Former members of the MEK

MKO former members

Rajavi’s leadership, the criterion to legitimize the ideology

Sahar Family Foundation: We continue with the question, in all aspects of the discussed suicide operations, what were the ideological foundations and historical backgrounds that theorized and justified application of such operations? Were there any reliable historical facts to refer to or Rajavi relied only on his own inferences to justify such deeds? As Rajavi usually theorizes anything before putting it into action, it has to be necessarily true in this case as well. I believe these are key issues, hardly discussed in detail, to help develop a better understanding of such reprehensibly ideological mannerism. So I think you can better disclose untold aspects since you have been so close to the nucleus of decision makings.

Batool Soltani: Naturally, as they stated, anything was founded on and done according to a series of presented justifications. That is to say, any resolution had to be justifiably fitted in an ideological apparatus to be practically conceivable. I myself believe that we cannot possibly develop an understanding of the mechanisms that are products of an egocentric will, and in many cases self-instigated, unless we can well analyze fundamental principles. Concerning your question, I will give some details of what I have observed in the different levels and in the level of the Leadership Council in particular.

Regardless of many subjects already discussed, once in 2002 we had a long discourse on the subject you broached. I have to point out that there was a especial book of the Leadership Council wherein you could find the questions, duties and responsibilities of the members of the Leadership Council. Particularly, an article exclusively concerned the subject. Of course, the book was only circulating among the members of the Leadership Council and none of the lower ranks were permitted to touch it. It was exclusively edited for the members of the Leadership Council and would be also referred to as “the Book of Guidance”. The book contained extended degrees of responsibilities as well as the limitations and whatever was considered to be an act of sin. In one of the meetings of the Leadership Council it was enthusiastically debated about the mentioned subject and the historical backgrounds of the suicide operation. In his speech Rajavi underlined that the act of suicide in itself was a big sin and homicide in Islamic teachings. He would say if according to Quran suicide was known to be a big sin then, why we were stressing on suicide and related operations as a working approach. Of course, it was before the widespread self-immolations of June 17.

He would continue focusing on the point that while it was a big sin then, why we took advantage of it for organizational interests and to defend Ashraf. In answer to his own raised question some stood to justify that the suicides were ideologically rooted and done for organizational and revolutionary interests that eventually benefitted masses. He taunted them all about whatever they thought to be serious remarks. He explained that it was all beyond our understanding since we lacked the sound political-ideological capacity needed to reach the accurate answer. The rationalized answer to his own posed question was that in all the wars and battles to which the prophets and imams dispatched their disciples to and also the armed struggle the organization was engaged in some people were inevitably killed. Then, was there any difference between the former warriors called martyrs and the latter combatants killed in the course of suicide operations? Both of the groups he explained to be of help to their leaders to carry out their responsibilities to affect their societies and the revolution they led. He meant that there was no difference between the two groups since both were killed in a battlefront to which they had been dispatched by the order of leaders who intended to accomplish the same cause.

Giving further explanations, he focused on Ahmed Rezai’s suicide act as a sacred feat beyond any regular suicide operation saying his act was sacred and distinguished because he, as the suicide-man, had reached a point where he had detached from his own self and had attached himself to a source without. Any act in any form, being suicide, self-immolation or else, done when the suicide detaches himself from his within and relies on a pivot without not only distances himself from any territory of sin but also transcends himself to a status even above the martyrs. He would interpret that the Quran regards suicide an act of sin because the perpetrator does it in the sphere of observing only his own self and as a result of failing to satiate his own personal will and whim. Then, it would be considered no sin if committed far from selfish tendencies and for a sacred causes to achieve some social and historical ends.

The Quran condemns suicide when motivated by individual urges and the suicide sees no obligation to follow the orders of a leader who intends to alleviate social problems and solve social controversies. It is no more a sin as it relies on and is guided by a pivotal element without who controls deflection when attached to. In fact, Rajavi was commenting on the application of one of the articles of his forced ideological revolution referred to as article F, Fardiyat (individual). The article in particular asserts the relation between the individuals and the leader meaning that it is the leader who legitimizes anything said or done by the individuals. He is the pivot on whom the individuals have to relay and attach themselves for interpretation of anything that happens to be practical and the criterion to assess the accuracy and soundness of thoughts.
SFF: What did Rajavi actually mean, attachment to leadership or ideology? Since it is the ideology, however, that crystallizes the values than the leader whose main role is to interpret and foster them. What did he really mean?

BS: He exactly intended attachment to leadership himself. There were controversies at the beginning on the ideological aspect and some would say that suicide draw its legitimacy from the ideology while Rajavi had a different opinion stressing on the leader as the matrix to which the individual had to secure a liaison. Although it may generally be considered the very same ideology, Rajavi believes that it is the leader who is the spirit without whom anything lacks legitimacy. It is main cause of his strife with the Islamic Republic regime. Attachment to ideology in his opinion is a general perception that actualizes by attaching to the leadership. Then, the matrix one attaches himself to far from his own self is the leader rather than the ideology since from the very beginning the leader has crystallized the ideology itself. As a matter of fact, both are regarded identical with the priority of the former over the latter to justify suicide tantamount to a de facto recognition of a sacred act wherever and whenever the leader wills. Looking it from the angle of Rajavi’s interpretation, the leader is the criterion and the grounds to judge what is lawful, permissible, prohibited and ideologically acceptable. That is where one’s suicide turns to be a big and unforgivable sin if it is unauthorized by the leader regardless of him being directly or indirectly attached.

SFF: What do you mean by directly or indirectly?

BS: By directly I mean a reaction against any direct attempt on the leader’s life when an individual risks his life to save the leader. Any reaction to protect the interests of the leader anywhere on the earth by risking one’s life is an indication of indirect attachment, a responsibility the individuals claim to defend the leadership, his security and interests. In both cases, whether the leader is exposed to direct attempts of assassination or indirect character assassination, one has to protect and defend the leadership and sacrifice himself. To actualize his justifications, he did not even shrink from identifying himself with the prophets and imams. He would say the one who sacrificed himself to protect the Prophet against the harms of the adversaries was identical with the same faithful follower who committed suicide or self-immolation away in the distance to defend his status and interests. Again the criterion was the leadership and his unlimited protection directly or indirectly.
I believe that Rajavi intended to completely remove the doubts formed in the minds of the members of the Leadership Council that suicide was in no way an act of sin and even sacred and glorified if it was committed under the command of the leadership in any form. The suicide who sacrificed himself for the cause of the leadership and his interests anywhere in the world would be rewarded far beyond that of a martyr who had been killed under the command of the Prophet or the leader of the organization.

SFF: At the first look, it seems that the priority is first to guarantee maintenance of the leadership’s interests and then survival of the organization. Can it be the basis for all justifications?

BS: Of course, in one aspect that is to guarantee the interests of both leadership and the organization. But there is one important point to notice, that is, the two are intermingled and inseparable with the priority of the former. The organizational interests can never be discussed separately unless accredited to the leader just as it is with the ideology that draws its legitimacy from the leadership.

To be continued
Translated by Mojahedin.ws

August 22, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

No member of Leadership council dares to tell his personal problems

Memoirs of Batoul Soltani –Part 21

The affairs of the Leadership Council including marrying Masud are never revealed to lower ranks, due to the fact that Maryam and Masud believe :”the lower ranks will not understand it because the pupils of their eyes are sexual.”

“Pupils of the eyes are sexual” is a jargon expression in the organization which is used for those who allegedly judge the affairs sexually. In their opinion the case of such marriages is something that the others are not able to realize.
No member of Leadership council dares to tell his personal problems
I don’t think that anyone in lower ranks know about the marriage agreement announced for women of the Leadership Council and Masud Rajavi. As a high ranking member who was responsible for meetings of lower ranks,

I don’t remember (at least as far as I was involved) the case of marriages was presented. Maryam and Masud insist that there is no need to present such a case in lower ranking meetings and also they do not have the capacity to realize it. They said:” we set such an arrangement to solve a historical problem. For me and other members of the Leadership Council, everything presented by Rajavi was acceptable. We had to discuss the most detailed problems of our minor members for Rajavi, For example we talked about their health problems or other problems, based on the content of reports of weekly cleansing meetings (cult jargon) for male members. The reports included their sexual problems or many other problems that no one dare to propose.

Of course, the men’s problems were never presented in front of us (as female members). Their contradictions were not told directly to us. At first, they were presented in men’s meetings, under particular regulations because these contradictions shouldn’t be presented in public meetings unless it was a public case. If the contradiction was sexual, it should be written to the male superior. The latter would add the names. The name had to be written on a separate paper and attached to the report [The name of the female member whom he had emotional or sexual feelings for]. If a man wrote the name of a woman in his report, he would be punished.

At the end of the day, the male superior handed the reports to the female in charge and ultimately the reports were handed over to the highest ranking member in the highest level. There, the reports were investigated and the names were read. Then they immediately changed the position of that female member and moved her to another unit. So, even the lowest ranking members could guess that she had some problem.

Sometimes the problem had happen between two male members. Then the superiors organized both to change their positions. After the changes were done, the two men became subjects of a series of meetings. They had to deal with a project with its specific outcomes.

There is no female member under the supervision of a male member. All women of course were only under the supervision of a single man, Massoud Rajavi. Before the evolutions in the leadership Council, the meetings were held with the presence of both men and women, but later Rajavi said that he didn’t want any female member to be under the responsibility of a male member. He believed that men’s hegemony upon women would definitely end in sexual problems. The relations were managed in a way that all reports were presented and discussed with Rajavi in daily meetings. For example the members reported that such and such person had emotional and sexual thoughts about such and such person.

Before marrying Massoud, none of the female members had the nerve to present such cases in the meetings with Massoud or Maryam. Therefore marrying Massoud was proposed. They told us:”You are all Massoud’s wives, so you could easily speak of everything to get the solution.” If someone didn’t accept the marriage, she would automatically drop from that level.

August 19, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Execution, the approach to repel dissenters

An interview with Batool Soltani on MKO self-immolations – Part ten

Sahar Family Foundation: since the deployment of the American forces in the region and even before that the serious agenda before the organization has been the resistance of Camp Ashraf. That why it is of such significance for the organization is another issue to deal with. But the question here is implementation of the means, explicitly suicide operations, to defend Ashraf as the strategic bastion. That is the fact we have already talked about when referring to human tragedy and human shield, the members’ risking their life in defense of Ashraf. Rajavi has reiterated that ‘if Ashraf resist, the whole world resist’, in fact, such mottos show clear dispositions of the leadership and other rankings towards Ashraf for its strategic importance. Will you give further details on anything untold concerning this issue and even what approaches did Rajavi take to deal with those members who would resist against plotted suicides in defense of Ashraf?

Execution, the approach to repel dissenters Batool Soltani: well, here are a nexus of issues that can be discussed separately. One is the vow to defend Ashraf through any possible means. First it was resolved to fight in defense of Ashraf tooth and nail but circumstances proved to be more serious and they had to think of a different approach to resist, that is to say, human shield. Once they resolved on urgent transfer of the cadres of the Leadership Council from Iraq to France and they even provided passports for high rankings to get them out of Iraq. In 2003, Massoud Rajavi, the beating heart of the organization, made a call insisting that Auvers-sur-Oise, Maryam’s residence, was the brain of the organization while Ashraf was naturally the heart; the brain would naturally collapse if the heart’s beating declined, and it is a question of how the brain and heart interrelate.

You know, after the fall of Saddam, the organization concentrated all its propaganda capacity on Auvers-sur-Oise to present it, along with Maryam, as the organization’s headquarters of the political leadership in the West. They began to maneuver on Maryam as a political engine there just after experiencing the failed tactic of electing her as the president-elect. Just after her sham election, she was sent to France to play her role there but it proved to be a big failure and she was returned to Camp Ashraf to be conveyed back right before the fall of Saddam. A new round of propagation began since they were of the opinion that now,

After the political fluctuations in the region, the West would have a differently positive opinion of Mojahedin. They targeted two aims simultaneously; to stabilize their political bastion in the West by attracting attentions to Auvers-sur-Oise, and second, to continue an increasing protection in favor of Camp Ashraf for two reasons. First, it has been regarded the organization’s ideological receptacle that has the potentiality of rendering members’ ideological readiness.

Second, it is observed to be a potential armed force just within the reach of the coalition forces to be used against Iran if they had any plan. The organization’s analysis of the regional crises had convinced it that American’s military interference against Iran was decisively inevitable and was planning to fan the fire to accelerate what it imagined had to happen sooner or later. Thus it was all conditioned on the preservation of Ashraf as a future lever for America against Iran that could possibly lead to Mojahedin’s seizing of power, the key issue on the back burner that required the organization to be disarmed but remain under the protection of a second patron and to unwillingly consent to the wills of the Iraqi government until the due time came. So Ashraf had to be preserved to invest the organization with a promising future. After the 17 June tragic incidents, Massoud Rajavi insisted on a new role play for the Leadership Council, the human shield to defend Ashraf. It was just coincident with Rajavi’s two-year pledge that ended with Bush’s presidency.

Rajavi knew well that out of Iraq would be the end of road for the organization and insisted on staying in Iraq at any cost in hope of a miracle that could open the gate to drive through into Iran. In an earlier analysis he had stated that the organization’s permanent stay in Iraq meant destruction of the organization in whole; it was only a short stay to move to Iran. But now there was another analysis that contradicted the previous; to leave Iraq was equal to complete annihilation. The sole solution was to preserve Ashraf; they could either wait to fish in the troubled waters of intensified crises in the region or all would be buried in Camp Ashraf. The approach for the latter choice was a mass suicide. But then they conjectured that there could be other solutions as well. On was based on the promise that because of the Geneva’s fourth article they could not be forcefully repatriated. Then they draw a picture that they would fight tooth and nail if there was any plan to relocate them forcefully.

The last proposed resolution was a mass suicide; two deaths were the outcome of this decision. A number of members dispersed after the invasion of the coalition forces were returning to the camp when en route they were informed of the camp’s siege by American forces. Two members the Leadership Council, Marzieh Ali-ahmadi and Nazhat Arzbeigi, immediately set themselves on fire to execute their organizational duty. In fact, they carried out the mission Rajavi had assigned members to do in case American forces occupied the camp. On two conditions members were told to commit mass suicide; the incursion of either Americans or Iraqi Shi’its into the camp. Just when Americans were behind the wall of Ashraf, many members the Leadership Council were preparing to commit suicide. Rajavi had even issued an ultimate for the disobedient who refrained to commit suicide, it was revolutionary execution. No doubt, no outsider could draw any distinction between a voluntary suicide and revolutionary execution following a mass suicide. Rajavi has thought of slightest details concerning his mass suicide program at Ashraf; nobody has to be survived, the willing and the unwilling have to be burn together.

Notably, there were other deterrent decrees issued by Rajavi in private and in a meeting of higher echelons; the lower echelons were unaware of the decrees. The escapees had to be targeted and executed by others; it was the same fate that befell the disloyal and betrayers. The deserters for the opposite front would also face the same destiny. Interestingly, if anybody failed to commit suicide, others had the responsibility to help him/her accomplish the job. Thus, the human tragedy in defense of Ashraf is a program that has to be possibly brought into actuality and there are a variety of approaches that will act to remove deterrents.

August 16, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Masud Rajavi Married every woman of the Leadership Council

Memoirs of Batoul Soltani – Part 20

As I explained previously about Masud and Maryam’s Marriage, it was a solution to remove the last obstacle between the leader and Maryam since no obstacle is accepted in this relationship. In the case of the leadership Council of which the members are all women, there was also the same legal, moral and religious contradiction that has to be removed.

Any woman who wants to enter the Leadership Council should obey the article B of the Ideological Revolution, which was actually related to “Joining the leader”. In this article the women are told to marry Masud Rajavi as soon as they are accepted in the Leadership Council.

As a matter of fact this article is mentioned just after the person has become a member of the Leadership Council. I remember Maryam discussing the argument for us saying: ”Now you are exclusively considered as Msaud’s wives”. Therefore the contradiction was removed. And only Masud could hold meetings for women of the Leadership Council since in his opinion when a woman is a member of the Leadership Council her relationship with the leader is totally different from the other members.

Thus, through a series of long-term meetings, the members of the Leadership council are convinced that the extent of their relation with the leader has changed due to their presence in the Leadership Council. Distinctively after that Masud is their husband. Then, he introduced a marriage certificate for each member of the Council.

It is worth informing that there were official ceremonies specifically held for the above mentioned marriages and I was present in one of them. Before the start of the ceremony, Maryam explained the article B again discussing its differences for a man and for a woman.

They presented some arguments on the issue but unfortunately I don’t remember them in details since they are related back to 1999. In fact the bottom line of those arguments was as Maryam said: ”you are not a divorced or abandoned woman any more … You are Msaud’s ideological wives”. She meant that this type of marriage is not ordinary but it is spiritual.

About the formation of the ceremony, Maryam herself was the one who hold the meeting. The scenario was like this “At the beginning Maryam asked Masud to enter the meeting and Masud refused at first and pretended that he was forced to come in. Apparently, Masud wasn’t willing to attend the meeting and Maryam insisted him to do so.

Even Maryam told the members of the Leadership Council that she was doing so to remove their contradictions. She said: ”Your minds are still bounded with legal and traditional restrictions and this might cause problems in the future”. She emphasized that marrying Masud would close their minds to any other man. Finally Masud got into the meeting and he himself announced the marriage agreement and each member said “I do”.

For the ceremony, after Masud went into the meeting, he gave a break. Then everyone made wudhu (ablution) and came back, Masud himself announced the agreement and the women said “I do” one by one. Apparently, they were not forced to say so.

It was a routine ceremony which was held for each group of the leadership Council members who were replaced. I myself attended the forth ceremony.

Before the ceremony, the meetings were completely different; members didn’t talk about anything; but after the marriage ceremony, the atmosphere was so different that the women could talk about their most personal and sexual problems.

Once, I remember a woman who didn’t say “I do” in the marriage ceremony. Then I saw that she was automatically excluded from our meetings. We never saw her in the meetings in that level anymore.

SFF – Translated by Nejat Society

August 8, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Rajavi; set your body on fire to defend Ashraf

An interview with Batool Soltani on MKO self-immolations – Part nine

Sahar Family Foundation: In our last talk you pointed out that the prerequisite for membership in Rajavi; set your body on fire to defend Ashraf the organization is to volunteer for self-immolation. Does it mean that the organization reacts against the reluctant and how does it deal with such instances?

Batool Soltani: The organization takes no clear position to directly confront in such instances. To answer the question, we need to conduct a deep analysis of a whole organizational reaction against already confronted cases. There was a female colleague who had refused to volunteer for self-immolation but the organization showed no antagonistic attitude towards her before others. It was not the end of the story and the organization commanded me to watch her closely since they believed that she was in trouble with herself and cared not the least for the organization. They would justify that now even ten days after the detention of Maryam in France, she had refrained to be an abstentious volunteer. In fact, the organization avoided to tackle with these members just before the eyes of others and pretended to overlook them. In this way, many others would be impressed to join the side of majority since the impartiality proved to be a working propaganda to attract more than to repel. Furthermore, nobody could accuse the organization of coercing members into acts of suicide and the acts would be propagated as personal outbursts of passion and consequent of strong devotion to the ideology, Maryam and Massoud. The process of indirect control of the disobedient would continue until through an excuse they would be seriously censured. There were some among the rankings of the Leadership Council who refused to volunteer for suicide operations but after a while were suddenly evanesced from the council. In my opinion, the use of clever mechanisms of control to undermine the dissidents functioned much better than exploiting levers of pressure and coercion. And so far it has succeeded to expand glorification of suicide operation as a token of devotion among the insiders.

SFF: You have already stated that self-immolation as a kind of suicide operation has been innovated by the organization. Can you say exactly when the organization selected it as a working lever, and who was the first to suggest it and for what reason?

BS: Well, I have already explained that the suicide operation is not new but was innate in An interview with Batool Soltani on MKO self-immolations organization from its very formation.

SFF: I mean in its novel form of self-immolation.

BS: Well, it was first conducted to be committed in 17 June operations. We have never witnessed it before.
SFF: To make it more clear, when it was first suggested as a solution and by whom?

BS: It returns to Massoud Rajavi’s last meeting in Camp Ahraf before the fall of Saddam. It was a well known meeting called ‘the meeting of flag’. Of course, the issue was not explicitly mentioned there but it was later discussed in a meeting of the Leadership Council that what should have to be done to defend if Saddam collapsed and Camp Ashraf came under unexpected threat from the outside. For the first time Massoud suggested self-burning as a defensive advantage to safeguard Ashraf. He frankly stated that to repel any threat intended to dismantle Camp Ashraf all had to sacrifice and set themselves on fire. Of course, at the time the organization was not suffering the deteriorating condition of being disarmed and it was still equipped with a variety of heavy and light weapons that could defend itself to some extent. But it seemed that Rajavi was anticipating a near future of invasion that could seriously challenge the organization before it could use its arms. So the best defensive measure was resolved by Rajavi to be suicide through self-immolation. We never saw Massoud again till the manifestation of his novel suggestion in the incidents of 17 June.

SFF: To remind you, I have to point out that the issue of self-immolation emerged for the first time in the letters of the members who wrote them to Massoud Rajavi following his ideological revolution as an indication of devotion to him and his revolution. I remember a letter in Jafarzadeh’s handwriting published by a website in which he had volunteered to commit self-immolation to show his loyalty. These letters date back to 1985 and I mean to say that the issue was first proposed at that time as the letters indicate. Furthermore, even when France was expelling some members to Gabon, Maryam Rajavi is quoted to have said Massoud Rajavi had stopped remonstrant self-immolations as a raised objection against the decision taken by France. Your reference to the meeting dates back to 2002, then, can you remember any earlier occasion when the issue came under notice?

BS: To correct, I was not in the organization at the time you are referring to. I joined in mid 1980s and I have seen none of the things you say in the sources published by the organization.

SFF: All of the instances I stated you can find in the publications of the organization if you have access to them.

BS: It seems that my information as a member of the organization fails to surpass that of yours. I would be grateful if you could give me the address to these sources.

August 6, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Mr. Saiee defected MKO terrorists and joined his family

Nejat Society – Kermanshah – Mr. Manouchehr Saiee succeeded to release himself from the bars of Rajavis’ Cult and returned to his homeland and joined his family.

After 17 years of being captive of Rajavis’ Cult, Mr. Manouchehr Saiee could visit his family and returned to his warm family center at Nejat Society office, Kermanshah branch.

Mr. Saiee declared that during these 17 years, I was imprisoned and tortured several times and at last I could manage to release myself from Mujahedin Terrorist Organization.

Mr. Manouchehr Saiee succeeded to release himself from the bars of Rajavis’ Cult

Nejat Society welcomes Mr. Saiee and wishes him success in all aspects of his new life.

Liberation of all who are banned behind the bars of MKO terrorist group is near. They will be released and begin a new life of great happiness near their families.

July 28, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Hamid Hajipur Welcomed by Nejat Families

Hamid Haji pur who spent twenty years of his life in MKO succeeded to defect from the cult a few months ago and return to his hometown in Gilan, Iran.

Following his return, a lot of families who are members of Nejat Society in Gilan office, contact the office in order that they can get news about the health of their beloved ones in Camp Ashraf.

To facilitate Mr. Hajipour’s visit with Nejat families, Gilan office held a meeting where the families welcomed Mr. Hajipour and asked about the condition of their children who are still captured in Camp Ashraf.

Hajipur Ex-member of Rajavi’s Cult Welcomed by Nejat Families

July 27, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Mujahedin’s Eternal Light Operation

The following is a part of Hadi Shabani’s interview with FNA. He was the advisor of Mozhgan Parsaiee (the chief commandant of MKO at the time) during the operation Eternal Light (Forough-e-Javidan). He spent twenty years of his fifty year-old life in the group until he could escape out of MKO camp in 2005.

In his denouncing interview, he retold his memories of the Eternal Light.

FNA: how was the military invasion ordered to you?

H.Sh: Immediately after the ceasefire between Iran and Iraq, Masud Rajavi held a meeting where he said that we should attack Iran in a week since the acceptance of the 598 resolution by Iran notified the weakness of Iranian forces in the fronts. He said that it was our fault that Iran accepted the resolution because when in the previous operation (Chelcheragh) we seized Mehran [a city near Iranian border] and we chanted the slogan “Today Mehran, Tomorrow Tehran.”, the Iranian regime were afraid of our arrival in Tehran and immediately accepted the ceasefire. Following such a speech the new brigades and battalions were organized. Later Masud [Rajavi] told that according to an organized plan with Iraqi army, they (Iraqi forces) were supposed to attack Iran from the Southern borders so as we could go ahead in the Western borders.

Hadi Shabani

FNA: did you participate the “justification meeting for Light” or “the Goodbye meeting”?

H.Sh: yes, all the forces were there. Masud addressed a long speech and told that we should start tomorrow and said to Mahdi Abrishamchi (the commandant of Tehran Axis): “when you arrive in Tehran, prepare my former office on Alavi street, Tehran, for me to settle down there.” he addressed the forces.”After you arrive in Tehran, you can do anything you like for 48 hours, kill anyone you like until I come to grant public amnesty.”

How did the forces hope to win in the operation?

All of us thought that the plan was really practical.

Maud said: “the Iranian forces have no motive to fight and the people are tired and waiting for a spark to revolt against the government.” Even when we told him that we had some shortages in the units, he said:” don’t worry. As soon as we arrive in the first city, the people will join us and cover our shortages.’’

From the other side, it was the last opportunity for us who had joined the organization to struggle. According to the indoctrinations of MKO, we had to fight or kill or die.

-But meanwhile, the Iranian forces could defeat the Iraqi forces in the South. Didn’t you wonder how a country, which was allegedly weakened, could do such a thing?

-You should know that as the MKO members, our mind didn’t work tactically. We couldn’t understand it. We were the same as a skier who slips over the snow of the emotions. We were not able to analyze, we even couldn’t work on the map. The commandant told us to go straight ahead until you get Kermanshah and then Hamedan where you go to Zanjan, Saveh and Tehran. And we accepted. Now that I see, I figure out that the operation was a failure from the beginning. Moving in a line on tanks in an asphalted road had no possibility to success but nobody knew that at the time.

The proceeding night, Masud convinced the members so well that they wanted to start the operation the same night. Some members worked hard, they slept only two hours a day, and then during the Eternal Light Operation, some members were so exhausted that they overslept.

Did you receive special trainings for the operation?

The trainings were so few and only for those who had just come from the Europe two or three days ago. They were only trained to shoot with Kalashnikov and colt. Those who arrived while the operation didn’t even received that short training. They were only given an arm to go fight. MKO told them falsely that we were for example in Kermanshah and they should go there. Some members who were in Europe had left their children to their neighbors in order to reach the operation. Those who couldn’t recognize their right hand from their left hand. The forces who participated in the operation included three parts:

The old members of the organization who were trained.

The members who had just come from the other countries.

The war prisoners of the organization.

Explain more about the two last parts, please.

The forces who hadn’t received training and participated the operation to take a use of such a large chaos!! They were hopeful to change Iranian regime and get a position or rank in the new regime but most of them were killed. The situation of the prisoners was even worse.

How come?

Some of the prisoners were the Iranian prisoners who were in Iraqi prisons where they were treated so badly. Some of them accepted to fight in the hope that they can escape during the operation. They were about 300 people. Most of them were from the army forces that were captured in Sardasht or Fakeh. Also some of them were taken as war prisoners in Chelcheragh operation. All of them were held in Camp called Debes in Kirkuk.

When the operation started, the organization had to use the maximum use of its forces, so they looked for the war prisoners. Some of the prisoners whose number was small declared their preparation to participate. The rest were jailed in a room where some food and water were left for them. They were told:” after the victory we will come back to you.

One of the MKO officials, ”Ahmad Vaqef said:”the following day we went to the room to tell them that we could seize Kermanshah and anyone who wants to come, can come. A number of them were tricked and came and the others were imprisoned again.” Therefore the organization could force about 40 people of them, to participate the operation and most of them could escape from the scene. The organization knew that but they said that they had no way except increasing the number of the forces. However Karand was besieged by the Iranian forces so the organization forces were surrounded in Islam Abad.

During the operation, in which unit were you serving?

I was working in artillery, our commandant was Mahin Rezaiee who was called Azar.

The first day, two sets of Ayfa were delivered to us. We were four people. We had no important problem until we reached Islam Abad where 122 small fights happened but any way we could open the way. Then the real fight began. I was injured then taken to Islam Abad. The injured fighters were a lot. We were taken to Bagdad hospital by Iraqi helicopters. The hospital was dedicated to MKO injured members due to their large number.

Your friends, did they tell you anything about the fights?

One of them described his memory which I’d like to retell it now that you see that MKO and Masud’s emotion and kindness! MKO’s strategy in the Eternal light was the “Military Flag” Strategy. It means: kill anyone who is against you and this “anyone” means “revolutionary guard’’.

A friend of mine explained:”we captured some of revolutionary guards during Eternal Light operation and kept them in a place with tied hands. The weather was very hot, and they were very thirsty. One of the members went before the commandant “Afshin” and asked him what to do with the captive ones. Afshin who liked colt very much took out his colt and killed all of them, put their bodies on each other and took pictures of them. The picture was shown repeatedly in MKO’s meeting as one of the most important achievements of Eternal Light.

What was the reflex of the failure of Eternal Light in the organization?

It was so terrible that after a week, Masud declared a public meeting and ordered to bring all the forces, even the injured ones, to the meeting, I was in the hospital at the time but they brought me to the meeting with my bed. The situation was very bad. Most of the forces were discouraged.

What did the organization do to deal with the situation?

During the meeting, Masud began with justifying the failure, the thing he was so good at. However the atmosphere after the operation was very heavy, the organization started to recruit new forces from Europe. They were told to come to Iraq for some military training and then they are free to stay or to go. Masud said that they were preparing for the operation “Eternal 2”

But it was of no use. The condition lasted until the American invasion to Iraq and then it reached its summit.

Translated by Nejat Society

July 23, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Human tragedy in prospect; Mojgan Parsai the first volunteer

An interview with Batool Soltani on MKO self-immolations – Part 8

Sahar Family Foundation: In our last session we talked about the possibility of a human tragedy. You said that all volunteers had signed a written pledge for self-immolation. The question is to what degree the organization can exploit these signed pledges to stage a human tragedy?

Batool Soltani: This is an issue of high potentiality. In fact, these letters helped the organization have an effective evaluation to plot its future scenarios. They are substructures on which the organization will lay the groundwork for its political strategies. But regardless of these potential means and developing a true assessment of the devoted on whom it can relay, it shows the organization’s own fascination in such activities that are some true aspects of cultic relations. Admittedly, most cults behave according to pre-planned scenarios in their relations with the outside world. It is also the same with Mojahedin.

When a member like Sedigheh Mojaveri commits self-immolation, for sure her feat has been already discussed in detail in higher echelons of the organization. It fails to be an arbitrary decision, not even one percent, to step into the street and set oneself on fire; any instance of unbridled passion is absolutely rejected by the organization and fails to be accounted as an organizationally directed objective.

Frankly speaking, no member of the organization with whatever ranking, being in charge of any post or else, hardly takes a step uncontrolled and uncoordinated by the organization. In a hierarchical order within an organization with tight discipline and very limited internal democracy, the responsible ranks have to be aware of the slightest overt and covert things about the members under their authority and there is nothing kept secret about the members in respect to their status.

For example, I was in England for four years and my massul (the one in charge) was aware of the single moments of my stay there; it was the same with the members under my authority. Hardly can you find an organization with so strong sense of cohesion and tight internal discipline. Consequently, no decision of self-immolation remains concealed from the ranks in charge and nobody ever dares to disobey the organization to engage in any self-motivated act of suicide.

SFF: From what layer of the organization were specifically the first volunteers of self-immolation in Camp Ashraf? Can you, for instance, name the first volunteer?

BS: You know, anything in an organization emerges from the top layers and gradually, through a well orchestrated mechanism, is spread to lower layers. It is done so skillfully that after a while those in the top can hardly believe that what is so easily embraced and theorized among the lower ranks is a magnified reflex of what had been originated in the top.

SFF: Now, can you name the first volunteer for self-immolation in Camp Ashraf when it was resolved on the act?

BS: In the department I was, Mojgan Parsai was the first who broached the subject and she was also the first volunteer. Her first sentence to begin was ‘It is worthwhile to set on fire whatever we have in Camp Ashraf for Maryam’s freedom’. Of course, what she said was another interpretation of Massoud Rajavi’s message stating that we had to make use of all our facilities and potentialities wherever we were to set Maryam free. He would say any Mojahed breathing on this planet had to be ready to sincerely sacrifice and set on fire whatever he had for the sake of Maryam. Thus, it all began in the echelon of the Leadership Council and the enthusiast slid down to the lower layers. It is also the same with other issues. Consider, for instance, they want to elect a first secretary.

The candidate would be elected in the first layers of the Leadership Council but remained secret. Idiomatically they would say ‘let the string of anything loose and it will unwind to the lowest layers’. They meant that whatever they decided on would be indirectly conveyed to the lesser ranks down to the bottom where it again quickly and energetically bounces back to the top layers as something new. Now it was our time to galvanize them into action and arrange a formal meeting to elect the one we had already decided on. None of the members present at the meeting knew what was really going on and how they had been inculcated to vote for Mojgan Parsai or Sedigheh Hussaini for example. Anything would end happily. On the one hand the top layers had picked up their favorite one and on the other hand, it would be propagated that a candidate had been elected through a totally democratic process. Everyone thought that his/her has been respectfully accomplished. Now suppose that somebody from the top layers had decided to commit self-immolation.

The decision had to be discussed in detail in all three layers of the Leadership Council before being approved by the first secretary and the leadership. I mean to say again that nobody with whatever ranking and organizational status, even if a proxy for the leadership, could take a perverse and decisive action or decision for whatever personal and organizational objective. Only those familiar with the layers of the Leadership Council can understand what I mean.

Systematically, when one from the top volunteers for self-immolation, as I did, it denotes that the person has grabbed at the loosed string whether he accedes to it or not. When I myself unwillingly volunteered for the act, in fact, I was sizing the string Mojgan Parsai had let down to let it pass to lower levels. It was only a reaction to what the organization tried to instill into the members. When I saw how devoted Mojgan was when she announced her readiness to burn herself for the sake of Maryam, although I did not know how sincere she was in what she claimed, naturally it could impress me to be the second to volunteer. Of course the sincerity is not at all a matter of any significance but the enthusiast and incitement such an atmosphere created among others.

Now the question is how the incitement could provoke the human tragedy you mentioned. Through the same mechanism of the idea being passed down from the top to the down, the crystallized ideas in the lesser layers very easily generate actions and the created enthusiast erupt into actions that may lead to human tragedy. It is much expected among the lower layer than the top since the rank and file are more emotive and impulses from the top easily impress themselves on them. Of course, you may notice that the top layers never fail to show off their emotions but for sure they are rational and reasonable when they have to act.

That is why they are the first to volunteer but hardly the last to put the words into action; unlike them, the lesser layers are resolute not only to do what they volunteer themselves for but also enter a compete and try to outstrip each other. That is how it may end to a human tragedy in its worst form. When I see that a ranking member like Mojgan Parsai volunteers for self-immolation, what do you expect of me as a subordinate! To be sure, as I have been already notified, I will not be the one to set myself on fire when the time comes because I know they will never let me harm myself as one belonging to the higher echelon. However, the occurrence of a human tragedy inside Camp Ashraf depends on Massoud Rajavi’s will and a number of other factors well identified by him to trigger the disaster. And it is all because of the strategically decisive role Camp Ashraf plays in Mojahedin’s existence and survival. So important an issue it is for Mojahedin that it requires a long discourse.

To be continued

Translated by Mojahedin.ws

July 22, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Hajipur Ex-member of Rajavi’s Cult Welcomed by Nejat Families

According to Nejat Society’s President at Gilan Office, Hamid Haji pur who spent twenty years of his life in MKO succeeded to defect from the cult a few months ago and return to his hometown in Gilan, Iran.

Following his return, a lot of families who are members of Nejat Society in Gilan office, contact the office in order that they can get news about the health of their beloved ones in Camp Ashraf.

The president of Gilan office added that Mr. Hajipur described the mental and physical pressure he had suffered as a member of Rajavi’s cult. Impressed by Hamid Hajipur’s story in MKO, the families showed concern about the release of their beloved ones and their return to Iran.

The meeting lasted two hour. At the end the families took some photos together with Mr. Hajipur and his family.

July 22, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts