had also justifiable reasons for themselves. Then, why a global war on terrorism is declared? If all dissidents and resistances were engaged in armed moves, what the world would be like?

Besides, the above mentioned reasons compared with the group’s unmentioned black file of terrorist atrocities are of no significance. A look at some counter-MKO websites, mojahedin.ws, iran-intrlink, irandidban and …, that present instances of the group’s terrorist operations will contribute to further information. For instance, MKO claim it has denounced terrorist activities since 2001. Can you believe it? Here are evidences that are excerpts from the group’s organ, Mojahed.

Furthermore, I do not think anybody can challenge the State Department’s recent report on MKO. Either all those countries that have proscribed MKO as a terrorist group are mistaken or MKO is lying to dupe the world. It is betrayal of moral standards to take safe refuge behind the globally accepted counter-terrorism laws to chant in favor of terrorists. One should choose to stand either in the former or the latter front.

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

The Terrorists Lambaste Proscription

Following re-designation of MKO by the State Department on its list of terrorists, the EU Council also intends to keep the group on its terror list despite MKO’s propaganda blitz aimed at condemning the move. The group claims that the EU has refused to apply a court order last year that annulled a 2002 decision to place the organization on its terrorist blacklist and order its assets frozen.

The EU has argued that the court’s ruling focused on procedural problems and did not imply that the group had to be removed from the list and that it has complied with the judgment by supplying documents explaining its decision. The EU even granted MKO an opportunity to present counter arguments. MKO has so far failed to adequately explain why it should be taken off the EU list of terrorist organizations. Rather, it has followed a tactical procedure of blasphemy and condemnation, being its typical, to trouble the water.

Mohammad Mohaddessin, a spokesman for the MKO’s political wing, in his recent reaction against the EU decision states that “the EU and the United States were maintaining the group on their terror lists to avoid further harming relations with the Iranian government”. It seems that Mr. Mohaddessin has totally forgotten that the US and Iran have been at loggerhead with Iran since the regime change in Iran. When all diplomatic ties have been ceased, how can one side concede to avoid further harming relations!

A look at the State Department’s recent report describing the group indicates that the US has developed a further understanding of MKO threats, a formerly political group that has completely transformed into a destructive cult. The world in general and the Europeans in particular can never forget MKO’s cult move in European cities when the members set themselves on fire following the detention of the group’s leader in June 2003. What other evidences does the EU need to re-proscribe MKO as a terrorist group?

Besides, none of the countries that have proscribed MKO ever consent to sacrifice the well-being of their nations for political causes regardless of baseless claims of some advocates of the group, like Alejo Vidal-Quadras, that call the EU’s refusal to remove MKO from the list”a political and ethical disgrace”. The group’s terrorist atrocities and cult-like moves are broader than the daylight to deny and no democratic government tries political appeasement at the expense of people who have trusted the government in preservation of the national security.

More interestingly, the EU’s patience in treating with MKO has emboldened the group to be under the illusion that it can possibly take bigger steps to challenge those who initiated blacklisting it. Mohaddessin has said that “his group would write to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice formally requesting that the group and its affiliates be taken off the blacklist”. He further forewarned that “if she refuses, the organization’s lawyers would lodge a complaint at a Washington appeals court”.

Regardless of the terrorists’ propaganda blitz in an attempt to influence the unanimous decision to confront terrorism, neither MKO nor its few advocates and lawyers are of any weight to impede the accelerated global move to uproot terrorism.

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Timmerman’s New Plan for Regime Change

Despite being a strong supporter of Israel, at least Kenneth R. Timmerman antagonizes MKO’s seizing the power in Iran, indicating that the group is not at all a pro-democratic activist as it advertises. A journalist, policy advocate, and activist, R. Timmerman directs the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, which he founded in 1995 with two other neoconservatives, Joshua Muravchik and Peter Rodman. The National Endowment for Democracy provided the initial funding to the group.

Strongly denouncing the recommendation of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group that the United States should engage in direct talks with Syria and Iran, Timmerman praises the Bush administration’s increased commitment to Iran regime change through support of dissidents inside and outside of Iran and believes that the United States must devote serious assets to helping pro-democracy forces to help the regime change. Seeing that the administration still has no plan of how to do it, Timmerman has recently proposed a new plan released in Front Page Magazine on January 18. He states:

I believe the United States should be prepared to commit a minimum of $300 million over an initial six month period if we are to have any hope of a successful outcome.

