Articles

An Unexpect Trip Disarrays the MEK Headquarters

The trip of Ms. Fariba Hashtroodi* to Iran and her meeting with the representatives of Habilian Association and Mr. Ibrahim Khodabandeh has overwhelmed MKO members and leaders in their headquarters in France.

People close the MKO report of disappointment of members of this organization, particularly the members of Council.

That’s why the MKO has made so much noise by its forces- through taking position against Ms. Hashtroodi.

In recent months, the cases on defection of several MKO supporters and old sympathizers as well as MKO members and their departure from Auvers have been on Maryam Rajavi’s desk.

The issue of the European-based MKO members’ differences with the group has forced the Gestapo of this terrorist organization to take measures to control the situation; however, Ms. Hashtroodi’s trip to Iran thwarted these measures and accelerated the process of defection so that some people have left the Camp in Auvers in recent days.

In the process of defection, most of focus is on the situation in Camp Ashraf, since the MKO officials there in the Camp are watching the members individually to prevent them from going to the US-run Camp (TIPF). However, the situation in Auvers is not better than that of Ashraf, especially now that MKO leaders are not able to send dissidents to Iraq to control them in better way.

————————————————————–

* Ms. Hashtroodi was formerly a senior member of NCRI

January 18, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

US’s New Strategy and MKO’s Position

It seems that the early slogans of US warmongers on the spread of democracy in the Middle East is an issue even the US’s failed politicians are too tired to repeat in their speeches.

Drawing a goal as "spread of democracy" was from the beginning a hollow slogan and what was important for Neocons was to impose US’s hegemony on region’s country and people and to get the oil resources. That’s why this goal is followed by deploying more US troops and threatening the countries of the region, and not by respecting the will of majority of Iraqis (who ask for the exit of occupiers).Warmongers’ obstinate competition with democrats, now representing the Americans’ requests on US’s foreign policy (particularly putting and end to the war), is another factor for the insistence of Bush’s team on killing Iraqis and others in the region.

Warmongers are well aware they have totally failed and that changing the strategy can’t help them. While experts had suggested their ideas on different solutions, warmongers still stress the spread of violence only to satisfy their hatreds.

In this way, they have resorted to the policy of creating tension between Arabs-Persians and Shiite-Sunnis to take advantage of the situation.

Their reliance on such a policy, with its whole negative consequences for the people of region, means "committing suicide" and getting more entangled in the quagmire. This will also intensify negative reactions in US’s domestic political scene.

US’s new approach, which will certainly be accompanied by more bloodshed and violence in Iraq and the region, would be welcomed only by anti-Islamic and anti-human movements whose lives are tied to setting up the fire of war and US invasions against other countries.

Among those who will welcome this are Israel and its followers in the region (those who, like warmongers, claimed of spreading democracy); failed from achieving their goals by the slogan of peace, they are in dire need for such policy by the US.

The terrorist group of MKO should also be included in this group. Lacking a clear strategy and surviving only by the support of Saddam Hussein, this group is now facing the strong opposition by Iraqi government and people and is also at the threshold of being deported from Iraq.

Believing only in bloodshed and violence and weakening the government of Iraq as the only ways to survive, Rajavi’s cult hopes it would be used by warmongers as an influential force.

It doesn’t seem the warmongers (who see the best solution as deploying 21000 troops) are interested in using 3000 desperate members of MKO who’ve been disarmed by the Americans themselves. However, if the warmongers are stupid enough to use bankrupt forces of Rajavi, it will be proved that Rajavi’s murderous gang is unable to do anything and that part of US forces should take care of these people. This has been proved during past 20 years when Saddam was taking care of the group.

Apart from this reality, what’s important and should be paid attention by MKO members and supporters is MKO’s recent stance, which exposes the depth of this group’s crimes.

Now, it can be said that Mojahedin-e Khalq is proudly paving the way for policies of the most hated parties of Imperialism all over the world the crimes of whom are known to everyone.

Today, another black page should be added to the treacherous records of this group- after cooperating with Saddam against Iranians. The crimes of the cult will never help the group survive but it will add more problems for the group.

Irandidban – 2007/01/14

January 15, 2007 0 comment

The Ideology of the MEK

Mojahedin Laid Criterion for Patriotism and Democracy

Following Saddam’s execution, the MKO-run media have mainly focused on tendentious reports that reprove the dictator’s hanging. The group’s move on such a suspicious line implies that Mojahedin attempt to exculpate Saddam of his myriad crimes to compel a mentality to identify him as a national hero. They have resolved to walk on the line of the opponents to Saddam’s execution, each impelled by different motives, in an attempt to win their support to accomplish their own ends, as they did when the master was in power. No doubt, Mojahedin’s present approach has its own strategic importance but it should be noted that the reach of their siding with Saddam’s supporters lies beyond the scope of the conventional dealings which require much deeper study.

Mojahedin’s silence over Saddam and the Baath Party through the past three years for itself speaks an unspoken truth. Notably, before Saddam’s fall, the two, Saddam and Rajavi, were each other’s sole recognized supporter. Mojahedin, enjoying a strategic position in the region and hardly turning to their Western lobbies, anticipated a promising future settled on Iraq-Iran borders to play their decisive role to overthrow the Islamic regime. Although they were aware that their dream was not to be fulfilled so soon and easily as they portended, at least they could continue to survive in Iraq and keep the members waiting mesmerizing them with murmurs of an imminent victory.

Once in his meeting with Saber al-Duri, who was in charge of the Iraqi security system, Massoud Rajavi stressed that the group’s settlement in Iraq was not a temporary but a long-lasting stay:

Tell him [Saddam] on my behalf; we were and are and will remain at your home as long as possibly we can. [1]

Regardless of their sharing of strategic interests, Rajavi and Saddam’s tie was rooted in a mutual historical and ideological understanding. A passing look over Rajavi and Saber al-Duri’s interlocution reveals the kernel points that ties one to the other. In many parts, Rajavi’s references are an analyzed synthesis of Mojahedin’s ideology with that of Baath Party:

– We share the same destiny.

– Our bloods are intermingled.

– The tie between we and you, be it either the government or the Baath Party whose leader and symbol is Mr. President, is not merely a political tie. It is an absolute brotherhood.

– Anything that is against you is against us as well and vise aersa.

– Our security and the strikes we receive are the same.

– Our progresses are also the same.

– Neither in my mind nor in my heart can I distinguish between our collective interests and losses.

– Our interests are closely associated.

– Our principles have got us together to be side by side in a front. [2]

The Iraq now turned into a country vulnerable to fluctuations with Mojahedin’s facing stalemate indicates that Rajavi was well aware of the grave consequences of Saddam’s fall and its aftermath effects on MKO. Thus, sensing his unquestioning liquidation, Mojahedin took a different turn to tie a destiny with Iraqi people at least to secure their stay in Iraq. In a sudden shift, they tried to establish the same conduct paradigm with Iraqi people, this time chanting slogans of democracy rather than brotherhood. Interestingly, knowingly or unknowingly, Mojahedin somehow consider Saddam and the Baath Party, compared with the present government in power, more democrat and patriot. Sediqeh Husseini, a ranking member of MKO, in a speech made at Camp Ashraf stated that:

Talking of democracy and a democratic Iraq, a key parameter is this same conduct with Mojahedin. [3]

She further stressed her claim in a message sent to Dayali Province Sheikhs but with a different tone:

Thus, we appraise the degree of patriotism and popularity of any movement according to the scale of opposition to interferences and, consequently, friendship with and respect for Mojahedin. [4]

It is easy to have a sound judgment on Iraq’s past situation and Saddam himself. Mojahedin’s contradictory position after the dictator’s execution and indirect expression of sympathy on his death with pro-Saddam factions that appreciate him as a hero helps a good deal to have a just analysis of Mojahedin on condition the fog of doubt has not completely evaporated. If the establishment of democracy in Iraq, as Mojahedin define, reconciles with their stay in Iraq, then, on account of Saddam’s granting them the bliss of settlement in Iraq, Saddam can be identified as the most democratic person. Consequently, not only the Baath Party represented democracy but also, compared with the current government, occupied a much higher platform of democracy. Mojahedin’s proximity to Saddam in behalf of the mentioned factors on the one hand, and their proposed criterion of democracy on the other hand are actually two sides of a coin that Mojahedin, under the vicissitude of fortune, avail themselves of it only with a little change of tone and literature.

Notes

[1]. To be judged by the history.

[2]. Ibid.

[3]. Sediqeh Husseini’s speech made at Camp Ashraf on the anniversary of Iran’s century long Constitutional Revolution.

[4]. MKO’s message to Dayali Province Sheikhs

Bahar Irani – January 10, 2007

January 15, 2007 0 comment

The cult of Rajavi

The MEK’s solidarity with a fallen dictator

MEK’S solidarity with a fallen dictator who is a role model for ” Rajavi”

MEK sympathy for Saddam’s death

The execution of dictator of Iraq was greatly welcomed by the majority of the people in the Middle East, particularly by Iraqis, Kurds and Shia and some Sunnis such as Turkmen that had suffered mostly under the Saddam’ Regime.

There was joy among Iranians and Kuwaitis whose countries were destroyed by Saddam when he attacked Iran in 1980 and Invaded Kuwait in 1991.

Overall most people around the world believed that Saddam Hussein was a notorious, bloodthirsty, tyrant and thug and a cruel dictator like Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot who had to stand before an international war tribunal for his crimes against humanity and war crimes.

There is some disappointment by the execution due to the opposition to the capital punishment in general.

Saddam killed thousands of Iraqis, Sunnis and Shias. Saddam’s time was full of cruelty, suppression and massacre of Kurds such as town of “Halabche” by Chemical gas which killed 5000 civilians instantly. Saddam closed his eyes on his sons who were systematically raping women, killing opponents as a hobby and controlling the funds coming from Oil for food program by the U.N.

There are small portion of Sunnis in Iraq and Palestinian (due to the false support of Palestine) Saddam was an Arab nationalist who believed he was ” Salahedin” and would capture Jerusalem. His wrong strategy resulted in the strong presence of U.S. forces in the region under the plan of new Middle East and Democracy for the region.

Also, there is a group of Iranian so-called opposition called MEK (Mojahedin-e khalgh) who are extremely upset by the death of Saddam because Saddam was the main financial and arms supplier of the group. Saddam allocated millions of dollars in funds and military equipment and provided training camps such as Ashraf for the group who moved to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in 1986. MEK associated with Saddam intelligence services to collect information on Islamic Republic of Iran (I.R.I.) military and economical sites during the war. Also, MEK promoted the terror campaign against I.R.I. from the bases inside Iraq that increased the cycle of violence and bloodshed in Iran.

MEK succeeded in gaining some support in Washington by lobbying US Congress. The lobby was not successful if there was any financial support by Saddam Hussein as it is indicated by US State Department report on MEK when it was listed as a terrorist organization.

MEK’s media sites banned any news on Saddam since his capture in 2003. Just 2 days after death of Saddam, they finally broadcast the news.

For the first time in three years the NCRI, the political cover group of MEK made a short announcement in Persian condemning Saddam’s execution and called it in favor of the regime of Iran. They also claimed that Saddam should have been handed over to his people for final decision.

The MEK, alongside pro Saddam Iraqis, is challenging the legitimacy of the Iraqi Government which has been elected in a free election. They have forgotten if Saddam was handed over to Iraqi’s then he would be cut in pieces because of the hate and pain people had suffered under his regime.

Saddam’s execution and trial procedure was not ideal but it was just for a butcher who did not let many of his people to stand before a court since they were slaughtered in the prisons. Saddam’s execution was not perfect but it was a gift for Saddam because in Iraq hundreds are dead daily by explosion, and under torture.

Saddam’s execution was a gift for a dictator whose life was based on ruining lives of hundreds of human begins in Iraq and neighboring countries.

If Saddam was never lived, the world was a better and safer and more peaceful place to live. Now, Saddam’s death opens the door for a new era in Iraq since pro Saddamists are losing their hope for the return to power. Saddam thought the US would bring him back to power.

Are Rajavi and MEK realizing the situation? The game has changed and they have lost the game.

MEK politically is dead and has no legitimacy or support among Iranians inside and abroad. Are they smart enough to understand that US are not betting on losing horses? The past proves the answer is ‘no’.

Massoud Rajavi vanished since March 2003. There is unconfirmed information that he is in the custody of Israel and US in the region. (Jordan or Qatar).

MEK are at the weakest point after Saddam because they have to face the consequence of collaboration with Saddam. Also, to answer to Iranians for their crime against humanity, and promoting violence alongside the I.R.I. and committing violation of human rights among the members that cost lives of some dissidents.

Pars Iran, January 4, 2007

January 11, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief

Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief in Opposition to Administration Terror Policy

December 19, 2006 03:07 PM Posted By News <http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsblog.org%2F>

<http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsblog.org%2Fnews-and-announcements-bipartisan-members-of-congres

s-file-brief-in-opposition-to-administration-terror-policy.html#discussion>

Questions & comments 1

Bipartisan Members of Congress File Brief in Opposition to Administration

Terror Policy Recently, ACSBlog highlighted

<http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsblog.org%2Fequal-protection-and-due-process-alleged-provider-of -material-support-to-terrorists-challenges-designation.html> the case of Rahmani v. U.S., in which the Ninth Circuit held that a person charged with material support of a terrorist organization may not challenge the State Department’s designation of the organization as terrorist. An amicus brief, filed by Congressmen Bob Filner (D-CA) and Tom Tancredo (R-CO) argues that, by designating the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) as terrorists, the designation which is at issue in this case, the State

<http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.altshulerberzon.com%2Fnews%2FRahmani_final_final.pdf> Department

exceeded its power under federal law.

According to the brief, Congress feared that, in enacting the law which allows the government to designate terrorist organizations and prosecute those who support them, it would abridge First Amendment rights by allowing the State Department to designate groups for purely political reasons. Such political opponents of the State Department would then be unable to raise funds from donors unwilling to risk a criminal conviction. Accordingly, the statute permits the government to only designate organizations who engage in certain violent practices, such as highjacking, assassination or use of a weapon of mass destruction. The brief argues that MEK engages in none of the practices permitting terrorist designation under the statute. Instead, its designation as a terrorist organization was part of a strategy to advance foreign policy goals:

In May 1997, Iran elected Mohammad Khatami, a reform-minded political moderate, as President. The U.S. regarded the change in leadership as an opportunity to reopen dialogue with Iran. As the group that the Iranian regime viewed as its most serious internal threat, Robert Collier, Exonerated in Terror Case, 4 Brothers Still Locked Up, S.F. CHRON., Jan. 25,

2005, at A1, the MEK was a natural pawn, and Iran reportedly demanded the designation as a prerequisite for engaging in diplomatic talks with the U.S., see James Morrison, Embassy Row: Backing Resistance, WASH. TIMES, July 27, 2006, at A14. In October 1997, the State Department complied with Iran’s demand and included the MEK on a list of designated FTOs. Shortly thereafter, a senior Clinton administration official indicated that the designation was intended as a “goodwill gesture” to Khatami and the Iranian regime.

This “politically motivated” designation, according to the brief, is not permitted under federal law. The brief concludes that MEK is a “legitimate political resistance,” similar to the “Northern Alliance in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, the African National Congress in apartheid-era South Africa, and Jewish armed resistance gruops in Nazi-controlled Europe.”

Written By:Paul Sheldon <http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.yahoo.com%2Fgroup%2Ftraitorsusa%2F> Foote

On January 9, 2007 11:51 PM

These representations about the Iranian Communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) omit that this terrorist group murdered American military officers and Rockwell International employees. The MEK committed many atrocities in Iraq in 1991, such as the massacre of large numbers of unarmed Kurds. The MEK committed a terrorist act in New York City. In September 2002, President Bush’s background paper for his remarks to the

United Nations listed the MEK as one of three Saddam Hussein-supported terrorist groups operating in Iraq. Hence, the MEK was a pretext for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. In 2003, American and coalition forces attacked Camp Ashraf, Iraq and killed some of the MEK terrorists.

http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acsblog.org%2Fnews-and-announcements-bipartisan-members-of-congress

-file-brief-in-opposition-to-administration-terror-policy.html

Paul Sheldon Foote

traitorsusa@yahoogroups.com

http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.yahoo.com%2Fgroup%2Ftraitorsusa%2F

<http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2F360.yahoo.com%2Fpaulsheldonfoote>

http://webmail.iran-interlink.org/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2F360.yahoo.com%2Fpaulsheldonfoote

Paul Sheldon Foote

January 11, 2007 0 comment

Ali Reza Jafarzade

Terrorists Disinformation

It is too flagrant to see there yet exist people who advert to ambiguous sources to release what they believe to be “Newly obtained intelligence reports”. Previously proven disinformation of a source should caution alert minds to be heedful of the authenticity of the intelligence and the quoter.

Claude Salhani in an article published in Monstersandcritics uses a pro-terrorist like Jafarezadeh as a source for his article. Being a member of the blacklisted terrorist MKO, the world has come to know that Jafarezadeh can never be trusted as a source of intelligence.

Being the kind of people who fish in troubled water, MKO does whatever mischief to escalate the tension concerning Iraq to survive. Quoting Jafarzadeh who talked at a conference organized by the Iran Policy Committee, a lobby group pushing to get the MKO off the State Department’s terrorist list, the article intends to support the idea that Iran is advocating a special force to spread disorder and terrorism in its neighboring country Iraq.

It was only ten days ago that, following the detention of two Iranians in Iraq, Maryam Rajavi, the head of the terrorist MKO, claimed that the two Iranians were senior members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and had coordinated attacks against coalition troops and Iraqi civilians. She cited the group’s intelligence agents as the source of the information. However, the two were released because Rajavi’s allegations proved to be purely baseless and false.

Any just appraise of intelligence and information depends on the soundness of the source wherein they emerge. Of course, the public opinion pays not the least attention to what terrorists release, and any reporter of good repute should be careful of the pitfalls of the smart terrorists.

A. Afshar – 09/01/2007

January 11, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Making a Martyr out of a dictator

Witnessing the last moments of a man’s life is never a pleasant sight, even if it involves a man like Saddam Hussein.

After a year long trial, Saddam Hussein, the former dictator of Iraq was hanged on the 30th of December 2006, as we all know by now. The verdict, however flawed is still considered as unprecedented in the greater Middle East. The trial and the following execution were largely due to the American presence in Iraq. It’s reasonable to believe that had Saddam Hussein been under the care of the Iraqis from the get go; he would have met his fate much sooner.

As to the reason for deciding to trial Saddam for the crimes he committed in the town of Dujail, is a matter of discussion. During his reign in power he committed hundreds of such atrocities, some of them involving more victims than the city of Dujail.

If the courts where to examine the 8 year Iran – Iraq war, the attack on Kuwait in 1990 or the killing of 5000 Kurds in the town of halabche in 1988, there would also had to be fingers pointed in the direction of Arab leaders and most western governments.

From the time the American government decided to use Saddam Hussein as a leverage in controlling Iran’s power after the revolution of 1979, the funding of these policies has always been taken care of by wealthy Arab Countries (such as Kuwait who during the Iran-Iraq war was an active supporter of Saddam Hussein but later found itself in the receiving end of Saddam’s chokehold).

The west also provided Iraq with intelligence and weapons.

But it was the people of Iran, Iraq and Kuwait who ultimately bur the brunt of this theater directed by the west and produced by the Arabs.

Saddam Hussein was in power for more then 30 years and during his time he was responsible for killing more than 1 million Iraqi shi’as and over 300 000 Sunnis. In the 8 year war against Iran, the Iranians suffered more then 1 million in causalities, injured and countless of people displaced.

120 000 Iranian soldiers fell during the war, some of them from chemical attacks by the Iraqis. Even after 17 years after the war ended thousands more are still suffering from the effects of exposure to chemical weapons.

Saddam acquired those weapons of mass destruction through companies in France, Germany and the Netherlands. The technology and the know-how in building these weapons were given by the west approval.

Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who got rid of each and every one of his opponents with no sense of remorse or mercy. After the downfall of Saddam, tens of mass graves have been discovered around Iraq, where hundreds of Iraqi have been buried after apparent mass executions.

In 1991, he ordered the shelling of the holy city of Karbala, (a predominately shi’a city and considered by many muslims around the world as a holy place) and conducted direct attacks on the holy mosque of Imam Hussein, as a reprisal against the shi’a uprising.

Under his power, the sunni minority had but all of the power but now find it very difficult to lose that control. This is one of the most important reasons for the insurgency and resistance among sunni Iraqis against the current government led by the majority shi’a and sunni kurds.

A part of the Iraqi Sunnis and other Arab block, are eager to make a martyr out of Saddam Hussein by using the flawed execution of Saddam.

The Mojahedin-e Khalq of Iran, a terrorist organization based in Iraq has also sided with the ba’thist party who regard in presenting Saddam Hussein as an Arab martyr and a hero.

His death symbolizes the end of an era of both his reign and the ba’thist party. It is now up to the sunnis to decide whether they would like to use their fair share of power in the newly established government or to continue the futile resistance against the will of the majority of Iraqis.

Former ba’thist, Al-Qaeda and Mojahedin-e Khalq of Iran are the ones who benefit most from a chaotic and violent Iraq. Order and progress is not in the interest of neither of these groups.

As far as the Iranian neighbor is concerned it seems probable that the Iranians share a common goal with the Iraqi government in a stable and calm Iraq.

There is now a government in power in Iraq, whose leaders have in the past either spent years in exile in Iran or have close connections with the Iranian government. What purpose would the Iranian have in fighting and undermining a government who share most its own goals and visions.

The real perpetrators in the meddling and undermining of the current government of Iraq can be found in the western borders of Iraq in countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

A fear in shi’a stronghold in the region is what is motivating these countries to support and fund the ongoing conflict and sectarian divide.

Those are the true enemies of Iraq and the Iraqi people.

Karim Haghi

09.01.2007

January 11, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Warmongering, the Peak of Rajavi’s Political Retardedness

Terrorist group of MKO gathered its British supporters in London in a meeting called "Iranian Fundamentalism, A Growing Threat".

In the meeting, MKO’s traditional supporters spoke in favor of MKO policies which made their speeches repetitious, hollow and clichéd. Their speeches showed how unaware they were [of the nature of MKO], people who have been supporting the group for more than 2 decades!

What was amazing in the meeting was that MKO’s tactics ruled the comments of participants.

Participants, opposing to the Baker-Hamilton report, asked George Bush and Tony Blair to return to their previous positions and not to follow this commission’s proposals for solving Iraqi problems.

They criticized the U.S. government that "it has not understood the conflicts of the Middle East"; they particularly were opposing to suggestions that the U.S. should talk to Iraq neighbors, especially with Iran!

Participants repeatedly warned the U.S. and Britain to "try their best in standing against Iran"!*

MKO’s insistence on military invasion on Iran and its opposition to Baker-Hamilton, along with Zionist lobby in the U.S. (which recently turned out to be the main group encouraging Neocons to attack Iran), is the main tactic of MKO against Iran.

In Iraq, MKO first acted cautiously in condemning Saddam execution but later, when it recognized that Ba’ath party and its supporters in some countries try to use Saddam execution as a tool for weakening Maliki’s government and for preserving tension in Iraq, it started praising Saddam as the "hero of Arabs" as if the group had not been following U.S. policies.

Evidence on MKO show that the group has moved along the lines of Ba’athists so much that it is officially promoting Salafi’s ideas (about killing Shiites)- which is undoubtedly spread by Israel and Britain.

The fact is that, for the time being, with MKO’s commitment to radicalism and murder as the ways of achieving it policies, the group can’t take any other option. Fortunately, it can be said that the public opinion, not only in the U.S. and Britain but also in the world, has concluded that U.S.’s policies in Iraq have been wrong and that they should be corrected. Evidences also indicate that even American officials have accepted this fact.

On the other hand, Iraq’s current government has gotten more strength with the execution of Saddam. It showed that it wouldn’t be surrendered to pressures and plots of Ba’athists, Al-Qaeda and their supporters.

So, holding such meetings by the MKO will have no outcomes. Such moves expose MKO’s retardedness and its desperation in taking such positions.

—————————————–

* For more information on MKO’s warmongering positions, you can see these comments in full- broadcast by MKO’s TV channel- on MKO’s websites.

January 11, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

The Stain of Supporting Saddam

The murderous gang of Rajavi condemned the hanging of its major supporter- whom they called "spiritual father"- and since his crimes were so high that even this murderous gang can’t openly support him, they claimed the history will judge this issue!

With the exposure of Saddam’s plans for massacring Kurds, which is only one of numerous horrible crimes of this man, all those who supported him found themselves labeled as supporters of massacring and "crimes against humanity".

What was admonitory was about the fate of opportunist gang of Rajavi, which was trying (with the assistance of Saddam’s lawyers) to accuse Iran in order to divert the case of murdering 180000 Iraqi Kurds.

Last year, Saddam’s French lawyer Emanuel Lodeux falsely quoted Iran’s ambassador to France that Iran was going to blame the MKO for Halabja bombing! (the operation the MKO was not capable of performing, even if ordered to do).

Following the complaints of former Iranian ambassador to France, this lawyer and a number of Saddam’s lawyers repeated this lie this time quoting it falsely from Iranian embassy in Jordan.

After Saddam execution and the noise Baathists and his supporters made, Khalil al-Dulaimi, the head of Saddam’s lawyers team, repeated the lies.

However, now that undeniable evidences on Chemical Ali’s case have been presented- which show that Saddam mocks the world’s response to killing the Kurds by Chemical weapons, the world knows how inhumane Saddam and his supporters are.

The gang of Rajavi was trying during past 3 years to disassociate itself from Saddam and claimed of being independent. However, following the execution of former dictator, they acted in line with Baathists’ policies to spread propaganda against Iran.

Thinking that after Saddam no one will investigate their crimes and understanding the colonial policies of the occupiers to stoke the fire between Shiites-Sunnis on one hand and Arabs-Persians on the other, MKO came to the scene with full power and devoted its satellite TV channel as well as internet websites to praising Saddam Hussein the murderer. They had closed their eyes on all Saddam’s crimes including the massacre of 250000 Iranians, 10000 Shiites and Sunnis and inflicting thousands of billions of dollars of damages to the people of region. But now that the plan for exterminating Kurds has been exposed, they should come and reveal their real nature.

Yesterday, newswires (quoting Reuters from the court of Saddam’s associates) reported about the exposure of documents on Saddam’s plans to exterminate Kurds with chemical weapons. The report said:

Saddam Hussein and his cousin "Chemical Ali" discussed killing thousands with chemical weapons before unleashing them on Kurds in 1988, according to tapes played on Monday in a trial of former Iraqi officials.

"I will strike them with chemical weapons and kill them all," a voice identified by prosecutors as that of Majeed, Saddam’s cousin and a senior aide, is heard saying.

"Who is going to say anything? The international community? A curse on the international community!" the voice continued.

"Yes, it’s effective, especially on those who don’t wear a mask immediately, as we understand," another voice, identified as that of Saddam, is heard saying on another tape.

"Sir, does it exterminate thousands?" a voice asks back.

Prosecutors said 180,000 people were killed, many of them gassed. Chief prosecutor Munqith al-Faroon also played on Monday video showing women and children lying dead on village streets and mountain slopes after what he said was a chemical attack ordered by Saddam.

Irandidban – 2007/01/10

January 11, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Opposition Groups Don’t Care about Rajavi

In response to repetition of slogans on "unity" by Rajavi, Didgah website expressed ideas which received some reactions. These reactions show that the gang of Rajavi is not accepted even among opposition groups.

Ali Nazer, director of Didgah website, childishly insists that the unity among opposition groups is an important issue for the MKO. "Why the MKO doesn’t call for unity? Is it harder than getting the support of a British or American representative?" he asks.

According to the self-conceit of MKO, he asks them:

"Isn’t it true that Massoud Rajavi, in his first message, addressed all those who share the same ideas on Republic, Democracy and the rule of Iranians? Isn’t it true that Mojahedin believe that Massoud Rajavi is their ideological leader? Then, why his particular request has not been answered? Why all MKO members and supporters, who are ready to give their lives for Massoud and Maryam even by self-immolation, have remained silence on this request? Why the MKO allowed the failure of "National Unity Project"?

Some people ask what if an organization or a political group doesn’t want to unite. I say, "Some senators didn’t want to support the MKO at first. It was the efforts of the MKO that led to their support for the group. The only major and positive difference is that in National Unity Project, Mojahedin don’t want and need not to expect others to support them but they want others to unite and form a common platform and front. In this front, no one necessarily supports nobody, but they make alliance to overthrow the enemy."

Ali Nazer intentionally deceives himself and ignores the fact that Iranian now know all MKO’s lies and that the MKO can only deceive those who are not familiar with Iran’s issues; those who don’t know the terrorist nature of the group well and support the group only for their own interests.

Then, Nazer turns to Mehdi Abrishamchi and addresses him as follows:

"I write this letter to you the chief of NCRI’s Peace Commission as an Iranian who has never had an organizational contact with the NCRI. Peace is not necessarily always made with an enemy; sometimes you have to make peace with a friend. Maybe it’s time for NCRI to initiate efforts for forming a commission (reconciliation commission, for instance) out of the NCRI, in which opponents, critics, and sympathizers can get together in order to form a broader front. There’s no doubt that the formation of such a commission will be very difficult since it’s really hard to forget all differences of these past 27 years. This needs sacrifice and patience. If we can’t form such a commission today, how will be able to sit beside each other in future’s parliament? How do you- who promise of a "democratic alternative"- want to solve the deep problems of forces, groups and individuals?"

Then, Nazer offers a list of people who can be invited to such commission by the MKO. He names people like Sadr Haj Seyed Javadi, Lahiji and others who left out the organization several years ago and now know the undemocratic nature of the group very well.

One of the people named by Nazer is Taghi Roozbeh who responds to this suggestion as follows:

"Overthrowing the regime for the sake of a democratic change requires a proportionate arrangement. Believing in overthrowing the regime is only a criterion gathering around which and ignoring other democratic facts means recreation of this hell we’re living in. This should be done in a way where there’s no place for dictators and other new administrators, such as Mojahedin and Imperialism who want to take advantage of public dissatisfaction and …finally, I should say that apart from above guidelines, all my familiarity with this group and its leaders, my experiences with them in prisons, during the revolution and their presence in Iraq and their ties with imperialist powers convince me not to cooperate with these people."

Many of these people and groups who are well aware of lack of popularity talk of the necessity of unity among forces who seek overthrow. Meanwhile, MKO is totally dependent on the western countries particularly the US in order to get something.

Iran didban, January 2, 2007

January 5, 2007 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts