Iran-Interlink

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

The highest pitch of stupidity!

Mojahedin Khalq Organsation vow to continue violance and terrorism

If there has ever been any doubt about the possible degree of stupidity of mankind, today, with the brightness of folly shining brilliantly from the nominal head of the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (who is currently confined by the US Army along with the remainder of the group in Camp Ashraf in Iraq), there should be no further doubt that humankind has crossed new frontiers even in this respect.

A new announcement by the nominal head of the Mojahedin Khalq (Rajavi cult) has opened up a new umbrella for all human beings under which all the great philosophers of the past can now live in peace and tranquillity. To what am I referring? It is the message issued by the cult under the name of Sedigheh Husseini responding to the imminent start of a court case into the assassination of Sayad Shirazi (a retired General from the Armed Forces of Iran) in which the family of the victim has filed complaints in the French courts.

The question here is not whether the assassinated General was a good man or not. The question is about the clear planning and ordering of the assassination of a man without any prosecution, trial or judgement an extrajudicial execution in other words. Now an organisation, which in its own propaganda declares that it is against execution, an organisation which sheds tears like a crocodile over the execution of rapists and mass murderers, has itself been the executioner in a murder case. And not by the order of a court. Not even by the accusation and verdict of its own members and leaders. No, the assassination was performed on the direct order of the secret services (Estekhbarat) of Iraq under the rule of Saddam Hussein. According to a clear, secretly filmed meeting and according to other documents Estekhbarat ordered the assassination and the Mojahedin Khalq of course claimed a hefty payment to spend on propaganda to launch and re-launch its brand, Maryam Rajavi, over and over again and portray her as the face of a" president in exile". (Fortunately, this time unlike on many other occasions in the history of Iran, after the fall of Saddam Hussein the overwhelming evidence of mercenary work conducted by Rajavi for Saddam has been exposed and documented.)

The MKO’s reaction to the revelation of the start of judicial proceedings, which are in effect putting the MKO itself on trial for the mercenary work it performed for Saddam Hussein, is very interesting.

You would have thought that the organisation would have no more than two choices. Either, to take an offensive position toward the court and the actions of supporting organisations. In this case they would declare the assassination of Sayad Shirazi as a historical point in its honourable history. (As the group did in the case of the execution of Kavoosi who was executed by the Iranian judiciary for may counts of rape and murder. The MKO proudly published his picture as a heroic Mojahed who was smiling when being executed.) The MKO would announce that it had assassinated him (as indeed it declared after assassination) and would do the same in the case of other assassinations.

Or the organisation would take a defensive position toward the court. In this case it would declare that "no, we did not do that" or would declare that "this was done without the leader’s order and we have punished the person responsible". (It has come to light that at least one of the assassins had fallen out with the MKO and has been killed in suspicious circumstances.)

But no, the Mojahedin Khalq did not take any of the above routes. They instead have chosen the stupid route under the name of Sadigheh Husseini (nominal leader of the MKO in Ashraf camp). She, completely overlooking the reality of the situation, has announced that they WELCOME the investigation as though the court being held to investigate the deeds of the assassinated victim. She has announced with great HAPPINESS that this court is necessary but not sufficient and it should investigate the deeds of many other people who have been assassinated by the Mojahedin Khalq.

Imagine that a murderer on trial for killing a man or a woman suddenly declares:

This court is necessary but is not sufficient. The court should be considering all the deeds of all the other victims whom I have killed. In fact the court should consider investigating the deeds of all the many I have yet to kill and haven’t had the time and the opportunity up to now.

A murderer might hope to evade the maximum sentence by claiming that his victims deserved to die, but would surely spend the rest of his or her life in a mental hospital under close supervision. But who knows? The declaration of the MKO may have been announced just to serve this very purpose of avoiding the maximum sentence on the grounds of insanity!

————————–

Kavoosifar, a convicted rapist and mass murderer who instead of going under psychological treatment was executed a few month ago, became the symbol of struggle for Mojahedin Khalq. Kavoosifar smied before execution and said he would do it again if he could.

(The MKO comment about the picture taken from Iranian newspapers reads: The smile of Eternal Victory over the henchmen)

Behzad Alishahi – Translated by Iran Interlink

Secretly filmed meeting between Massoud Rajavi and General Habboush of Secret services of Saddam Hussein reveals that Mojahedin got direct order for assassination of General Shirazi and got paid in return

link to the videos

September 22, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Response to Christopher Booker

Mr. Booker’s article has been translated in to Farsi and posted in Mojahedin Khalq Organisation web sites (on the list of Terrorist organisation in USA, EU, Canada and United Kingdam!!) shortly before the publication of this article in Telegraph!! (Iran Interlink)

Link to: State Department’s Report on Mojahedin Khalq Orgainsation, Rajavi cult headed by Massoud Rajavi and Maryam Rajavi (2007)

http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=2309

————–

Response to Christopher Booke Ahmad Baaraan, Paris, July 29, 2007 Your Sunday Telegraph article of July 29 titled “EU flouts its own highest court…” has some serious flaws that deserve your attention. I have known MEK (PMOI, NCRI, MKO, …) for more than 25 years up-close and personal. I have also studied the group in my role as a researcher. Therefore, I see myself qualified to comment about it. Quite frankly, your article is just an echo of the PMOI’s own propaganda filled with false and misleading information.

The enlistment of the group in the EU’s terror list is based on the group’s own behavior which is nothing short of a personality cult revolving around its leader, Massoud Rajavi, with a history of violence and a philosophy based on hatred. The group has also been enlisted by the US Government as an FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization) which was later upheld in court. In concurring with the Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia, Judge Harry T. Edwards notes: “…the public, unclassified administrative record, including petitioner’s own submission to the Secretary, contains more than enough evidence to support the determination that petitioner (PMOI) engages in terrorist activity.” (1)

The December ruling by the EU Court you have referred in your article did not favor de-listing the group. To the contrary, it clearly dismissed the action sought by the PMOI to annul the EU Common Position 2005/936/CFSP- the updated terror list that included the PMOI. It did however order to unfreeze the group’s assets due to lack of proper procedure for such freezing. Therefore, your assertion that the British Government is flouting its own court is not accurate. This ruling is readily available in 16 different languages on the Court’s own official web site. (2) PMOI and its paid politician supporters have misled many about this, relying on that most would not read the actual ruling. I challenged the PMOI to translate the entire ruling (not just the select parts) in Farsi (Persian), and to post the translation on the Internet. They have refused to do so, and will continue such. More than 7 months after the ruling, only the favorable part of the ruling has been published on the group’s Internet site.

Your article also refers to NCRI as a coalition of which PMOI is a member. This is simply not true. Not only people familiar with the group know that NCRI is just a decoy for PMOI; the United States Court of Appeals in Washington DC ruled the following:

After an extensive investigation of MEK and NCRI, the FBI reported to the State Department that “it is the unanimous view of the FBI personnel who are involved in and familiar with the FBI’s investigation of the [MEK]that NCRI is not a separate organization, but is instead, and has been, an integral part of the MEK at all relevant times…. Contrary to NCRI’s portrayal of itself as an umbrella organization, of which the MEK was just one member, the FBI concluded that is NCRI that is “the political branch” of the MEK.”(3)

I caution you not to drift into the PMOI’s propaganda traps by echoing their statistics about the number of people attendant their gatherings, people executed in Iran, and the number of supporters of the group in Iran.

Regards

Ahmad Baaraan

Paris

ABaaraan@yahoo.fr

(1) http://uniset.ca/other/cs5/327F3d1238.html

(2) http://curia.europa.eu (case number T-228/02)

(3) 362 U.S. App. D.C. 143; 373 F.3d 152; 2004

(Farsi translation of Mr. Booker’s article was posted in Terrorist websites before coming out in Telegraph!!)

Link to Mr. Booker article in Telegraph.co.uk.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/29/nbook129.xml

August 1, 2007 0 comment

Dick Cheney

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. News has emerged that US Vice President Dick Cheney is subject to impeachment. Part of the accusation against him involves links with the terrorist Mojahedin Khalq cult as highlighted in article 3 below: (3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:

(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization. Press Release US House Resolution 333 Dennis Kucinich 4 July 2007 04:15 110th CONGRESS 1st Session H. RES. 333 Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES April 24, 2007 Mr. KUCINICH submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article I

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:

(A) `We know they have biological and chemical weapons.’ March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.

(B) `. . . and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.’ March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.

(C) `And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time . . .’ March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

(D) `We know he’s got chemicals and biological and we know he’s working on nuclear.’ May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(E) `But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons . . . Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.’ August 26, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.

(F) `Based on intelligence that’s becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.’ September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(G) `He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.’ September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(H) `And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.’ March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

(A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq’s weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration’s policy objectives accounts.

(B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.

(3) The Vice President’s actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002, and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002, vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President’s actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

(A) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated `Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute it’s nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.’.

(B) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that `Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR’s assessment, highly dubious.’.

(C) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that `INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the US Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.’.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article II

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:

(A) `His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.’ December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.

(B) `His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.’ January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.

(C) `We know he’s out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.’ March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(D) `We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons . . .’ September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(E) `Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.’ October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney ’04 Fundraiser in Iowa.

(F) `He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.’ October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.

(G) `Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.’ January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.

(H) `I think there’s overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government.’ January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

(I) `First of all, on the question of–of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It’s been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.’ June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:

(A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001, attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was `scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda’.

(B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: `Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.’.

(C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that `there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network’.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article III

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

(A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.’ March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.

(B) `But we’ve also made it clear that all options are on the table.’ January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.

(C) `When we–as the President did, for example, recently–deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.’ January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.

(D) `But I’ve also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.’ February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.

(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:

(A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.’ Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

(B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council’. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.

(C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.’ Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:

(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.

(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.

(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.

(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.

(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution’s adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.

(A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.’ Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.

(B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.’ The threat of force is illegal.

(C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.’ Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.

The Vice President’s deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President’s recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.

Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

July 10, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Open Letter to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice

Questions arise over appearance of Mojahedin cult terrorists in Europe Dear Secretary Rice, A violent attack was made on a public meeting in the FIAP building in Paris, France by the Mojahedin Khalq proscribed terrorist Organisation (run by the self-appointed, life-time leaders of the cult Massoud Rajavi and Maryam Rajavi). Several participants were seriously injured.

The incident, which took place on June 17th, was allegedly led by Mr. Mohammad Hayati, a well-known terrorist leader who is accused of participating in the assassination of Americans in Iran during the time of the late Shah, as well as commanding the massacre of Iraqi Kurds and other criminal activities under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Documents and evidence concerning Mr Hayati’s participation in the Paris attack have been handed to the French authorities and this is currently under investigation.

Mr. Hayati was among the 3,800 MeK combatants who were disarmed and held captive by the US army during the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. Mr Hayati’s appearance under a false name and passport in Europe has raised serious questions among many in Europe.

On 28th June, we witnessed the clandestine TV program of the Rajavi cult broadcasting footage of Mr. Hayati claiming that he has been in Ashraf Camp over the past weeks.

Our investigation into the matter has revealed that this transfer of a known terrorist from Camp Ashraf to Europe and his return within 11 days has not been a single incident. From what we understand, quite a few people have "gone missing" from Camp Ashraf since 2003. If so, the camp is even more of a disgrace than is generally known.

The State Department Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism in its April 2007 report has emphasized that:

"â€¦Many MEK leaders and operatives, however, remain at large, and the number of at-large MEK operatives who received weapons and bomb-making instruction from Saddam Hussein’s regime remains a source of significant concern" This concern must, of course, be heightened when such operatives are believed to have surfaced in Europe in the circumstance of a violent attack on a public meeting.

In addition to the surfacing of MKO terrorists in Europe, we also have concerns about the participation of Professor Raymond Tanter (Iran Policy Committee, an open lobbying group for the cult), Alireza Jafarzadeh (Representative of the cult in Washington) and 20 more close contacts of this proscribed organization in a ridiculously expensive show in Paris organized specifically to promote the leader of this terrorist organization. The venue has been hired by an American Company and the costs, including the transfer of actors, lobbying personnel, Afghani and Tajik refugees, is estimated to be between 1.5 to 2 million US dollars.

Dear Secretary Rice,

While we have every respect for the USA’s policies in pursuit of her national interests around the world; while we acknowledge that US efforts to bring the Iranian government in line with the international will to halt enrichment of uranium are within the rights of the US Administration; and while the attempt to bring normality back to the streets of Iraq is everyone’s wish, we are increasingly concerned about the unchallenged activities of the Mojahedin cult. In particular we are concerned about the possible misuse of their terrorist capabilities by some elements in Iraq and nowadays in European and North American countries.

The open hand given to the leaders of the cult, and their freedom of travel to and from Camp Ashraf, while for the last 3 years we have witnessed the hardship imposed on those who have rejected the cult (of which around 200 are still, after four years, living in harsh conditions under tents in the Iraqi desert) is surely not acceptable to your good self. And the responsibility for injury and/or possible assassination of critics of the cult in European countries by some known, registered terrorists like Mohammad Hayati, would certainly lie at the door of the US Administration (which is in charge of security at Camp Ashraf) before it becomes the responsibility of any European Law agencies.

Dear Secretary Rice,

As survivors of the terrorist Rajavi cult, which has been investigated by the US and about which many thoroughly researched reports have been written since 1994, we urge you to instigate a full investigation into the situation at Camp Ashraf in Iraq. We draw your attention in particular to the meetings that take place between the supporters of Saddam Hussein and the MEK. We also urge a thorough investigation into the whereabouts of those people who have been missing from the camp from 2003 up to now.

We also urge you to take the activities of the Iran Policy Committee, the representatives of the MKO, including Mr. Alireza Jafarzadeh who has regularly appeared as an ‘Iran analyst’ on Fox News, and the other lobbying bodies in your country, seriously.

We are more than happy to provide the documents and evidence which we have on these issues to your department for further investigation.

Yours sincerely,

Anne Singleton,

Iran-Interlink

June 29, 2007

Iran Interlink, June 29, 2007

July 3, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Planned MKO violence linked to damning US Terror Report

A series of irreversible setbacks in recent months has apparently sealed the fate of the Mojahedin-e Khalq’s (MKO, aka Rajavi cult) in political circles.

On December 12, 2006 Judgement of the Court of First Instance of the European Court of Justice in case T-228/02 was announced. By pouring money into top legal teams, the MKO had been convinced of a favourable outcome. But British Foreign Minister Margaret Beckett clarified the European position; new legislation has ensured that all the MKO’s assets remained frozen and its proscription as a terrorist entity remained unchanged. The Court did, however, rule that the EC give the reasons for its proscription to the MKO.

The MKO reaction to this setback was to pretend it wasn’t true and to disseminate its own version of the Court ruling. Rajavi sent two MEPs to Camp Ashraf in Iraq to celebrate with the captive combatants ‘the removal of the MKO from the terrorist list’. Rajavi told his followers they would soon be re-armed to resume training in earnest to pursue their twenty-five year quest to overthrow the Iranian regime in its entirety through the National Liberation Army (the front name used for Mojahedin military activity).

The MKO also had its members in Europe, North America and Australia set up any publicity stunt possible, from pickets to petitions to say the Court must abide by its own ruling and remove the MKO from the EU terrorist list – as though the Court was defying the law which itself had just ruled upon.

Links:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=1619

The European judgement was rapidly followed by an equally damning US Supreme Court ruling on MKO fundraising. Then the Iraqi government announced its determination to close (actually to reclaim as Iraqi territory) Camp Ashraf, and have the foreign terrorist MKO expelled from the country.

Links:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=1498

At the end of April 2007, the US State Department published its review of terrorist entities. The report marks the MKO out as a dangerous cult with operatives, trained by the former Iraqi regime in bomb making and weapons use, still at-large.

Link:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2309

Now, the final nail in the MKO’s political coffin has surely been the election of Nicolas Sarkozy as France’s President. France is home to the MKO’s western HQ and residence of co-leader Maryam Rajavi. As Interior Minister in 2003, Sarkozy gave the go-ahead to Judge Brugiere to raid the MKO headquarters in Auvers-sur-Oise during which 160 members were arrested and evidence of planning and financing terrorist activity uncovered. Evidence which is referenced by the State Department report.

Link:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2092

Identified as both a terrorist organisation and as a cult, how are the Rajavis responding to this series of devastating setbacks? Can the group stage a comeback?

The MKO has already closed some websites, stopped live discussion on their TV and refuse to give any reaction to the US report. However, if we take the MKO’s reaction to the EU Court ruling as typical, it is certain we have not heard the last from them. We also know from the reaction to Maryam Rajavi’s arrest in 2003 when she ordered self-immolations to force the French judiciary to release her on bail, that this group will not go quietly.

Significantly, the MKO’s own analysis places blame for the group’s difficulties on its critics. Of these critics, the most troublesome have been ex-members of the organisation who have been outspoken in their exposure of the organisation’s cult activity and its close ties with the Saddam Hussein regime. With ex-members constantly giving the lie to the Mojahedin’s seductive claims to democracy, feminism and popular regime change, it is not surprising that the MKO leaders see these people as the biggest obstacle to their ambitions.

Massoud Rajavi’s plan fourteen years ago was for his wife – whom he nominated president elect – to carry this seductive message to western politicians and media and for her to find western sponsors to allow him to continue the quest he began under the patronage of Saddam Hussein – to somehow engineer the violent overthrow the Iranian regime and to install the Rajavi regime in its place.

It would be easy to assume from this that Rajavi’s efforts to keep Camp Ashraf intact is based on its military capacity. However, with the continuation of the FTO label, if Rajavi agreed to the removal of the Camp and its members, this would allow him to forge ahead with the claim that the MKO has renounced violence. But the Camp has much greater significance to the Rajavis as their ideological training ground. The camp provides the conditions of isolation and de facto imprisonment which are necessary to the imposition of cult mind control and psychological coercion on the members. Without these conditions, members would be free to have contact with their families, and to make value judgements using external points of reference which would certainly result in mass exodus from the organisation.

Rajavi will keep his people in Camp Ashraf at any price. He has employed people to lobby the Defence Ministries of European countries on his behalf. In the UK a minor academic, who has a track record of support for the Rajavis, has been tasked to make overtures to the Ministry of Defence in order to create a bridge for senior MKO members to pressure the department (the threat of mass suicide in Camp Ashraf is just one of those ‘pressures’). The only purpose for such contact would be to beg for the preservation of Camp Ashraf or provision of a similar discreet base in a third country, possibly Jordan.

While this is ongoing, the situation in Rajavi’s western bases is hardly less desperate. With Sarkozy’s election, Maryam Rajavi’s trial on terrorism charges will likely go ahead sooner rather than later. The Rajavis will need diversionary tactics such as the self-immolations staged while she was held in custody in 2003.

To mark the anniversary of her arrest on June 17 the MKO is planning to announce that five million French citizens have signed a petition to have the MKO removed from the terror list. However, this will only work if the ex-members are not able to expose these funny numbers. The aim is to keep them quiet for as long as possible to allow the MKO propaganda machine to work unhindered.

Reliable sources have revealed to Iran-Interlink that the Rajavis have already set in motion a new wave of attacks by Mojahedin cult members, particularly in the UK, aimed to intimidate and silence the ex-members and other critics whom they blame for this situation (the Rajavis never believe their own activities to be at fault). The attacks typically begin with distribution of slanderous colour brochures in the places of residence and work followed by indirect harassment and intimidation. The next step is to send members to physically intimidate the target. Criminal damage and physical harm have been reported previously in several cases, including a Catholic priest who was attacked while coming to the aid of one such ex-member.

The information given to Iran-Interlink ties in with previous attempts by the MKO to undermine the ex-members’ efforts. For years the Rajavis have tried to discredit them with the accusation that they are working for the Iranian Intelligence Ministry. Inside the Mojahedin the ‘crime’ of working for the regime carries with it an automatic death penalty. Whenever this accusation is made the Rajavis are giving tacit permission to MKO members to execute the target.

While this kind of low-level intimidation has become standard for this terrorist group (as with many others), the conditions which it faces now should alert western governments to act quickly to prevent any escalation into violence, even death.

The main consideration with the Mojahedin is that it is a cult. When Maryam Rajavi goes to trial the Mojahedin will, without doubt, respond with a series of orchestrated protests including more self-immolations. But, with their backs now against the wall the Rajavis may have no option but to order more forceful expression to avoid submitting to the course of justice. As a destructive cult, there is no doubt that the MKO will resort to violence in response to outer threat. The MKO will follow the predicted path of all cults and kill its own members as well as killing external threats. This may begin with self-immolations and targeted assassination of its critics. It may even affect a wider circle, including members of the public. Whatever violence ensues, the perpetrators of these acts will be as much the victims of the Rajavis as the targets are.

Iran-Interlink,

PO Box 148

Leeds LS16 5YJ

+44 113 278 0503

http://www.iran-interlink.org

info@iran-interlink.org

Iran Interlink Brief – Iran Interlink, May 2007

May 14, 2007 0 comment

The cult of Rajavi

The Use of the Philosophy of Martyrdom within Religious Cults for Acts of Terrorism

Dr. Massoud Banisadr speech in London School of Economics, May 05, 2007

“Men reject their prophets and they slay them, but they love their martyrs and honour those whom they have slain.” Fedor Dostoevsky (From Brother Karamajov book 6 Chapter 3)

In the Quran we read that on Judgment Day, God will be just when it comes to ruling between Prophets and Martyrs. Quran 39:69

This is interpreted to mean that some martyrs would stand higher than prophets. But which one of them? Before I go any further, let me emphasis more on the meaning of this saying of Quran, and what it means for an ordinary Muslim? It means that an ordinary Muslim through his actions while he is alive – and with the right kind of death – can change his or her status in front of God and the people, from an ordinary person into someone higher than a prophet….

The transcription of Dr. Massoud Banisadr speech in LSC:

http://www.banisadr.info/LSpeech050507.htm

May 8, 2007 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Who benefits from America’s support for terrorist MKO

Who benefits from America’s support for terrorist Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (Rajavi Cult)?

It is not a secret that America has recently helped some of the smuggling gangs and terrorist cults, which have been denounced over the years throughout the civilized world, in an attempt to put more pressure on Iran to stop enriching Uranium.

The most recent support for Jondollah, which claimed the recent killings in Baluchestan province of Iran (attacking schools, etc), came in a live interview with Abdolmalek Rigi the head of Jondollah broadcast by Voice of America.

Link to the related article (Persian)

http://www.iran-interlink.org/fa/index.php?mod=view&id=2051

And the comments of American officials about the controversial Camp Ashraf (still run by the Rajavi cult and protected by the US Army in Iraq) given to CNN correspondent, leave not much question about direct support and protection given to MKO (Rajavi cult), which has been responsible for scores of murders across the globe by the order and support of Saddam Hussein.

The article, written by Michael Ware, CNN, April 05, 2007 is titled:

U.S. protects Iranian opposition group in Iraq

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2084

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/05/

protected.terrorists/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Ambassador Javad Zarif (representative of Islamic Republic of Iran in United Nations) was interviewed by Asia Source on April 21, 2007.

http://www.asiasource.org/news/special_reports/zarif.cfm

Part of the interview reads:

"Is Hamas a terrorist organization?

No.

Is Hezbollah?

No. Let ‘s stop here. The majority – you don’t need to ask me this question – the majority of the international community does not regard these two organizations to be a terrorist organization. Now the question that can be asked from the United States is why is it cooperating with organizations that it considers to be terrorists? Now the majority of the world do not believe that Hezbollah or Hamas are terrorist organizations. Hamas and Hezbollah are official political parties with seats in the parliament. Hamas won the majority, which the United States did not like and the United States has boycotted Hezbollah ministers in the Lebanese Parliament simply because it doesn’t like them. Now the US or Israel labeling an organization "terrorist", that organization which is involved in legitimate resistance to foreign occupation, that organization does not then automatically become terrorist. Go look at the international community. This is the problem of the US equating itself with the international community again and again. But the question that needs to be asked is the behavior of the United States vis-à-vis organizations that it considers to be terrorists. Why is it cooperating with them?

Which organizations are you thinking of?

I’m referring to MEK [Mujahideen-e-Khalq], for instance, in Iraq that the United States is actually supporting and signing agreements with. Would the United States accept any country providing the Fourth Geneva Convention protection to Al Qaeda which is another universally recognized terrorist organization? So terrorism should not become a label, a convenient label for dealing with your adversaries. You’ve got to have objective criteria. Apply those objective criteria and deal with them accordingly."

It seems once again the ball has landed permanently in the court of Bush administration to come up with an answer.

Iran Interlink, April 21, 2007

April 23, 2007 0 comment

Iran Interlink

Symposium on Fate of Individuals in Rajavi Cult

Iran-Interlink Hosted Iraq Symposium on Fate of Individuals in Rajavi Cult

To: National Desk

Contact: Anne Khodabandeh of Iran-Interlink, 44-113-278-0503 or 44-787-654-1150 (cell), or http://releases.usnewswire.com/redir.asp?ReleaseID=69516&Link=mailto:info@iran-interlink.org

LONDON, July 20 /U.S. Newswire/ — Iran-Interlink hosted a symposium on Iraq: Camp Ashraf in Westminster on Wednesday, July 19. The focus of the symposium was "What Will Be the Fate of Individuals Trapped in the Rajavi Cult in Iraq?" The Rajavi cult is recognized in the West as the terrorist Mojahedin Khalq or National Council of Resistance of Iran.

Since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, Iranian terrorist group Mojahedin have been held captive in Camp Ashraf, north of Baghdad.

The Symposium examined the fate of individuals in terrorist cults with particular reference to the Mojahedin Khalq and its members in Iraq.

Experts in the fields of cult behavior, terrorism and the Mojahedin gave presentations, followed by discussion of the issues by delegates from various organizations.

The expert panel consisted of:

— Ian Haworth of the Cult Information Centre

— Anne Singleton, author of "Saddam’s Private Army"

— Alain Chevalerias, journalist and director of Centre du Recherche Sur la Terrorisme

— Soheila Nowroozi, sister of an MKO member recently killed inside Camp Ashraf

Delegates in the discussion represented:

— Peyvand Association, Netherlands

— Awaa, Germany

— Iran Sabz, Germany

— Family Network Association, Sweden

— Pars Iran, Canada

— Negahe-no, Norway

— Pers et Avenir, France

— Rahai, Netherlands

The symposium concluded that the individuals trapped in Camp Ashraf need urgent humanitarian help only to meet the rights granted to them as Protected Persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention — which are currently being denied to them.

The symposium message to Western governments is to abandon the idea of keeping Camp Ashraf intact. These individuals are victims of a cult and do not want to be there. Since 2003, over 1,000 of the total 3,800 captured people have used the opportunity of the presence of American forces to escape the cult. The remainder are waiting for help.

Although some individual conservatives believe they can use the Mojahedin in confrontation with Iran, they must abandon the idea that they can use an army of 50-year-olds to fight. Western governments should not be considering using the victims of cult manipulation for their own ambitions.

The individuals in Camp Ashraf need to be rescued. They need to be given immediate unrestricted opportunity to leave the camp and take up residence in a protected facility beyond the reach of cult leaders. The three-year delay in dismantling the camp has left the situation for the individuals critical.

They should be given the opportunity to renounce their membership of the organization and receive structured and appropriate help to de-program them, the symposium concluded.

The full report of the symposium with recommendations will be published in September.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/redir.asp?ReleaseID=69516&Link=http://www.usnewswire.com/

Newswire – 7/20/2006

July 22, 2006 0 comment

European Union

MKO lies to Court to Save its Skin

January 30, 2006

Letter to:

Court of Justice

Court of First Instance

Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald

L-2925 Luxembourg

To the Judges of the Court of First Instance

At 09:30, on February 7, 2006 in the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, hearing T-228/02 Organisation des Modjahedines du peuple d’Iran v Council (Common foreign and security policy) will take place. http://curia.eu.int/en/actu/calendriers/index.htm

This action against the Council of the European Union was first brought before the Court on 26 July 2002 by the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI) – also known as Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK).

In simple terms we understand that through this action, the MEK wishes to be removed from the European list of terrorist entities.

Some of the main arguments brought by the MEK are that it is:

Conducting legitimate resistance against the Iranian regime

Complying with the fundamental principles of democracy

Complying with the fundamental principles of respect for human rights

Supported by the international community

Never undertaken actions against civilians

The only resistance movement which is now acting within Iran’s borders

Defending peace in the region

In response, and in opposition to this action, the people signatory to this letter all declare themselves willing and able to bear witness to the facts set out in this letter thus:

1 From its inception, the MEK has been the main anti-western force before and during the 1979 revolution in Iran. The MEK killed six Americans in Iran during the 1960s. During the ‘hostage crisis’ in 1980, the MEK advocated killing the American hostages. The MEK openly took up arms against the regime of Iran again only after a failed coup d’état against the new revolutionary government in 1980.

Since then, the MEK has carried out mortar attacks against civilian targets, resulting in the deaths of shopkeepers, passers by. The MEK has bombed factories, schools and residential areas. The MEK received orders from Saddam Hussein to attack targets chosen by his regime and were paid accordingly.

2 The MEK is organized internally as an autocracy, with Massoud Rajavi the sole, self-appointed leader for life. He occupies the role of supreme leader and is above the law. No one has the right to remove or even criticize his leadership. Below him in rank is his wife Maryam Rajavi, also appointed by Massoud Rajavi. He presented her to the National Council of Resistance (NCR) for ‘election’ to the position of ‘president elect’ of the NCR. The ‘election’ took place in an open meeting in which there was no secret ballot, the vote was 100% in her favour. The NCR comprises at least 95% MEK members who only claim to be independent members but who without exception believe in the MEK ideology.

3 There are countless examples of suppression and repressive measures inside the MEK. The MEK has practiced forced marriage and now practices forced divorce, separation of children from parents, gender apartheid, imprisonment for criticizing leaders or even the leaders’ strategy. Victims inside the MEK have been sent to Abu Ghraib prison. Extrajudicial punishments include torture, death under torture, long term imprisonment in solitary confinement and sentencing to execution – not carried out by express order of Massoud Rajavi. The Human Rights Watch report of May 2005 ‘No Exit’, details only a small sample of such human rights abuses carried out systematically inside the Mojahedin. Former members will bear witness that none of the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are practiced inside the MEK organization.

4 The MEK claims to have collected hundreds of signatures from western parliamentarians. However, the names have never been published and no-one has had sight of the signatures. The MEK has a known history of forging signatures. The MEK collects signatures through lies, deception and misinformation. Signatories do not have immediate access to necessary information by which to make balanced judgment about the MEK.

5 There are numerous instances of civilian deaths and injuries caused by the deliberately imprecise methods of armed attack used by the MEK in Iran. The use of mortars, fired in civilian areas, have led to schools, public parks and residential buildings being hit. The largest number of civilians killed by the MEK was in the Eternal Light operation of 1988. In this operation, the organization sent thousands of untrained civilians into battle with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in Rajavi’s bid to pursue regime change by armed means. Thousands were killed and injured in this abortive operation. Rajavi is culpable for war crimes based on his orders and decisions during this operation.

6 The MEK is not supported inside Iran – most of Iran’s younger generation have never heard of the MEK except as a historical group which betrayed their country by fighting alongside Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. The MEK does not mention its twenty year existence in Iraq and its dependence on Saddam Hussein during that time. No opposition group (inside or outside Iran) has ever accepted the group which is universally regarded as traitors. The lack of support for them outside country by exiled Iranians is a clear indication of how much support they have inside the country. The only beneficiary of the MEK’s existence has been the hardliners of the Iranian government who refuse to accept any other opposition except them because they are known as assassins and traitors to their country. This allows the hardliners to continue a policy of repression against any legitimate opposition.

7 The MEK’s most recent public stance is to support regime change involving war waged against Iran by the USA or Israel. The MEK’s ‘third way’ states clearly that the MEK can bring about regime change only if its forces in Iraq are re-armed.

Since 2002 many things have changed.

"The Mojahedin Khalq Organisation claims that it rejects armed struggle and commits itself only to non-violent means of struggle and therefore asks the relevant authorities to remove it from the lists of terrorist organizations." The MEK claims that in future it will only engage in political, social and cultural activities against the Iranian regime.

Firstly, this claim has never been made publicly and has only been made in private to the officials involved in this court. Secondly, this is a lie. The MEK has no intention of abandoning armed struggle.

As recently as two months ago the MEK clearly issued death sentences against their critics in European countries. This was broadcast on their clandestine TV program copies of which area available.

The MEK continues to advertise its National Liberation Army (currently disarmed by US forces in Iraq) as the only possible way of achieving regime change in Iran. The MEK openly promotes the use of violence in Iraq, Iran and in western countries.

Information from a source close to the MEK states that the organization is now actively collecting signatures from its members who swear that:

armed struggle is the only possible means to achieve regime change and take power in Iran. (The real meaning of this is the belief that Camp Ashraf in Iraq should be preserved and the combatants re-armed.)

they adhere to every step of the Ideological revolution and pass through it consciously and believe in every part of it. (The real meaning of this is that they accept the conditions of slavery imposed by the MEK’s cult culture.)

they declare total and unswerving loyalty to the ideological leader, who is Massoud Rajavi. (The real meaning of this is that Rajavi will never be removed from leadership of the MEK, thus denying any semblance of a democratic process.)

These three articles, which every member is being asked to affirm and sign to, are exactly the opposite to the conditions necessary to prove their case in this court.

Indeed, the MEK is more committed to these principles than ever in its history as this is the only means by which the organization can be kept intact.

Since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003, reams of evidence has come to light concerning the MEK’s behaviour in Iraq and elsewhere. Examples include: video evidence of payments made by Saddam to the MEK in payment for the assassination of specific people; selling oil illegally for Saddam in the west (under the UN oil for food program); involvement in the suppression of the Shiite and Kurdish uprisings in March 1991 which involved the massacre of civilians.

The MEK have never condemned their fallen benefactor Saddam Hussein and refuse to refer to him as anything less than "the ex president of Iraq". The MEK has not cut its ties with the remnants of Saddam in Iraq and elsewhere, including the Baath Party and tribal leaders loyal to Saddam Hussein. The MEK celebrated the 11 September tragedy in their camps in Iraq. The MEK leaders directly ordered members to commit self-immolation in European cities in June 2003, resulting several disabilities and two deaths.

If the MEK wishes to refute the evidence which led to its inclusion in the terrorist lists of every major western country, it must:

1- publicly and unequivocally renounce violence as a means to achieve political aims – including publicly agreeing to the dismantlement of Camp Ashraf in Iraq

2- abandon the practice of collective living, compulsory divorce, separation of people from their children and families, cutting people off from their finances and stop the use of psychological manipulation to indoctrinate members; the MEK must free its members from conditions of slavery.

3- respect democratic principles by holding real elections for the first time – which allow for the removal and replacement of all its leadership cadre through secret ballot; run the organization as a normal political group.

4- provide answers in public to the issues arising from MEK behavior over the past twenty five years, including; the massacre of Iraqi Shiites and Kurds in 1991; the massacre of thousands of civilians in the Eternal Light operation of 1988; the incarceration of dissidents in its own prisons and in Iraq’s infamous Abu Ghraib prison.

Signatories:

Abbass Sadeghi

Akbar Akbari

Ali Akbar Rastgoo

Ali Bashiri

Ali Ghashghavi

Alireza Mir Esmaili

Alireza Mirasgari

Amir Atefe

Amir Kord-Rostamie

Anne Khodabandeh

Aylar Seraji

Batool Ahmadi

Batool Maleki

Behzad Alishahi

Behzad Kazemi

Daryoush Mir Esmaili

Edward Tormado

Elham Kakavand

Faride Barati

Farhad JavaheriYar

Faride Sadri

Farzad Fazinfar

Fatolah Firooz

Ghasem Ghezi

Gholam Mehdioghli

Habib Khorami

Hadi Shams Haeri

Hanif Baghalnejad

Hassan Azizi

Hassan Haghi

Hassan Khalaj

Hassan Mohamadi

Hassan Sadeghian

Homayoon Elahi

Hossein Baghalnejad

Iraj Haghverdi

Jafar Baghalnejad

Jafar Gonjeshki

Jamshid Tahmasbi

Javad Firoozmand

Karim Haghi

Katayoon Mir Esmaili

Kazem Molahosseini

Khaodabakhsh Rudgar

Majid Farahani

Mahboobe Barati

Masoome Behnam

Massoud Jabani

Massoud Khodabandeh

Marjan Malek

Mehdi Baghalnejad

Mehdi Khoshhal

Milad Ariyayi

Mina Vatandoost

Mitra Yoosefi

Mohamed Hossein Sobhani

Mostafa Mohammadi

Mostafa Mostafai

Naser Haghi

Naser Razvani

Nasrin Behboudi

Omid Ahmadi

Parvin Haji

Maryam Jokar

Rassoul Ahmadi Nejad

Reza Haghi

Robabe Shahrokhi

Ronak Mostafai

Roya Roodsaz

Saeed Khodashenas

Samad Alesiad

Sara Baghalnejad

Shafighe Haghi

Shokat Haghverdili

Soheila Behboodi

Yaser Ezati

Zahra Lotfi

…

February 2, 2006 0 comment

Iran Interlink

Iran Interlink Demands Indictment of MEK’s Rajavi

Iran Interlink Demands Indictment of Mojahedin-e Khalq’s Massoud Rajavi

The trial of Saddam Hussein has begun. His toppled regime actively supported international terrorism and Iran’s Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) group – led by Saddam’s closest ally, Massoud Rajavi – was at the top of the terrorist list.

In a press conference on Thursday November 10 – at The Ambassador’s Hotel in Bloomsbury, pressure group Iran Interlink demanded that Massoud Rajavi joins Saddam in being brought to justice.

The conference started with a documentary film showing Massoud Rajavi as he briefed his forces on their mission, along with eye witness accounts of the Mojahedin’s offensives against civilian Kurdish populations in the Spring of 1991. The documentary revealed that the Mojahedin, acting as Saddam’s private army, played a decisive role in the suppression of the 1991 internal uprisings in Iraq, and is responsible for the massacre of many Iraqi Kurds who opposed Saddam.

Following the film, French journalist and researcher on terrorism, Alain Chevalerias, spoke about the terrorist nature of Massoud Rajavi’s Mojahedin organisation. Chevalerias – whose book ‘Burned Alive’ charts the psychological manipulation exerted on MKO members which resulted in several members setting fire to themselves in Paris and London in June 2003 – gave a clear definition of terrorism for the audience and said that groups which attack civilian populations in countries of which the west is critical must be viewed in the same way as the terrorists who target western populations.

Anne Singleton, author of ‘Saddam’s Private Army – how Rajavi changed Iran’s Mojahedin from Armed Revolutionaries into an armed cult’, spoke about the cult nature of the Mojahedin. It is not a political organisation, nor is it a military organisation, it is a cult, said Ms Singleton. Worse than this, it is a terrorist cult. Ms Singleton spent over fifteen years in close proximity to the cult and spent three years full time with them. Ms Singleton pointed out that neither the Mojahedin organisation, nor its leaders, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, have ever publicly condemned Saddam Hussein or his crimes, and have never publicly renounced violence as a means to achieve their aims.

Ms Singleton asserted that the Mojahedin, because it is a cult, can play no part in the political future of Iran. Moreover, now that its forces – with the exception of the people in Camp Ashraf in Iraq – are based in western countries, the Mojahedin no longer presents a threat to Iran. Rather, when its forces set fire to themselves in the streets of western cities, this organisation has now become a problem for the people of those countries.

The speakers were followed by video evidence secretly filmed by Saddam’s own security services depicting the financial, spying and terrorist relationship between the Mojahedin-e Khalq organisation and Saddam’s regime.

The conclusion of the press conference was that not only was each and every military and terrorist operation carried out by the Mojahedin in Iran ordered directly by Saddam Hussein and his intelligence and secret services in Iraq, but that as it faces greater and greater rejection from western governments, the Mojahedin will inevitably return to the side of Saddam Hussein. In this respect, it is possible that they are already participating in the insurgency in Iraq as well as planning terrorist activities in the west.

At the end of the press conference, a Question and Answer session was held with two former members of the Mojahedin.

A three-member team of supporters of Massoud Rajavi and the Mojahedin had been admitted to the conference by Iran Interlink in order to have them watch the films and listen to the speeches. It was hoped they might be in a position to answer some of the journalists questions about the crimes of Massoud Rajavi. During the Q&A session, the team began to rant and admitted they had come with the sole aim of accusing speakers at the meeting of working with the Iranian intelligence ministry.

Massoud Khodabandeh and Karim Haghi, who were holding the Q&A session, restored order so that bona fide journalists were able to get their stories. Unfortunately, the team of Mojahedin supporters, frustrated in their efforts, then began to accuse journalists at the press conference also of being agents of the Iranian intelligence ministry.

The supporters of Massoud Rajavi were unable to answer the central accusation, or to refute or deny the evidence shown at the press conference – that Massoud Rajavi had ordered his own people, Mojahedin forces, to suppress the Kurdish uprising in 1991 as a part of Saddam Hussein’s repressive regime.

Iran Interlink repeats its demand – that Massoud Rajavi be tried alongside Saddam Hussein for war crimes, terrorism and crimes against humanity.

November 12, 2005

November 13, 2005 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts