Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton
US State Department
Dear Ms. Secretary, 
With regards, on behalf of the ex-members and families picketing outside the Ashraf garrison in Iraq we wish to draw your attention to the following:
We were informed that you have stated: “M.E.K. cooperation in the successful and peaceful closure of Camp Ashraf” will be “a key factor in any decision” on its longstanding request that the State Department lift its terrorist designation.
We have no argument on lifting its terrorist designation or not, since it is not our concern and has no effect on our tasks. This is up to the US administration which will of course act on national and political interests. As far as we are concerned, we are seeking a humanitarian goal to which no government (including Iraq and the US) and no international organization has paid any proper attention.
The MEK led by Massoud Rajavi is a destructive mind control cult which is manipulating its members using psychological techniques in order to keep them captive. The families of the members have been sitting outside the Ashraf garrison for more than two years with the request of just visiting their loved ones freely. This request has been completely denied by Rajavi. He is afraid that once these people meet their families and have the smallest access to the outside world their minds would break free and they would no longer stay in the cult. Only once Rajavi accepts this request we can say that he has cooperated.
Moving from ‘Ashraf’ to ‘Liberty’ would not be good for anyone as long as its cultic structure is kept intact. It is just like moving an armed mine from one place to another. If the mine is defused (the cult’s structure is changed) and left where it is, it would be much more beneficial than moving it to another place without defusing it. Merely moving the cult physically without changing its cultic relationship which is the basis of its terrorist characteristic will have no effect whatsoever.
The Rajavi cult has claimed that since the invasion of Iraq by the allied forces it has abandoned its weapons and was not involved in any terrorist activities. But you know well that this cult was forced to be disarmed by the American Forces and had no means to get engaged in military actions. Rajavi then said that “we want the owner of the weapon rather than the weapon itself” and vowed to his followers that they would be given modern weapons by the Americans. Rajavi gave the weapons to keep the cultic structure of the MEK. Now, Rajavi is prepared to give up the Ashraf garrison in order to keep its inhabitants and his organization intact. By doing so he would be able to establish another “Ashraf” elsewhere. This by no means is considered as “cooperation” since when being unarmed, Rajavi gave up his weapons but as soon as the cult was de-proscribed by the EU, he issued a statement and claimed his weapons back.
As far as the suffering families are concerned, there are 3400 captives in the hand of Rajavi who have no access whatsoever with the outside world no matter being in Ashraf or in Liberty. Rajavi is prepared to pull back provided he is able to keep his cultic structure and rule over his followers. So long as he is keeping his cult as it is he is able to conduct terrorism. Unfortunately the western governments as well as the international organizations in the past 9 years have played Saddam Hussein’s role for the MEK and have restored Rajavi’s physical and psychological rule and influence over his captive members.
There are talks about Ashraf inhabitants. Who is their representative? Is the self-appointed totalitarian leader of a mind control destructive cult recognized to talk on their behalf? Why there are always talks about terrorism but not about mind control? You know well that the latter is the base of the former. Is the US administration making the same mistake as was mentioned in the RAND report and is preserving a cult with terrorist application?
The Sahar Family Foundation (SFF) has always emphasized that without involving the families there would be no solution for the dilemma, and unfortunately the US administration that plays a vital role in the case pays no attention to this key factor and sill tries to solve the problem without engaging the true representatives of Ashraf inhabitants. We are afraid that in this case this difficulty will remain unsolved.