The very first step must be the appointment by the President of a Special Envoy for Iran, with full presidential authority to convene a loyal type meeting of several hundred prominent Iranian leaders. The majority of those able to attend such a meeting will of necessity come from the diaspora; some will come secretly from the inside.

In his drafting a detailed game plane, he suggests organizing massive non-violent protests against the current Iranian rule in Tehran. But he does not throw caution into the wind to warn about MKO’s potential exploitation of opportunities. He also draws the strategy for “preventing the Islamic-Marxist Mujahedin Khalq from exploiting the situation and seizing power in a putsch’.

Mr. Timmerman’s strategy for establishing democracy through a regime change plan in Iran utilizing the Iranian themselves does not, however, mean that he and his colleagues are really concerned about Iranian people but that it is the easiest and most sensible strategy to avoid confrontation while ensuring the best results for the US.

Supporting regime change by Iranians, while containing Syria, not only makes the best strategic sense for America, it is the right thing to do.

Mojahedin.ws -Sattar Orangi -January 21, 2007

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

Friends of Once Enemy

Reading the Wall Street Journal’s recent article “Anti-Americans On The March”, I was grabbed by the MKO’s overwhelming metamorphosis when the past memories floated through my mind. The article mainly discusses that a universal movement, regardless of being religious or atheist, to fight American hegemony has already initiated with the Lebanon’s Hezbollah forming the matrix. Religion, once regarded the main ideological obstacle to form a comprehensive resistance against the American imperialism, now prompts a collective goal once impossible to achieve:

Religion, excoriated by Karl Marx as the "opiate of the masses," has become a great mobilizing force — even for zealous atheists. The phenomenon extends beyond the Middle East to Europe, Latin America and Africa, too. Causes that a few years ago seemed moribund or at least passé — socialism, Third World solidarity, strident anti-Americanism — have been injected with the fervor, though rarely the actual faith, of Islamic radicalism.

Once itself the forerunner of such resistance, MKO has taken a sloping path swimming against the current. In its formation of struggle against the ousted Iranian monarchy, the organization propagated the idea that “there is only one major enemy: imperialism and its local collaborators”. Mojahedin denounced the American imperialism for its political, economic, social and cultural break-in role.

Mojahedin insisted that most of the world’s problems had been created by imperialism and that their main goal was to free Iran of the US imperialism. Alas, now it has turned to be something of the past found only in Mojahedin’s earlier publications and pamphlets.

The past imperialist and enemy, itself careful not to put all its trust in the blacklisted terrorists, is sought for a helping hand to assume power in Iran. Promising to do its best as a means of furthering the US-Zionists shared interests, Mojahedin has detached itself from the front of anti-American campaigners, since the common goal has evaporated, to befriend the enemy.

It seems that Mojahedin’s metamorphosis and digression is the outcome of disbelief in any belief; the communists and atheists at least believe that there is no God.

Sattar Orangi – Mojahedin.ws  – December 12, 2006

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Lord Corbett

A Funny Solution to the Middle East Crisis

I’d like to congratulate Mojahedin for the new discovery of one of its enthusiastic advocates who believes that removal of the terror label from Mojahedin solves the crisis in the Middle-East. Mojahedin themselves had never thought of such an unsought potentiality.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, chairman of the British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom and the leading figure against the proscription of MKO, is more steadfast than Mojahedin in the fight. Published in the Birmingham Post, Nov. 17, Lord Corbett strongly contradicted Tony Blair’s recent saying that Iran- “in conjunction with Syria – may hold the key to a peaceful Middle East”. He adds that:

Western leaders are scratching their heads in desperate search for a new Middle East policy as the dire situation in Iraq worsens and tensions in Lebanon and Palestine rise.

It does not mean that Lord Corbett favors a permanent anarchy in the Middle East, no, heaven forbid, but that he conceives the West is unable to find the appropriate apparatus to solve the problem. Criticizing engagement of Iran to end the crisis, he states:

Those who favour ‘engagement’ of Iran’s Ayatollahs, sometimes described as appeasement, have taken this opportunity to call for ‘dialogue’ with Tehran as a means of resolving the various crises in the Middle East, including in Iraq.

Lord Corbett then suggests that the West must abandon the appeasement policy and exploit a force, beyond that of the US or Britain!, that the Iranian regime most fear:

Instead, as part of the present policy review, the West must ask itself what it is that the brutal oppressors of the Iranian people most fear. It is certainly not the US or Britain. What they fear is democracy and those that can bring it about – the 95 per cent of Iranians who despise this regime and the Iranian resistance, National Council of Resistance of Iran.

Thus, the problem is resolved. Mojahedin are a means of resolving the crises in the Middle East and as he states: “This is where the solution to the present crises in the Middle East rests”.

But what has barred such a potential force to solve so complicated a problem and to bring about peace and tranquility for the people of the Middle East? The blame is again on the US and those Western countries that have proscribed potential Mojahedin a terrorist group. By “removal of the unjust terror label from the PMOI.”, Lord Corbett believes the West can pave the way and take the first step towards building a stabilized Middle East.

“Should the West have the courage and the will to follow this course, we will soon see a very different Middle East”.

Once, on the pretext of war against terrorism, the US and the Western countries invaded Afghanistan and Iraq causing a destabilized region. Now comes another westerner who suggests utilizing a terrorist group to restore the equilibrium. I also congratulate Lord Corbett for proposing so lofty a suggestion; putting forth the terrorists that act as antidote to anarchy.

Sattar Orangi, November 21, 2006

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Duplicity of the MEK nature

The Betrayers Who Posture as Heroes

Celebrating the century-long anniversary of the Iranian Constitutional Movement of 1905-9, Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) avows to be the heir of the patriotic heroes and the Mojahed commanders of the revolutionary army like Sattar Khan. The term Mojahed was a label to some armed volunteers in the constitutional revolution that Mojahedin Khalq mischievously subsumed in their organizational label. Mojahedin conclude that the constitutional movement sustained a failure more because some pro-British elements betrayed and deserted Sattar Khan.

They call themselves “the main Iranian Resistance” representing a nation that has, since inception of republic system after monarch’s downfall, labeled them hypocrites. the crimes and atrocities which they have perpetrated hits such a big record in history and they are so execrated among their people that no pro-Monarchists nor other Iranian dissident groups, and diaspora would wish to be thrown in with Mojahedin in anyway at all.

One may ask what are they doing all these for? The explanation for their actions is quite obvious: they’re willing to give away Iran in bits and pieces to those who are waiting to devour it granted half a chance as long as they might be provided with an opportunity to come to power. The only thing Mojahedin care not the least for is people.

Mojahedin culminate against pro-British traitors who had deserted Sattar Khan while they have overstepped the limits of betraying a commander; they betrayed the whole nation. They have developed a lexicon of their own with the altered connotations. When Rajavi fled from Tehran to Paris, hidden in women’s clothes aboard a hijacked aircraft, he referred to his escape as "the most courageous act of heroism", and when he signed a "treaty" with Tareq Aziz, then one of Saddam’s top aides, to help Iraq in the war against Iran, the Mujahedin hailed the move as "a great patriotic act".

Mojahedin are perpetrators of high treason besmirching the reputation of the true Iranian patriots and Mojaheds. What Mojahedin did against Iranian people in the past and are doing at the present under whatever pretext is totally unforgivable. If Mojahedin are opposed to the current ruling system and government of Iran some other different people and groups might share the same opinion. But none of the other groups and individuals betrayed and deserted the nation. That was hardly a justification for Mojahedin to go and side with an enemy at war with the nation besides masterminding terrorist operations.

Now enjoying the full hospitality of the Western patrons, Mojahedin, under the full command of the hosts feeding them, have accomplished violation of allegiance toward their country’s sovereign and betrayal of the nation by consciously and purposely acting to aid the enemies through inciting and waging war against Iran. The very same countries supporting and hosting Mojahedin have passed sever laws for charges of treason. Even in the US, providing "material aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime" is treason and also punishable by death. The question is why, then, these countries support and nurse the terrorists and betrayers who deserve to be punished for their treasonous deeds?

A big number of disappointed Mojahedin members are living in Camp Ashraf under hard condition at the present. They have been unnerved by never-ending intimidations of being tried for treason if they returned to Iran. The common sense approves the process but the Iranian authorities have issued a general amnesty for those Mojahedin members whose hands are clean of peoples’ blood. Naturally, the offer doses not apply to MKO ringleaders who have directly been involved in terrorist operations and crimes against the Iranian people. If Mojahedin ever care to be relieved of the ignominy of betraying the nation, they have to return to take side with people against whoever might pose a threat.

mojahedin.ws –  By Sattar Orangi  –  August 7, 2006

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts