Duplicity of the MEK nature

MKO fundraising for Haiti ?

Following the disastrous earthquake in Haiti, Sweden, with a nine-million population is the third country to help the survivors ranked after the US and Canada.

But fraudulent groups use the opportunity to raise their own funds, manipulating people’s emotional feelings.

Swedish authorities have made some decisions to prevent these individuals or institutes from financially abusing people. It has published a list of organizations that are considered as untrustworthy charities.

The government has allocated some special bank accounts to charity organizations. Such bank accounts are numbered with digits beginning with 90. The thirty organizations listed by the government, lack the accounts which are called “ninety”. Among those organizations, one can see the name of a front organization working for Mujahedin Khalq organization which is named “Mujahedin Sympathizers Society”(MSF) .

Erik Zachrison, from Council of funds raised by volunteer charity organization of Sweden has already told about the listed organizations:” I don’t know their nationality and they have not managed to present a registered number for their organization. I just know they are active all over Sweden and they do not own the account “ninety” and they have never asked to register a “ninety” account. They stop people in the streets by showing brochures or pictures and for example ask them if they know Amnesty International and then ask for financial help. A lot of people think they are helping that mentioned international body”

Many of these organizations use names including terms like cancer, orphans, very similar to those of famous charity organizations in order to deceive people.

The thirty listed organizations are as follows:

• Al-Aqsa Spannmål Stiftelse
• Baltic 2000
• Cancerhjälpfonden
• Cancer- och Allergifonden
• Cancer- och Allergifondens Stödförening
• Cancer- och Barnhjälpen
• Cancer- och Miljöfonden – CMF
• Cancer- och Trafikskadades Riksförbund
• Cancer & Trafikskadefonden
• CURO – Riksföreningen för cancersjuka
• Developing World Clothing
• FRF-Stiftelsen – Fonden för Rehab o medicinsk forskning
• Gatubarnsföreningen
• Hjälpfonden
• Hjärtehjälpen
• Humana Sverige/UFF – U-landshjälp från Folk till Folk
• Innocent Child/Krigets Oskyldiga
• Insamlingsstiftelsen för Handikappades Rekreation
• Klädinsamling Service
• Mojahedin Sympatisör Förening – MSF
• NYTEX
• Orphan Home Care
• Pilgrimsfolket
• SADF – Alzheimer och Demensforskning
• Samhällsfonden/Svenska Samhällsfonden
• Stockholmsstorken/Storken
• Svenska Smärtafonden
• Sveriges Cancersjukas Riksförbund
• Telehjälpen

Translated by Nejat Society

January 28, 2010 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

What MKO leaders fear?

Any individual, group or organization that is not approved by MKO leader, would be considered as the “agent, spy or mercenary “of Islamic Republic, according to MKO’s dialectic; anyone who criticizes MKO’s ideology and activities, is demonized as the most atrocious enemy, by the organization’s propaganda system.

MKO uses the terms like democracy and human rights as tools to crush those who believe in other ideologies than that of MKO. However, the news of families’ visit to Ashraf where their children are captivated by MKOand MKO leaders do not allow them to meet their beloved ones, exactly represents the contradictory behavior of Rajavi’s cult toward human rights. The families who are now awaiting at Camp Ashraf gate, on hunger strike, have not seen their children for more than twenty years. The reason for this anticipation is the same old excuse:”families are gathered by IRI’s agents and sent to Iraq.”

Given that the families are sent by IRI, it is not even fair to deprive some elderly parents who have not been able to contact their children by phone for long years, from visiting them. What kind of human rights do MKO leaders believe in?

At the time of Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein who was MKO’s land lord, Massoud Rajavi ordered to stop all family relationships under the title of “Ideological Revolution”. The parents were separated from their kids; the couples were forced to divorce …

After the fall of Saddam Hussein, the way was paved for families in Iran to come to Ashraf. They could pass various obstacles in the occupied, critical Iraqi territory in order to be able to visit their children for a few hours. The visits were definitely a heavy coup for the organization because the process of defection was accelerated since then. Thus Maryam Rajavi issued her order from her base in Auver Sur d’Oise, Paris to stop the families visiting Ashraf residents.

She didn’t hesitate to say:

– Do not accept to visit your family, if they come to Ashraf.
– If you were forced to visit them, you should face them in a way that they would understand you were not happy with visiting them. If needed, you should slap them.
– Never accept a family visiting for a second time …

Having seen the outcome of family visits at Ashraf, Maryam Rajavi is terrified of further visits, she is well aware that family visits revive the feelings and emotions among captured residents of Camp Ashraf. The visits create new questions in residents’ minds on why they are in the organization.

The family visits will spark a light in the hearts of Ashraf captives and make them distanced from the cult of Rajavi and this is what the cult leaders panic.

By Mazda Parsi

November 12, 2009 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

Hunger strikers and absence of MKO leaders

The organizationally orchestrated hunger strike of MKO’s advocats and sympathizers in some European countries, and camp Ashraf in particular, in complaint to the presence of Iraqi police in camp Ashraf had to end somewhere. Lasting over 70 days, the strikes were raising suspicious that how these people, most over their mid-ages, were surviving such long-lasted hunger strikes! Fortunately for MKO, the Iraqi Government’s move to release the 36 detained members came to the organization’s help to grab at the opportunity to end the show. Since the events of June 2003, this has been the largest remonstrant reaction of Mojahedin to the enforcement of law in countries where they have managed to settle.

Mojahedin were desperate as they had two options before them. They had to either break the strikes midway on any unjustifiable excuse or enforce the strikers to continue which could lead to some victims even if nobody came to investigate and question the accuracy of the claimed strikes. In fact, it could be similar to the events of 17 June immolations in creating a human tragedy.

MKO leaders, those within Ashraf and those in their luxurious residences in European countries, are now bombarded with the questions that what decisive role did they play when Ashraf residents were facing challenges as they have trumpeted? If, according to the claims made by Rajavi, they are making their best to protect camp Ashraf and its residents, why the cost of defending MKO bastion is to be paid by the rank and files and not by the leaders and high rankings? As if nobody has noticed their absence from the scene of conflicts in camp Ashraf. As evidences show, many MKO high-rankings can leave Iraq and reside in another country if necessary. In other words, they are not at all worried about their own future and thus, there is no need to risk their life and line as human shields in protection of camp Ashraf. They are among the members of the Leadership Council but not all of them necessarily and some act as the scapegoats to carry out suicide attacks when demanded by the leadership.

However, Rajavi is well aware that he may need these scapegoats in long time and prefers to arrange a human shield for camp Ashraf based on the organizational hierarchy of MKO members. Evidently, the Leadership Council will be the last layer to be victimized. It is certain that Rajavi never entangles himself and his relatives and intimates in the conflicts of camp Ashraf like that of last June and nor in the cold war initiated in the Europe by MKO sympathizers. The history of the organization shows that MKO rank and files have no role but being victimized in the hands of Rajavi for furthering his totalitarian objectives. If hunger strike and complaint could solve the problems posed to Mojahedin, why MKO leaders and high rankings refrain to take part in these strikes themselves? If as claimed by MKO leaders, the present struggles aim at defending Ashraf residents, how those responsible for providing security for MKO members in Iraq evade it despite their presence under the focus of attention of western media and politicians?

In other words, what is the role of some well-known and effective MKO leaders like Abbas Davari, Mehdi Abrishamchi, Mohammad Hayati, Sedigheh Hosseini, Mahvash Sepehri, etc in the current critical situation of Mojahedin? None of them risked his/her life to be in front-line of the human resistance and human shields formed in camp Ashraf but stood far behind and pushed others against the gates to confront Iraqi forces. As in the terrorist activities of Mojahedin in 17 June, they were the main defendants of European courts accused of instigating MKO members to carry out suicide attacks. Although they were put on trial, the negligence of the concerned courts on the one hand and lobbying efforts of organization on the other veiled the reality. They are known to be the main instigators of clashes in camp Ashraf and Europe. They are not hew to international conventions and human rights yet try to achieve organizational objectives by victimizing a number of deceived individuals trapped in the cultic relations of a notorious terrorist organization.

If Mojahedin truly claim that Maryam Rajavi is recognized by European politicians and parliamentarians, she could have proved her concern and love for Ashraf residents and human rights by taking part in hunger strikes herself or at least one or two of her mentioned apostles. Maybe she thought the world failed to be attentive enough to ask why the leaders were absent from the scene of struggle!

October 22, 2009 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

MKO’s version of democratic government

As s cult-like terrorist organization, Mujahidin Khalq has never believed in democracy in its long history of cult-like approaches. Despite their propaganda for democracy and human rights, they have always believed in an ideological system originated in religion of Shiite Islam [MKO’s version] and Marxism. All documents on MKO’s background prove this ideology which opposes liberalism and individualism as well as capitalism. But today in a U-turn regarding their past doctrine, MEK try to draw the attention of Western governments to themselves by their large-scale propaganda in Western lobbies, advocating a “secular democratic regime of Iran.”

The controversial title “President Elect” for Maryam Rajavi is the main example of MKO’s false propaganda. Who has elected Mrs. Rajavi as the President?
National Council of Resistance that is the umbrella organization for MKO.

Due to its atrocities against Iranian compatriots during Iran-Iraq war, as Saddam Hussein’s accomplice, and its terrorist acts against Iranian targets and civilians, MKO has never had support among Iranians. Therefore, Maryam Rajavi can never be the President-elect of Iranians except those manipulated members in the isolated cult of Rajavis.

Now, after the controversial presidential election in Iran, which was a big practice of democracy for Iranians, Maryam Rajavi is seeking an opportunity to impose her cult of personality to Iranian nation, advocating her regime change policy. All experienced practitioners of democracy argue that democracy includes sharing of power by various parties, a phenomenon that has never existed in MKO, since its foundation, the dissidents have been always suppressed by the cult leaders.

In reaction to the post-election incidents in Iran Maryam Rajavi once more proposed her solution as “democratic change” against Velayet-e-Faqih regime! And she probably sees her cult of personality as the best alternative to the ruling system.

Maryam Rajavi, the advocate of regime change is of course the best person to destroy the progressing path of democracy in Iran, since the destructive cult of hers and her husband’s is the best symbol of suppressing the freedom of expression and speech.

Masud Rajavi who has imposed himself as an idol to be worshiped by the members given that he is the leader of Iran [as an impossible option]could be the most notorious dictator, after Stalin and Hitler in the new regime that MKO is seeking to establish.
By Mazda Parsi

July 5, 2009 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

Rajavi Cooperated with SAVAK

There are some evidences that Masoud Rajavi cooperated with SAVAK (Pahlavi regime’s security and intelligence organization) deliberately while in prison following the mass arrests in 1970s, when majority of the organization’s leaders and members were arrested on terrorist charges. According to Lotfollah Meisami, an eyewitness of Rajavi’s interrogations, he snitched extra information to SAVAK agents to immune himself against further pressures if they could have access to unreleased information. Giving false or burned information on the part of political prisoners is justifiable but giving more irrelevant information implies that Rajavi submitted completely to SAVAK playing a passive role to stop being tortured by the horrible, notorious security organization of Pahlavi’s regime and to win their full trust. In this regard, Meisami refers to a case in which Rajavi gave details of how Mojahedin fighters would carry their weapon concealed in handbags:

He (Rajavi) in one of his interrogations even referred to a suitcase in which weapons were hidden. He did so to defend himself it in case it would be unveiled in future. The interrogators came to analyze that he was a man to invest on. 1

It happened at a time when Mojahedin were on a path of struggle with the regime and absolutely reprehended any cooperation with SAVAK and even those members suffering under the heavy pressure and torture avoided to establish friendly relations only to be relieved of sufferings. Thus, Rajavi’s intimate manner of conduct with SAVAK agents to win their attention was in no way justifiable. The statements made by Meisami imply that Rajavi did so to prove he had repented and to take a path of passivity while in prison:

Rajavi was on friendly terms with SAVAK to the point that other prisoners called him a fop. He pretended to be very knowledgeable and we did not know why he did so. 2

Another instance is Rajavi’s passivity to tensions created inside prisons. It seems he evaded to be engaged in clashes that provoked SAVAK further and thus aggravated the conditions which could even lead prisoners to the edge of execution. The indifference on the part of Rajavi confirms the claims made by MKO former members that he had a fully passive role when SAVAK was hunting down the organization that led to their mass arrests:

Rumors ran rampant that they executed political prisoners with untried. Rajavi and some other members withdrew and concluded not to mess with SAVAK agents; it was the start of a round of collaboration with SAVAK. 3

Rajavi demonstrated his goodwill to SAVAK in various ways one of which was demanding facilities the agents of a regime with whom others were engaged in a heavy battle. His demands implied his indifference to the course of events in the society, his alliance with regime forces, and also his weak, conservative mode. Meisami refers to some instances of Rajavi’s demands in that critical period of the Iranian history:

When Rajavi came to Qasr prison, he smoked an expensive brand of cigarettes. Those arrested as demonstrators against the regime, would break into chanting ‘down with Shah’ in prison cells while some Mojahedin high ranks asked for TV. It was somehow a pulling out and they had quieted down to show their readiness to cooperate with SAVAK. 4

Other MKO former members have stated some cases in this regard too. For example, Mehdi Khoshhal who witnessed the conflict between Abbas Davari and Masoud Rajavi quotes Davari complaining about Rajavi’s egocentric manner in the National Council of Resistance in its early years and says:

This buster (Masoud Rajavi) who thunders today is very cagey. He was never given a basting in prison. He played a trick of abstaining from food to become weak and so fainted whenever SAVAK agents came to interrogate him. However, he would draw details of Hanifnejad and other’s residence when they put him under pressure. 5

The cases mentioned indicate that they fail to be sheer follies and errors somebody might make, rather they are characteristic outcomes of a double-crosser. Neither has he the guts to suffer hardships of a freedom-fighter nor can he curb his egocentric, ambitious demands that he tries to accomplish on the expense of others. Many folded personality of Rajavi makes it hard to believe that it is his errors and mistakes that has steered the organization to the terminus of a terrorist cult.

References

1. Ethical comedown of a Mojahed, Journal of The way of Mojahed

2. ibid

3. ibid

4. ibid

5. Khoshhal, Mehdi, Fighting Dictatorship.

October 27, 2008 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

A Misunderstood Court Judgment

In an interview with Radio Italy, channel 1, Maryam Rajavi, leading the cult of Mojahedin in the absence of her husband, stated that “…four international European courts have ruled out the illegal terror tag. Therefore, the European governments should listen to their parliamentarians and take the PMOI off the list”.

We do not know exactly when and where these four stated courts ruled removal of the terror tag from the organization, but if she means the last case judged by the European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg on 23 October 2008 it has to be stated that she has misunderstood the judgment. The court never judges that European Union has wrongly blacklisted the organization on its terrorist list and that it has to be removed.

She had earlier, and following the verdict, said that "The court’s verdict acknowledges the right to resist against dictatorship and represents the triumph of justice over politics and economic dealings and interests". It is itself another issue that how a court’s judgment may buy legitimacy for a blacklisted terrorist organization with countless evidences of terrorist atrocities against its own people.

Here is the court’s judgment with no further comment:

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Seventh Chamber)

23 October 2008

hereby:

1. Dismisses the action as unfounded in so far as it seeks annulment of Council Decision 2007/445/EC of 28 June 2007 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decisions 2006/379/EC and 2006/1008/EC;

2. Annuls Article 1 of Council Decision 2007/868/EC of 20 December 2007 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2007/445, and point 2.19 of the list annexed to that decision, in so far as they concern the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran;

3. Dismisses the action as unfounded in so far as it seeks annulment of the other provisions of Decision 2007/868, so far as the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran is concerned;

4. Orders the Council to bear, in addition to its own costs, one third of the costs of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran;

5. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Commission and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay their own costs.

October 27, 2008 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

A Definition of MKO Solidarity with Iraqi People

In her meeting with a group of Iraqi sheikhs, who were on a visit to Paris to attend MKO’s gathering on June 28, in Auvers-sur-Oise, Maryam Rajavi stressed that there was a close consanguinity between Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization and Iraqi people as reported by MKO’s run Iran-efshagari site. She paid homage to Iraqi martyrs like Sheikh Faez whose blood had mingled with that of Mojahedin’s in their struggle for peace and democracy! It seems that she has taken the turn to follow the same conduct once her husband had taken with Saddam but this time with Iraqi Sheikhs and through chanting slogans of democracy rather than brotherhood.

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

I think that the relations between us and you and Iraq, being the government of Iraq or the Baath Party and at the top of it Mr President [Saddam], and on the other side, the Iranian Resistance and the Mojahedin and the National Liberation, is not a purely political relation and one cannot interpret our relations like that any more. I think that the brotherhood relation has been completed. Such brothers that would not come short of anything for each other…. And that was how our fates were tied together. Our fates have become one and our bloods have been mixed together. And you know that there is no exaggeration in this. 1

Regardless of their sharing of strategic interests, Rajavi and Saddam’s tie was rooted in a mutual historical and ideological understanding. How is that in a value system that well justifies ties to a tyrant against oppressed people it also rationalizes solidarity with the same people after the fall of the tyrant. Paradoxical as it may seem, it is possible only if the solidarity is looked upon from the angle that the new alliance follows the same previous line of the tyrant and the Sheikhs are not true representatives of Iraqi people but supporters of the ousted dictator.

That is exactly it! They need backers in Iraq since the legal and nationally elected government of Iraq is planning to expel the group from Iraq and it lacks the least public support since hardly the Iraqi people fail to remember its bloody collaboration with Saddam. Unlike what they propagate as an act of solidarity or anything else, it is only a tactic they are the masters to contrive:

Always, when faced with a troubling question, the Mojahedin fall back on one of their habitual tactics. Either they claim bias, declaring that putting them in question is playing the game of the Iranian regime, or they use a jargon which we will look at more closely later on. In spite of everything, today they no longer fool anyone. Since the fall of their protector, more information is being uncovered, all of it supporting this reaction. The movement is tied to Saddam Hussein’s regime -for whom he, Rajavi, has done the dirty work to get his ‘residency permit’. 2

In fact, none of the Iraqi Sheikhs in the company of MKO is familiar with the group’s Machiavellian mind-set manipulated to achieve certain ambitious ends and assuming power. mojahedin need bridges to cross troubled, deep waters, a fact that its backers learn when it is too late and are left to drown in the same waters they have helped them to cross safely. At least one of Saddam’s men is named to have known Mojahedin and Massoud Rajavi particularly well. As Gessler names him, he is a very visible personality, very influential in Saddam’s regime until his defection. Brigadier General in the Iraqi Army General Staff, in charge of the secret services until 1994, Vafigh al-Samraee, was in regular, personal contact with Saddam Hussein:

I especially remember a sum of 20 million Iraqi dinars received by Massoud Rajavi (1 dollar was then worth three dinars). This was before the occupation of Kuwait in 1991. At that time he had received at least 8 million dollars. He also received various sums in foreign currency to cover his propaganda expenses in Europe. Massoud Rajavi also had other sources of income, including money given by his supporters. All of this money complemented the deliveries of military equipment. After all, the Iraqi regime supported the People’s Mojahedin with arms, mobile cannon, tanks, heavy artillery and even combat helicopters. ; The group used the logistical support of the Iraqi intelligence services to cross the border and to send commando groups into Iran to carry out terrorist attacks. 3

Referring to Mojahedin’s role in the suppression of uprisings Iraqis in Southern Iraq and Kurdistan he has stated:

The People’s Mojahedin brutally assaulted the Kurdish towns of Jelola and Khaneghein and took an active role in the repression of the popular uprisings in Southern Iraq in 1991. They provided Iraqi intelligence with all kinds of information on what was happening inside Iran". 4

No doubt, Mojahedin would have continued their collaboration with Saddam even beyond what has been stated had Iraq not been invaded. And how they happen to be on the same front of solidarity with people after securing brotherhood with the enemy of people is a question its roots has to be sought in the existing challenges between Iraqi domestic factions and parties. It is even much more embarrassing to see that some of these Sheikhs have put complete faith in hypocrite Mojahedin expressing indescribable affinity with the people they shared no communal interests in the past.

References:

1. To be Judged in History”; English Transcript of Videotaped Meetings Between Massoud Rajavi and the Head of Saddam’s Intelligence Services, Iran-interlink.

2. Antoine Gessler; Autopsy of an Ideological Drift, 2004, p. 81.

3. Ibid, p. 110.

4. Ibid.

July 17, 2008

http://www.mojahedin.ws/article/show_en.php?id=2812

July 21, 2008 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

Iraqi official:MKO terrorists sighted among British troops

Iraqi official: Mojahedin Khalq (Rajavi cult) terrorists sighted among British troops in American uniforms a week after Britain took them off its list of terror

British marines seen near Iran border

Roughly 60 British marines have been seen patrolling along Iraq’s border with Iran near the Shalamcheh border crossing, sources have said.

"Close to 60 British marines were seen patrolling near the Iranian border of Shalamcheh in groups of 20, carryig light weapons and with the apparent intention of monitoring the condition of the sealed border crossing," sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity told PRESS TV.

The Iraqi government officially closed the Shalamcheh border crossing in Iran’s southwestern Khuzestan province on April 24.

These British units are deployed along the Iraqi border with Iran, using Apache helicopters, the sources said.

Over 300 American and British forces are currently stationed some 10 km from the Iranian border of Shalamcheh in the Iraqi town of Tanumeh.

Members of the terrorist group, the Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO), have reportedly been sighted among them in American uniforms.

Press TV, May 10, 2008

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=55023&sectionid=351020101

May 10, 2008 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

A response to Patrick Clawson

Patrick Clawson in his article titled “ A Roadmap for the Foreign Terrorist Organization List ” dated April 25, 2008, rightfully questions a lack of objective criteria for de-listing an organization deemed at some point to be a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). A direct reference to Mojahedin-e Khalgh Organization with its diverse aliases such as MEK, MKO, PMOI, OPMI, NCR, NCRI, NLA, to name just a few, draw my attention to the Clawson’s views. I was nudged by further curiosity when I noticed that a Farsi translation of Clawson’s article had appeared on MEK’s propaganda apparatus even before its seemingly original English version was published. Although MEK has a long history in using deceptive tactics, here I have no intention to draw a conclusion that Patrick Clawson is somehow linked to the MEK’s demagoguery.

My close proximity to MEK’s headquarter in Paris, France, and my direct access to inside information of this group made it hard for me not to respond to Clawson’s article and the serious flaws in his views; nor could I resist my desire to reveal the true nature of MEK and its unbridled terrorism at the core of its existence.

Clawson complains about absence of clarity in the process of revocation of an FTO designee “even after the organizations have denounced terrorism for many years….” He then goes on to contest the designation of MEK as an FTO, and in doing so refers to irrefutable evidence about the group’s history as irrelevant. [Even at this point I am still resisting the link between Clawson and MEK]. However, I feel confident to say that Clawson is much misinformed about MEK and his views of the group depict a serious lack of good judgment about its nature and deceptive tactics.

1- I challenge Clawson to produce even one credible evidence that shows MEK has publicly denounced violence and terrorism. MEK has always maintained that he has never involved in terrorism rather they use the term “revolutionary resistance.” The true question that MEK and Clawson need to answer is this: Do you believe that MEK has engaged in terrorist activities in the past? If so, when and how? And if the answer to this question is affirmative, when did MEK publicly denounce such acts?

2- MEK deserves to remain as an FTO due to its cultic and violence-loving nature evident by the treatment of its own members, its close cooperation with the former Iraqi dictator, and its participation in killing scores of innocent civilians in the name of “revolutionary resistance.

3- After the 1979 revolution in Iran MEK routinely questioned the Islamic regime for their lack of Anti US zeal. They argued that it was MEK and its supporters who took over the US embassy in Tehran but the Islamic republic took credit for it. They publicly touted their killing of US service men and wrote poems about the killing, and yet they shamelessly deny they did that today. What is even more pathetic is that Clawson has fallen for such demagogy.

4- I also challenge Clawson on his view of the European Court ruling in December 2006. I have serious doubts that if the author has bothered to read the actual ruling. In that, the Court denied MEK’s request to nullify the EU’s list of terror group in which MEK is remained for years. Yet, the group falsely claims the reverse. I have repeatedly asked MEK to translate the court’s ruling into Farsi and publish it publicly in its entirety, they have refused to do so. They have only done so for the favorable part of the ruling in which the court had ordered unfreezing of their assets due to lack of due process. The court never concluded that MEK should be removed of the EU’s terror list. To prove my point, I invite Mr. Clawson to a public debate about his views on MEK. I am confident to have little difficulty to prove Clawson’s lack of familiarity with MEK and its deceptive propaganda.

5- I support a regime change in Iran. However, I do not see a major difference between the MEK, its fanatic anti US nature, violence-driven motives, and its unbridled terrorism than those of the ruling Mullahs. Iranians historically have been a peace-loving nation. They detest the MEK.

6- The US Court of appeals has ruled many times that MEK by its own admission has been actively involved in terrorist activities. Alas and alack, Clawson has never bothered to review such legal decisions, instead has referred himself to some false information propagated by MEK with the intention to deceive its audience.

In short, de-classification of MEK from the evidence-based terror group takes more than just private whispering of anti-terrorism statements with no real substance in practice. It demands a sincere review of the past terrorist activities coupled with a public commitment to a declaration of non-violence and peaceful activities. Moreover, it requires recognizing and honoring the basic human rights of MEK’s members, and unobstructed access to the free world and family members, something that MEK has denied its members for years. MEK’s current publications are full of glorification of violence and support for terrorism for their Farsi speaking audience. This is a clear contradiction to what Clawson has claimed that the group has denounced terrorism for years. The roadmap to de-proscribing of terror list cannot be based on false and misleading information let alone demagogy.

By Ahmad Baaraan, Paris
ABaaraan@yahoo.fr

May 1, 2008 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

The Least Required Qualifications for the Custody of Iraqi Children

It was earlier discussed that Maryam Rajavi’s announced readiness to take care of 1,000 Iraqi orphans and pay for all their expenses in Camp Ashraf is supposed to be a bid to attain certain political interests and especially to strengthen her group’s foothold in Iraqi soil. Hardly can it be considered a humanitarian move since Mojahedin’s phased ideological revolution had already targeted destabilizing relative emotional attachments of the insiders and conceptualizing the idea that the leadership is the focal point of absolute love and devotion. Conjugal attachments and familial affections had to be sacrificed for the leader; the outcome was forced ideological divorce of the spouses and separation of children from their parents.

Suppose that MKO’s suggestion is for a good and humanitarian cause. There are globally adopted minimum standards that had to be met for children foster care and guardianship is subject to certain rules. According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, “States Parties shall ensure that the institutions, services and facilities responsible for the care or protection of children shall conform with the standards established by competent authorities, particularly in the areas of safety, health, in the number and suitability of their staff, as well as competent supervision”. Thus, any individual or organization that intends to take care of children has to meet required benchmarks according to adopted laws of a country concerning child care and welfare.

Although in some details different because of the regional, cultural, and religious considerations, countries in their jurisdiction consider sever qualifying regulations for the guardians and custodians. There is a unanimous agreement that they have to be subject to no limitation and entitled to no especial protection and assistance. Moreover, they should be liable to no prosecution for charges against them and accused of no criminal acts and abuse particularly done against children. Above all, they should be financially eligible and it has to be ensured that the guardianship does not result in improper financial gain for those involved in it.

Considering the least qualifications for the custody of children, now the question is that are Mojahedin qualified enough to take care of Iraqi children? First, they have to be subject to no limitation and entitled to no especial protection and assistance. It is broadly known that Mojahedin’s members are restricted in Camp Ashraf that is regarded as a military camp rather than a residential complex. At the present, no child lives in the camp and all children have been already evacuated to Western countries and most of the members are held against their will. Even their stay at the camp is transient since the Iraqi government is determined to expel all the members who are under the supervision of Coalition Forces that designated the members as “protected persons” under the Geneva Convention and posted guards at their bases since 2003.

In respect of criminal acts and charges, regardless of many instances of inter-organizational liquidations, MKO has committed many hundreds of assassinations and political killings as well as shedding blood of many innocent children and civilians according to its own officially issued military communiqué. Its globally proscription as a terrorist group by the State Department, the EU’s country members and some other countries is a telling evidence of its countless perpetrated atrocities. There are also evidences of the members’ children receiving ideological and cult educations and harsh military trainings in MKO-run hostels and basis scattered in Western countries.

Is MKO eligible financially to foster Iraqi orphans? According to the State Department’s report, “Before Operation Iraqi Freedom began in 2003, the MEK received all of its military assistance and most of its financial support from Saddam Hussein. The fall of Saddam’s regime has led MEK to increasingly rely on front organizations to solicit contributions from expatriate Iranian communities”. French prosecutor general had earlier on March 19 requested the anti-terror court to add new charges against MKO and the leader of the group Maryam Rajavi. The new charges are reported to be money laundering and fraud charges added to the previous case which includes connection with terrorism and saboteur groups. In Germany, the government investigations uncovered Mojahedin’s illegal financial activities where it abused the members’ children, who had been evacuated during the first Gulf War, to beg in the streets. In general, the group’s funds are the pile of no clean money.

Now, does MKO meet minimum standards that are required to qualify it for the custody of Iraqi children? Where the MKO members’ children were illegally deprived of their rights and even their identity and freedom, for which the leaders have to stand trial, how the cult’s leader presumptuously announces readiness to take care of innocent Iraqi orphans? Of course, that is clear that the Iraqis never consent to see their orphans out of frying pan into the fire.

Bahar Irani – Mojahedin.ws – August 8, 2007

August 14, 2007 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts