Articles

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Terrorism, Weapon to Achieve Political Goals

There have been reports on MKO’s unofficials stance on renouncing armed struggle strategy. Some time ago, we also heard news on passivism of non-Mojahed members of NCRI. These sign may be related. We even heard that putting NCRI’s name on terror lists has been intensified. Since the NCRI was the only cover for the MKO, they decided to renounce armed struggle to be able to get out of defensive position.

For 24 years, MKO used terrorism as a means for getting to its political aims. They used it as a strategy that had no alternative. During 24 years, they blocked all other opposition groups; they delayed the victory of opposition group for 10 years by following the line of terror and suppression in Iraq.

Mojahedin, in the years when their armed strategy went to its peak, tried to legitimize armed battle through their non-Mojahed members; this was how they used it to serve their political goals.

Whenever they wanted to prove its strength and power, MKO conducted a series of terrorist operations inside Iran; then, they introduced it as their own popular base. This was, in fact, one of their repetitious methods. Many innocent people were killed in these operations of Rajavi, but he used them for his own political aims.

Theblackfile.com

February 13, 2006 0 comment

Maryam Rajavi

Terrorists Exploit Diplomatic Pressure

* Head of a group labeled terrorist by the U.S. urges the West to back an internal political push against Tehran.

AUVERS-SUR-OISE, France – Opening the gates of the secretive world of her headquarters North of Paris, the leader of an Iranian exile group urged Western governments Tuesday to support a campaign of internal political resistance to the regime in Tehran.

Maryam Rajavi of the Mujahedin Khalq, which has been officially designated a terrorist group by the United States and European Union, capitalized on the escalating diplomatic confrontation with Iran to hold a rare news conference at the heavily guarded compound on the wooded banks of the Oise River.

Rajavi, 52, called for the West to avoid responding to Iran’s nuclear ambitions with appeasement or a military invasion. Instead, she said political and economic sanctions would fortify democratic resistance among Iranians, with her group, whose name translates as People’s Holy Warriors, serving as a vanguard.

"The Iranian resistance has a capacity to bring about change," Rajavi said. "Knowing this, the mullahs have always in their dealings with their foreign counterparts demanded the imposition of harsh restrictions on the resistance, branding it as terrorist and a sect."

Despite Rajavi’s contention that she is a moderate Muslim espousing a peaceful, democratic Iran, her initiative seems a longshot at best.

Her group remains under investigation in France for allegedly carrying out terrorist attacks in Iran and plotting against Iranian government targets in Europe.

After French police arrested Rajavi during a raid on the compound by more than 1,000 officers in 2003, a number of her followers around Europe set themselves on fire. The grisly protests exposed an internal culture that mixes Marxism and Islam, isolates members from their families and gives Rajavi the status of a guru, according to French investigators and former members.

Moreover, Mujahedin Khalq’s former alliance with since-deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in Iraq’s war against Iran alienated many Iranians. Because of the group’s lack of support in Iran and dubious image, Washington, Paris and other capitals do not see the group as a viable force, according to analysts and Western officials.

"Given the sect-like, totalitarian and terrorist nature of this organization," enlisting it as an ally seems "indefensible," said analyst Dimitri Delalieu in a recent report for the European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center, a Brussels think tank.

Rajavi and fellow leaders were released pending the outcome of the French investigation. They say the charges are groundless and part of a politically motivated attempt by France to facilitate deal-making with the Iranian government.

In any case, the group retains a measure of relevance because it periodically has made significant disclosures about Tehran’s nuclear program. It relies on an espionage network in Iran and sometimes, analysts say, tips from Western and Israeli spy services.

"They are more marginal than ever," said Olivier Roy, a Middle East expert at the National Center for Scientific Research in Paris. "They will maintain their contacts with Western governments only because intelligence services have so little on Iran. The CIA and others have great difficulty getting information in Iran. So because of the lack of anything better, the Mujahedin will still be able to play that role."

Rajavi appeared determined Tuesday to rehabilitate her image. A legislator each from Britain, France, Belgium and Portugal were on hand to endorse her and demand that her group be removed from lists of terrorist organizations.

Rajavi said the West should use sanctions to pressure the Iranian government to submit to a referendum on the future of the country’s political leadership that would be watched by international monitors.

"It would be fantastic if the international community could intervene and impose a referendum," she said.

But she declined to rule out armed intervention, saying, "The tactics and methods have been imposed not by us, but by the mullahs."

By Sebastian Rotella

February 2, 2006 0 comment

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Iraqis Want MKO’s Expulsion

Iraqis want the new government to issue a statement on expelling the members of terrorist MKO from Iraq.

History shows that terrorist MKO had an active role in former Iraqi government. Since its arrival in Iraq, MKO started to conduct former regime’s evil plans against Iraqi people.

After the fall of former regime, Iraqis heard happy news on the expulsion of this group from the country; a decision that was made by interim government but the US forces didn’t allow it.

Today, we live under the shade of a popular government with elected parliament. Despite being threatened by terrorists, Iraqis showed up at polling stations to elect their representatives.

Now, the nation asks members of parliament to expel this organization due to its terrorist records.

We talked to a number of our compatriots to know their ideas about MKO’s expulsion from Iraq:

Sa’doon Jalil said: "Through your magazine, I ask Iraqi officials not to forget the martyrs. They should make a tough decision to expel the terrorist organization of Mojahedin-e Khalq from Iraq. In the past, people suffered much from this organization and it’s still a big threat for Iraq.

A man, introducing himself as Doctor Sabih, said: "Interim government’s decision on the issue is clear. It insists on expelling this group from Iraq and it allows Iraqi people to press charges against the leaders of the organization for the crimes they have done. This can be a base for a tougher decision on this organization and I believe that Iraqi parliament (comprised of elected representatives) can make the decision.

Ms. Asra Aziz, from Iraqi National Assembly wants to advocate those who have suffered from former regime and its security organizations: "Mojahedin-e Khalq was a leverage working for former regime’s security and intelligence services. It committed numerous crimes against our nation and making a decision on the expulsion of this organization boosts the decision of interim government and meets the requests of Iraqi people. "

Sheikh Saheb Abbas, cleric from the city of Al-Sho’leh, remembers the crimes of terrorist MKO and says: "I am a witness of MKO crimes. This organization surrounded prayers in Al-Mohsen mosque and the former regime used the members of this organization to beat the prayers and martyr a number of them. Those prayers had gathered to protest the killing of Seyed Mohammed Sadr. I saw foul behavior of Mojahedin with Iraqi people. I don’t know why there’s silence on the presence of this group in our country. This organization is a dirty stain on pure soil of Iraq. Does their presence in Iraq is beneficial for our country? I ask Iraqi officials and our representatives in Iraq National Assembly to issue a decision on the expulsion of this terrorist organization from Iraq. The Assembly should ban all interactions with this group, as ordered in Fatwas of supreme religious leaders."

Mr. Ghassem Hassan, owner of a bookstore in Motnabi Street, expressed his views as follows:

"The presence of this group in Iraq is a threat for Iraq and Iraqis. Despite the decision of interim government, they are still active in Iraq. It seems that it’s beneficial for the US. They want to keep the group in Iraq to do what they desire.

This organization has the capability to work for any devil in order to get to its own goals. They proved this when working for Saddam. It served former regime and denied it after the fall of Saddam, although they used millions of dollars of Iraqis. We Iraqis don’t know why interim government’s decision on the group is not executed. This is what people want."

Majid Ali, referring to the necessity of developing a law for the trial of leaders of MKO in special courts, says: "this organization plundered the properties of Iraqi people. They martyred our compatriot sand conducted anti-human crimes. I ask for the expulsion of this group and trial of its members for their crimes against Iraqis.

At the end of the interview, we found that all Iraqis insist on making a tough decision on MKO expulsion by National Assembly. Iraqi people also asked for the trial of MKO leaders and commanders for their crimes in Iraq. We want Iraqi to be purified from terrorist groups.

Al-Shahid/No. 259

February 2, 2006 0 comment

Duplicity of the MEK nature

THE MUJAHEDIN DOES NOT REPRESENT IRANIAN AMERICANS!

TELL CONGRESS THAT THE MUJAHEDIN DOES NOT REPRESENT IRANIAN AMERICANS! The Mujahedin-e Khalq organization (MKO/MEK) is beefing up its campaign to get off the State Department’s terrorist list and receive US funding by presenting itself as representative of the Iranian-American community.

The MKO has since the early 1990s been on the State Department’s terrorist list. In 1997, their political wing, the National Council of Resistance of Iran was also added to the terrorist list, making it difficult for the organization to lobby in Washington in theory.

In practice, however, the Mujahedin has maintained a very strong lobbying arm in Washington DC, and continued to pursue their political objectives while arguing that they represent the Iranian-American community. On January 20th, the Los Angeles Times wrote that “Iranian Americans generally… oppose a nine-year State Department crackdown on an organization [the MKO] that it classifies as terrorist but that the Iranian community considers a resistance group.”

The Mujahedin has increased its political activities in Washington in the hope that a showdown between the US and Iran would lead Washington to de-list them from the terrorist list and support them as a legitimate and popular opposition group.

For instance, HR 282, introduced by Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), a long time supporter of the Mujahedin on Capitol Hill, states that the White House must “designate at least one democratic opposition organization as eligible to receive assistance” from the US government within 90 days of the bills passing.

Analyst point out the similarities between the Iran Democracy Act (HR 282) and the Iraq Democracy Act (from 1998), which resulted in Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress receiving millions of dollars from the US government.

The Mujahedin is seeking to present themselves as representatives of the Iranian-American community in order to get off the terrorist list and receive financial support from the US government.

NIAC has prepared a letters to your House Representatives as well as to the Los Angeles Times, pointing out that the MKO does not represent the Iranian-American community. It is extremely important that Iranian Americans participate in this debate, and that they lend their expertise and unique perspectives on this matter.

Please edit the letter and make it more personal. A personal perspective has a far greater impact than a letter with only abstract arguments. Do also strengthen or soften the arguments to make it better reflect your personal perspective.

Please note that due to the existing terrorist classification of the MKO, NIAC will not prepare a letter endorsing or favoring their position

The National Iranian American Council

January 2006

January 31, 2006 0 comment

Duplicity of the MEK nature

Iranian Communist Lies About Iran

Michael Rubin’s “Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq” (FrontPage Magazine.com, January 13, 2006, http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=20780&p=1)

classified correctly the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists. Even the New York Times has reported that some Iranians refer to Massoud Rajavi as the “Pol Pot of Iran”. (Elizabeth Rubin, “The Cult of Rajavi”, New York Times Magazine, July 13, 2003,

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/13/magazine/13MUJAHADEEN.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5007&en=6b6a11b0fdb450b1&ex=1373428800&partner=USERLAND

pagewanted=1&ei=5007&en=6b6a11b0fdb450b1&ex=1373428800&partner=USERLAND)

Ali Safavi’s “Missing the Mark on Iran” (FrontPageMagazine.com, January 27, 2006, http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21064) should become a textbook case example on how easily America’s terrorist enemies can have their lies published in the American media.

Michael Rubin’s “Hitting the Mark on Iran” (FrontPageMagazine.com, January 27, 2006, http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=21065&p=1) has exposed some of the dishonest tactics the MEK has used with success in duping the American media and the American public. One could fill books about the dishonesty of the MEK, if any American publisher dares to expose the names of Democrats and Republicans in Congress who have been duped.

The MEK has been on the terrorist lists of the State Department since the administration of former President Bill Clinton. In September 2002, President George W. Bush’s background paper for his remarks at the United Nations listed the MEK as one of three Saddam Hussein-supported terrorists operating in Iraq. The MEK was a pretext for the invasion of Iraq. In April 2003, American and coalition forces did attack and kill some of the MEK terrorists at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. However, some analysts have claimed that this was a staged attack because the American military could have destroyed easily the entire camp and its four thousand or more terrorists. The American government ordered the American military to protect the MEK and to permit the MEK to keep individual weapons. In 2004, the American government recognized the MEK terrorists at Camp Ashraf, Iraq as having protected person status under the Fourth Geneva Convention (civilian individuals!). The American government has closed the Washington, DC office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) in the National Press Building. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, a supporter of the MEK while a Republican Senator, raided the home of NCRI spokesperson Alireza Jafarzadeh and took boxes of documents from his home.

The following are some of the deceptive tactics contained in Ali Safavi’s article:

1. He introduced himself as a sociologist and as someone who has studied the history of the MEK. While it is true that he studied sociology at the University of Michigan, he has been actively involved in the MEK as a military commander and as a spokesperson for the NCRI. A photograph of Ali Safavi in military uniform is posted at: http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/info/Safavi.htm

Anne Singleton and her husband Massoud Khodabandeh know the MEK well. Anne Singleton was involved with the MEK for nearly 20 years. She is the author of the book, Saddam’s Private Army. Massoud Khodabandeh was an MEK commander, too. Anne Singleton’s Web site in the United Kingdom, Iran Interlink, is an excellent source of the truth about the MEK.

2. Ali Safavi claims that the most anti-MEK Web sites in America are left-wing Web sites. Of course, he did not cite even one example of a left-wing Web site critical of the MEK. The truth is that the major American Web sites critical of the MEK are right-wing, not left-wing. Examples of right-wing Web sites publishing authors critical of the MEK: (a) Traitors USA http://groups.yahoo.com/group/traitorsusa/

(b) Antiwar.com http://www.antiwar.com/

Traitors USA is my Yahoo! Group specializing in the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists and the Democrats and Republicans who support the MEK. My Republican Party credentials are easy to check in the public records. In 1990, while I lived in Los Angeles County, California, Republican voters elected me to the Republican County Central Committee. In 1992, I was a Republican candidate for California State Assembly, endorsed by the California Republican Assembly. Now that I live in Orange County, California, it is a matter of public record that I am a registered Republican. The Web site of California’s Secretary of State discloses my contributions to conservative Republican candidates. Next to the door of my office at California State University, Fullerton is information on how students can join David Horowitz’s Students for Academic Freedom: http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/

In a few minutes, anyone who cares to do Internet searches can find postings about me as a Republican professor at California State University, Fullerton. Even as an undergraduate student at the University of Michigan, I was an active member of the College Republicans. I have never been in the left wing.

Many Americans who rely upon comedians or the evening television news might think that Antiwar.com must be left-wing. The American media continues to publish lies that only left-wing activists are anti-war. For years, right-wing writers at Antiwar.com have been exposing the lies of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists. The most prolific critic of the MEK at Antiwar.com has been Justin Raimondo. Justin Raimondo is a former Libertarian Party and Republican Party candidate for public offices. Justin Raimondo is the author of the book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement

LewRockwell.com is anti-state, anti-war, pro-market. It is an important resource for writings supporting capitalism. A search for MEK will return articles exposing the MEK.

As a right-wing author, I do submit articles or comments critical of the MEK across the entire political spectrum. I have had some success with postings at progressive Web sites.

The background paper for my September 15, 2005 speech to a Libertarian Party group is available at:

http://www.liberty66.org/

The title of the speech was “Libertarians and the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) Terrorists”.

So, while it is possible to find some postings critical of the MEK at left-wing Web sites, I rely upon right-wing Web sites to find large numbers of postings critical of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists.

3. Ali Safavi did not include the red, communist flag of the MEK. Kenneth Timmerman has posted some photographs of MEK demonstrators near the United Nations Building on September 14, 2005 at: http://www.iran.org/news/24-Irandemos.htm

The American military has permitted the MEK to continue to fly its communist flag at Camp Ashraf, Iraq:

http://www.iranian.com/PhotoDay/2003/April/base6.html

4. Ali Safavi has not written a true account of the embarrassment of some members of Congress for signing Iran statements. While the January 15, 2003 New York Times contained a full-page advertisement by MEK supporters, the advertisement listed only six of the members of Congress. Republican Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen refused to release all of the 150 names she claimed supported the MEK. For a more accurate account of the members of Congress, see Sam Dealey’s “Rep. Ros-Lehtinen defends Iranian group labeled terrorist front for Saddam Hussein” (The Hill, April 8, 2003, http://www.thehill.com/news/040803/roslehtinen.aspx)

5. Ali Safavi’s history of the MEK failed to include that both MEK and Islamic leaders were prisoners in the same jails during the reign of the Shah of Iran. Islamic leaders of Iran know that the MEK is 100% communist and 0% Islamic. A popular Persian term for the MEK can be translated as two-faced.

6. Massoud Rajavi, the supreme leader of the MEK, learned from Iranian history that the pro-Stalin Tudeh Party failed to sell godless communism in Islamic Iran. Massoud Rajavi thought that the techniques of Che Guevara and of the liberation theology in Latin America would be a more successful model for a communist takeover of Iran. Roman Catholic popes have been strong opponents of liberation theology. Ali Safavi is wrong about Roman Catholic positions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology

7. The MEK have committed terrible atrocities against Kurds in Iraq. To save bullets for Iran, the MEK ran over Kurdish civilians with armored personnel carriers or tanks. The American military has interviewed hundreds of MEK terrorists at Camp Ashraf, Iraq and has identified many who should be tried for war crimes. See: Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball’s “Shades of Gray” (Newsweek, October 13, 2004, http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6242223/site/newsweek)

8. Ali Safavi’s tales of the treatment of MEK members at Camp Ashraf, Iraq are pure fiction. The MEK’s leaders hate any MEK members who try to leave the MEK. Near Camp Ashraf, Iraq is Camp Freedom, Iraq. At Camp Freedom, Iraq, there are approximately 200 former members of the MEK who were able to escape from Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Ali Safavi failed to mention that the MEK has tortured for many years many MEK members who attempted to leave Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Some MEK members died during the MEK torture at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. For details, read books by former MEK members: (a) Anne Singleton’s Saddam’s Private Army

http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/child%20pages/book_I-I.htm (b) Masoud Banisadr’s Masoud.

9. Ali Safavi’s description of the roles of women in the MEK is fantasy. He failed to mention some details covered in books by Anne Singleton and Masoud Banisadr, such as: (a) mandatory divorces (b) segregation of men and women at Camp Ashraf, Iraq (c) mandatory assignment of spouses for MEK leaders (d) mandatory confession of masturbation. Ali Safavi can start by writing the truth about how Maryam Rajavi became the third wife of Massoud Rajavi. Members of the right wing who claim to support family values will reject the Pol Pot of Iran.

10. Ali Safavi failed to disclose that even foreign reporters at Camp Ashraf, Iraq have written about the celebrations of the murders of Americans. Iranians who lived in Tehran during the American hostage crisis know that the MEK were demanding the executions of all of the American hostages. Ayatollah Khomeini refused the demands of the MEK. Ali Safavi failed to disclose that the Persian language Web sites and satellite television programs of the MEK have anti-Western, anti-imperialist content. The MEK rose to power in Iran in the 1960’s and 1970’s by being the most anti-Shah and most anti-Western terrorist group in Iran. There are posted videotapes of Massoud Rajavi meeting with leaders of Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq. The anti-Western, anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist ideology of the MEK is common knowledge to any Iranian who lived in Iran before the Iranian Revolution.

11. Ali Safavi failed to disclose the location of the MEK’s supreme leader, Massoud Rajavi. Recent posted reports include claims that the American military is keeping Massoud Rajavi at Camp Mercury, Iraq. The reports do not include whether Massoud Rajavi is being kept for future war crimes trials in Iraq or is being protected by the American military.

In a few minutes, anyone can perform an Internet search for “Ali Safavi”. They will discover that he has been speaking for the NCRI or the MEK for many years. They will discover that many famous American newspapers have quoted him without bothering to check the accuracy of anything he says. Michael Rubin was correct in concluding that the writings of Ali Safavi are dishonest but useful. The real villains in this case are the idiots and dupes in the American media who cannot be troubled to publish truthful, investigative reporting about the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists.

At Traitors USA, you can find my exchanges of emails with Ali Safavi. When he discovered that I graduated, too, from the University of Michigan and am a professor, he found it difficult to attack my academic credentials. While he describes himself as a sociologist, he fails to disclose on which faculty he serves or in any other way he works as a sociologist. His fictional tales about the MEK do not work with me. I have known MEK members for 37 years. While I was a doctoral student at Michigan State University, I attended MEK meetings. I studied Persian at Harvard University and met a Harvard professor who writes truthfully about Iran. Professor Richard N. Frye’s Greater Iran is a truthful story of an American professor who spent 60 years researching Iran and the surrounding areas: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1568591772/qid=1138430187/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-4092926-4396717?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Relatives of my Iranian wife of 37 years have died fighting for the MEK.

The Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists publish daily large amounts of print, television, and of Internet media lies. Unfortunately, most American journalists are either too stupid or too dishonest to expose America’s communist terrorist enemies.

I am a Professor of Accounting who has graduated from the University of Michigan, Harvard Business School, and from Michigan State University. As a life-long registered Republican and as an elected member of the Los Angeles County Republican Central Committee, I have always been in the right wing of the political spectrum. Ali Safavi’s statements about left-wing attacks on the MEK are misleading. While you can find some progressive Web sites critical of the MEK, you can find communist Web sites supporting the MEK.

During the Vietnam War, I volunteered and served in the Army in Vietnam to fight the communists. If I were young enough to serve in the Army today, I would not join the Army to further the goals of corrupt Democrats and Republicans in Congress who support the communist overthrow of Iran by the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists.

From Lenin to Fidel Castro to Pol Pot, there have been some evil American political and business interests who have supported the communist takeovers of countries. Americans need to cancel subscriptions to any newspapers supporting or publishing lies about the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists. Americans need to vote out of office all Democrats and Republicans who accept campaign contributions from the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists’ supporters.

Professor Paul Sheldon Foote

California State University, Fullerton, pfoote@fullerton.edu

January 27, 2006

January 31, 2006 0 comment

Iraq

Al-Zarqawi Reportedly Moves to New Area of Iraq

A report by al-Jazeera satellite TV on January 22, citing Iraqi military officials who claim that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, is in the Diyala province (northeast of Baghdad), runs contrary to the assessments of Iraqi intelligence services and U.S. military intelligence in Iraq.

The new Iraqi intelligence service (headed by Mohammad Shahwani), U.S. military intelligence and the Badr Organization (which operates an independent parallel intelligence service) have long believed that the core of the al-Zarqawi network is concentrated around the Euphrates River valley in northern Anbar, along which the key towns of Qaim, Haditha, Hit, Ramadi, Habbaniyah and Fallujah are situated. These towns are considered to be the most insecure and dangerous in Iraq, where insurgents have—at one time or another—exerted complete control.

The assessment of U.S. and Iraqi intelligence derives from intense counter-insurgency operations and the interrogation of thousands of captured insurgents. Moreover, Anbar and Nineveh provinces are the only areas in Iraq where the al-Zarqawi network has developed roots, not least because of the proximity to the Syrian border, from where the vast majority of jihadis infiltrate the strife-torn country. Given the realities on the ground, the al-Zarqawi network is highly unlikely to move key figures outside its main base of operation for prolonged periods.

More broadly, Diyala is a stronghold of the so-called "Nationalist" insurgency, where even indigenous Islamist rebels (mostly connected to the "Islamic Army in Iraq") have been discouraged from operating in the province. The local characteristics of Diyala’s insurgents, coupled with the proliferation of Iraqi nationalist organizations (which operate in the open under the guise of civil society forums), make it extremely difficult for jihadis to operate in the province. If al-Zarqawi was operating from Diyala, it is likely that he would be quickly identified and killed by Iraqi rebels who are now beginning to distance themselves from extremist insurgents and jihadis.

After Anbar province, Diyala ranks as the most strife-torn region in Iraq. There are four factors that explain the volatility of this most strategic region of Iraq’s 18 provinces. First of all, Diyala has historically been a bastion of Arab and Iraqi nationalism (Baathist or otherwise). The province’s strategic location and its proximity to Iran make it a highly prized and sensitive region in the eyes of Iraqi nationalists. While the downfall of Saddam Hussein had a catastrophic impact on the morale of Arab and Iraqi nationalists in Diyala, these forces quickly mobilized to fight the U.S. and its Iraqi allies.

Second, Diyala is the only province in Iraq where Shi’ites and Sunnis are represented in roughly equal numbers. While there are no official statistics, the former are believed to have a slight majority. The finely balanced sectarian demographics became a violently contentious issue after the intervention, which has promoted identity politics in Iraq. Broadly speaking, the Shi’ites in Diyala regard SCIRI and the Badr Organization as protectors and employers, while the Sunnis see these organizations as Iranian-backed quislings that are exploiting the occupation to consolidate power.

Third, SCIRI and the Badr Organization have had a strong presence in Diyala since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. In fact, the Badr Organization (in its previous capacity as the Badr Corps) entered Iraq from the Diyala province from April 9, 2003 to early May 2003 and established bases in Baqouba (the province’s capital), Miqdadiyah and Khalis. In that crucial month, Badr forces fought pitched battles with remnants of the ousted regime, including Baath party diehards, Diyala tribesmen loyal to Saddam Hussein and the Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization (Terrorism Monitor, Volume 1: Issue 5, November 7, 2003). As the insurgency deteriorated in Diyala, the Badr Organization steadily increased its presence and operations.

Finally, the presence of an Iranian dissident group, the formerly-armed Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), in Diyala has created tensions between prominent tribesmen and other influential actors in and around Khalis, where the MKO’s Ashraf base is located. While the MKO (which is classified as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government and the European Union) was disarmed in May 2003 and the movement of its members are supposedly monitored by U.S. forces, the organization regularly hosts meetings in Ashraf in which tribesmen and other influential individuals from Diyala (many with links to the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein) voice support for the organization, demand a withdrawal of foreign troops and strongly attack the new Iraqi government. The emergence of Ashraf as a platform for Iraqi nationalists has prompted the Badr Organization to increase surveillance operations in and around Khalis, and to engage in intimidation campaigns against key individuals who visit the camp.

The visit to Mashad (northeast Iran) by a Diyala tribal, legal and religious delegation reveals an intriguing (and under-reported) feature of the Iraq conflict. The delegation was hosted by the Habilian Association (http://habilian.com), a research and propaganda outlet that is close to the Iranian security establishment. While the visit was ostensibly touted as an opportunity to discuss ways of expelling the MKO from Iraq, the transcript of the main meeting (http://habilian.com/view.asp?ID=00439) leaves little doubt that the event was tied to the growing insurgency in Diyala and its local, national and international ramifications.

Global Terrorism analysis

January 31, 2006 0 comment

The Ideology of the MEK

Members of Mojahedin are obliged to kill themselves when they face arrest

Did you know… that members of Mojahedin are obliged to kill themselves when they face arrest?

Why is it that no member of the Mojahedin is ever briefed as to what they should do if they fall into enemy hands?

From the time of the Shah, carrying a cyanide tablet and, where possible, a hand grenade has been a part of the everyday life of any member of MEK. To allow yourself to be arrested alive is regarded as a sin, as betrayal and as a crime committed against the organization and its leaders. Conversely, ‘martyrdom’ through suicide by any available means has been encouraged whenever and wherever a member has faced the enemy. During the era of the Shah, this enemy was the police or any other law enforcement agent. The idea had been originally taken from the revolutionary groups existing during the 1960s and 1970s in South America and other parts of the world which were engaged in guerrilla war against Imperialism backed by the communist Soviet Union. The explanation for this requirement was that it was”to protect information”and”to sacrifice yourself in a way that the enemy could not obtain any information from you under torture”.

A long time has past since then, but in the Mojahedin the idea of killing yourself in the event of facing arrest has not changed. It is an established fact that a Mojahed-e Khalq (People’s Warrior) will kill him/her self before being arrested. It is for this reason that no member of the MEK is ever advised what they must do if they are unable to kill themselves when they are arrested.

After the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the consequent sidelining of the Mojahedin in the establishment of the new Islamic Republic, Massoud Rajavi introduced a new phase referred to as”Lebanonisation”. This meant instigating antagonistic action which would lead to bloodshed. Any kind of conflict, any kind of riot, unrest, attack from any side… and especially having a supporter injured or, even better, killed, was a good point from which to fire up morale, to advertise the victimization of the organisation and in particular to ask for revenge.

Later, living on the blood of both friend and foe became an integral part of Rajavi’s strategy. The defeat of the tragic paramilitary assault on Iran in 1988, in which about 5,000 untrained civilians including old women, teenagers, PhD students from western universities and even disabled people, were asked to go to Iraq to fight against the Iranian Army with eight years’ war experience, was announced by Rajavi as”the insurance of the organization for years to come”. The ensuing massacre of about 3,000 untrained Mojahedin civilians and the deaths and injuries suffered by the Iranian Army created enough enmity between them to pave the way for acts of violence and vengeance for several years to come and to negate the emergence of any non-violent ideas which could have arisen. Rajavi’s concept of”insuring the future of the organisation”was that this fresh blood would halt the advance of any possible solution except that of the bloody take over of power – which, obviously, was reserved for the only force which enjoyed the use of Saddam Hussein’s tanks and guns.

Later this need for blood brought Rajavi to employ even more sinister and even nastier ways and tactics. In recent years there have been numerous cases in which individuals who had been sent to perform terrorist acts inside Iran had been sent deliberately to their death in order to provide fresh blood and increase the number of martyrs.

The majority of these individuals had been given just enough training and planning to carry out their terrorist operation and had been told nothing about what should happen afterwards. They were given no information about how to return or how to deal with arrest. The only possible interpretation of this was that they were not only expected to not come back, but were in fact not expected to survive.

The expectation was that if they faced arrest, they would fight to the last bullet, to kill or injure as many as possible and then kill themselves. The numbers of people who have used their cyanide tablet and/or exploded their grenade tight to their bodies are countless.

A few who have survived, like Mrs. Marjan Malek or Mr. Arash Sameti, or people like Ebrahim Khodabandeh and Jamil Bassam who did not have the opportunity to kill themselves, revealed later that they had been indoctrinated by the cult such that the torture they had been told would be inflicted upon them after their arrest was so terrifying that suicide seemed to be the only option.

But Rajavi’s quest for fresh martyrs did not stop here. Numerous cases have been recorded in which disaffected members have been taken to the Iraq- Iran border in the middle of the night and made to walk towards Iranian border posts. From behind them the MEK would shoot to prevent them turning back and to alert the Iranian border guards, who would in turn shoot at the advancing victim. There are also numerous cases in which someone has vanished, or has died in suspicions circumstances, but who has later been announced as a martyr killed by the Iranian regime.

The use of cyanide and grenades and the obligation to die before capture has continued from the time of Shah to the present, but the purpose of it has changed completely. It is no longer about protecting information (otherwise Maryam Rajavi and her cohorts would have killed themselves upon their arrest in Paris in June 2003). It is now about providing numbers to add to the list of Mojahedin Martyrs.

The purpose is to”insure”the organisation’s future since, in the atmosphere of bloodshed and revenge, no nonviolent alternative or opposition to the ruling regime could emerge.

One of the most deplorable ways of achieving this”insurance policy”has been where the terrorist teams sent for operations have been instructed that anyone who might suspect their identities while travelling should be killed. Behzad Alishahi explained one such incident in which his team mates killed an innocent worker who was in their way only because he had seen them and told them not to go through a factory.

Alishahi later was sent back to the camp and underwent all kinds of pressure for arguing against this cold blooded killing.

Fortunately since the fall of Saddam Hussein, although Rajavi has desperately tried every avenue to generate some killings and/or torture to produce fresh blood, the cult’s success has been minimal. Even the arrest of Khodabandeh and Bassam in Syria and their transfer to Evin prison, which Rajavi hoped would buy”new insurance”for the organisation, failed totally. During the past three and a half years, the only new blood they have achieved has been the deaths of two members and the permanent disability of several more who committed acts of self-immolation. Interestingly, the culture of carrying cyanide tablets, even in western countries, is encouraged more than ever. The cult leaders’ only hope for survival is linked to bloodshed, and they are impatiently waiting for any opportunity to kill any number of people no matter if they are friends, foes or even passers by.

Survivors’ Report/No. 20/January 2006

January 31, 2006 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Targeting a ‘terrorist group’

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Reader’s Reply: Targeting a ‘terrorist group’

Original Article: Iranian Americans Rally for a Different Approach Jan. 20, 2006

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Targeting a ‘terrorist group’

‘ font-size: 10pt”>It is sad to read about the Mujahedin Khalq organization (a.k.a. MEK, MKO, NCRI and several other names) in that the terrorist group is portrayed as the representative of a quarter of a million Iranian Americans. The group was in charge of killing several Americans during the shah’s regime in Iran. Its ideology is a mixture of Islam and Marxism. The group is run like a cult, in that the "holy" leaders (Maryam and Massoud Rajavi) must be obeyed at all costs, even if this means sacrificing families and children.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>In 1980s and ’90s, the group’s leaders forced members to abandon their children to come to military camps in Iraq to participate in fighting the Iraqi Shiite uprising alongside Saddam Hussein’s troops. It is no exaggeration to say that more than 95% of Iranians and Iraqis, both in their native countries and in the U.S., abhor the organization and are puzzled by the fact that some U.S. politicians sympathize with this terrorist group. More shocking is the Pentagon’s move to provide it with a haven in Iraq for potential future attacks on Iranian soil.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>I guess terrorist groups can be supported by the Pentagon whenever the goals justify the means.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>
KAMIAR ZADEH

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Los Angeles

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Here we present paragraphes of mentioned article:

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Iranian Americans Rally for a Different Approach

‘ font-size: 10pt”>By Nick Timiraos, Times Staff Writer

‘ font-size: 10pt”>http://www.latimes.com/news/

‘ font-size: 10pt”>WASHINGTON —….

‘ font-size: 10pt”>
The Iranians demonstrated as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice demanded that the United Nations take action against Tehran for its nuclear development ambitions.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>"We’ve been very clear that we believe that the time has come for a referral of Iran to the Security Council," Rice said. "The Iranians have been given every opportunity to find a way to a solution…. They have not taken those opportunities."

‘ font-size: 10pt”>…The People’s Mujahedin, also known as Mujahedin Khalq, or MEK, was added to the State Department’s terrorist list in 1997 after attacks inside Iran. Some of the attacks were directed toward Americans, U.S. officials charge. But the group’s supporters, including many members of Congress, dispute the grounds for the terrorist designation.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>At Thursday’s rally, Iranian Americans from across the country demanded a change in U.S. policy toward the MEK, a step they said would allow the group to pursue internal resistance in Iran.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>…In a video shown at the rally, Rep. Bob Filner (D-Chula Vista) supported the call to remove the MEK from the list.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Rice, in remarks Wednesday, said the administration’s position on the MEK "has not changed."….

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Iran’s new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, supports the Islamic regime’s push on nuclear research, arguing that the country has the right under international law to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy program.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>…"We are not looking for a war or military action from the West. We don’t want financial support," said Shirin Nariman, of the Council for Democratic Change in Iran, which planned the rally. "We are merely asking for a third option, to support a democratic regime change in Iran."

‘ font-size: 10pt”>"The MEK is the only opposition group that Tehran fears," said Raymond Tanter, a visiting professor at Georgetown University.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>

‘ font-size: 10pt”>LA Times online edition, January 2006

January 26, 2006 0 comment

Former members of the MEK

Survivors’ Report, No.20- Editorial

This month’s article reviewing the activities of the Association of Victims of the MEK has brought back some special memories.

One thing that is clear from the past year’s activities is that some extraordinary people are involved in this Association; people whom I have had the pleasure of meeting and working with over the past year; people who have displayed a wealth of ability, humanity, kindness, wit and good humor; people with strengths perhaps they are not aware of in themselves. For some of these people, to have survived the crushing experiences during their time with the MEK is an extraordinary feat in itself. For them to find the strength and conviction to continue to speak out the truth is truly inspiring.

We all know people who have left the Mojahedin for whom simply the experience of having been in the cult has become a virtual prison from which they cannot escape. MEK indoctrination infects their thinking even now and stunts their lives in every aspect.

The former members who have had the courage to speak out about the crimes of the Mojahedin leaders are all extraordinary people. When these people joined the MEK it was because they were not ordinary; they felt the desperate need of their people for freedom and they acted on it. Now, they have come out of the MEK with their integrity intact. They did not give way to the crushing manipulations of Rajavi. It is because of this that they are able to resist the threats and expose the machinations of the leaders. It is also, we should not forget, because Rajavi is not godlike; he is mortal and fallible like the rest of us.

News of Massoud Rajavi’s arrest and interrogation by US forces in Camp Mercury in Iraq should not come as a surprise.

After all, the man is fallible. What is of greater significance is that the unanswered questions which the MEK leadership tried so hard over the past three years to sweep under the carpet have now infiltrated into the body of the organisation. Questions about Rajavi’s relations with Saddam Hussein, human rights abuses inside the camps and the massacre of Kurds and Shiites are no longer the questions of former members, but are rather the question of existing members.

Rajavi, having failed to fob off the ‘enemy’, is now hearing the same questions emitted from the mouth of his devotees inside the organisation. Looking back over the past, as we do at this time of year, what strikes me as most interesting is just how far the MEK has shrunk from its glory days at the time of the revolution in 1979, when it could command thousands of supporters. Now, instead of trying to set up her own regime in Iran, Maryam Rajavi is spending her entire resources on squabbling with a handful of former members – the Association – in the west. No doubt the people of Iran will be truly grateful to know that the MEK’s attention is taken up elsewhere.

Iran-Interlink

January 26, 2006 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MKO, Part of Zionist Lobby

The scandal of infiltration of some people-affiliated with Zionist lobby- into the US government and spying for Israeli government, with the purpose of directing the United States towards a war on Iran, is a reality that shouldn’t be ignored.

FBI and US Justice Department have concluded in their investigations that some anti-Iran figures want to instigate neoconservaties against Iran.

“Larry Franklin”, who’s been sentenced to 12 years in prison, is a tough anti-Iran figure who transferred Pentagon and NSA’s intelligence on Iran to AIPAC officials and Israeli diplomats. He tried to transfer secret reports on Iran’s threat for Israel and US interests to Zionist AIPAC lobby, with the hope that AIPAC could press the US to take tougher stance towards Iran.

Larry Franklin has admitted having contacts with two senior officials of AIPAC: Steven Rosen former director of AIPAC, Wiseman and an Israeli diplomat in the United States.

According to a file presented by US Attorney General, Rosen and Wiseman tried since 1999 to penetrate US officials and get sensitive intelligence through contacts.

David Sutterfield, second American diplomat in Iraq, gave secret information to Rosen in 2002.

Larry Franklin, formerly deputy of Douglas Feith, had close relationship with some US neo-conservatives outside Bush administration. The case also includes the names of Richard Rhodes, head of the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, and Michael Ledeen, an American Enterprise Institute scholar who arranged a meeting between Franklin and several Iran opposition figures. Iranian oppositions gave them some information on Iran’s threat for US forces in the region.

With a brief look at the type of propagandistic attacks by these people (who work to guarantee Israel’s interests -even if its costs Iran’s destruction- and consider Iran an obstacle in the way of killing innocent Palestinians) and considering the timing of MKO’s shows under the name of”revelations”, the roots of MKO’s propagandas (particularly in the US) could be well understood.

Douglas Feith is behind the scenario, the performance of part of which has been given to the terrorist MKO; in return for this cooperation, MKO would be protected in Iraq.

All their purposes can be summarized in”efforts for instigating Bush administration to attack Iran, before Iraq crisis could effect decisions of Bush administration”.

The presence of David Sutterfield in Iraq should also be considered a part of warmongers’ plans.

Since this policy has repeatedly been revealed (in Irandidban.com and elsewhere) and there are solid evidences on the issue, FBI officials should clarify the MKO’s dangerous role in spreading propaganda to instigate public opinion against Iran and prevent them from conducting illegal anarchical activities.

January 26, 2006 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts