UK

UK deproscription offers lifeline to cult victims

The Consequence of the Terrorist Tag Removed

Regardless of MKO’s hysteric propaganda reactions following the UK Court of Appeal’s ruling to remove its terrorist tag, the issue can be viewed from a different angle. Some opponents may condemn the move by the UK while advocates appraise it praiseworthy but there is a third view as well. It has to be pointed out that nothing changes MKO’s natural inclination towards terrorism; still it is of significance that what might be the consequences of the move by the UK and its impacts on the structure of the organization and the captivated members in Camp Ashraf.

Against all baseless claims made by the organization, there exist obstacles that deter the process of transferring the detached members of Camp Ashraf to other countries or deprive them of benefiting asylum-seeking rights. Many countries, including the UK, disallow the entry of these members on the grounds of terrorism and especially because of the terrorist tag the organization carries. Removal of the group from the UK terrorist list at least implies that these members will face no more obstacles in future to cross the borders of this country. Furthermore, the British advocates of the organization claim to be the most enthusiastic supporters of it for humanitarian causes; the words are so promising for the members now facing an uncertain destiny.

In other words, the terrorist tag the group considers to have discouraged the struggle is now benefiting dissatisfied members if removed since all limitations they would face when seeking asylum are eliminated. The removal of the terror tag is one of those supposed solutions that, as once said, can decide the destiny of the Camp Ashraf residents and grant them the opportunity of leaving the organization on free-will and start a new life in whatever country they desire. They will be no wanderers in Iraqi soil if they leave Camp Ashraf because the main problem following the release from the bonds of the high walls is falling into the pit of eternal wandering which is even worse than their earlier condition.

In the past MKO has done its best to deprive the dissident members taking advantage of the given opportunities. In many cases the organization has utilized legal levers to impede the process of these members’ asylum-seeking in Western countries and in England in particular. Incredible as it may seem, once MKO claimed that Iranian refugees in Western countries held any recognition of legitimacy because of MKO and that, no country would grant them asylum if it was not for the group. And some came to surrender to MKO and submitted to be at its service far from home since they thought they had no other choice if they preferred living in exile to expulsion.

After the relocation of its HQ from France to Iraq, MKO kept on with the tactic but in more aggressive and harsh manner. Now, no dissident was allowed to leave the organization unless he dared to experience the horrible Abu-Ghuraib prison for a few years; hardly anybody could leave the notorious prison alive or preserving a healthy body to live on. Anybody who announced separation from the organization had to face the consequences of his decision personally, that is to say, he had to face allegations of illegal entry into Iraqi territories because he was no more under the protection of the organization that was granted a legal stay in Iraq. However, the evidences indicate that MKO has the potentiality of erecting a variety of obstacles, being familiar with the gaps in laws and security measures, in the way of its dissident members to be granted a place of safety in western countries.

Being removed from the terror list of England, and other lists as well, leads the organization, concerning the condition of dissident members, to a self-destruction abyss. MKO insists not to let any dissident and detached member enter the UK and will do anything to stop any attempt. Its future reaction depends on the support it will receive from its parliamentarian advocates following its removal from the list and the degree of granted freedom activities. It has to be noted that the ruling will impose heavy costs on the UK government as well. But the truth is that, in spite of all these costs, not MKO but the dissidents are the real winners who will benefit the most.

Omid Pouya, Mogahedin.ws, July 4, 2008

July 7, 2008 0 comments

John Jenkins:”We too hate the MKO Terrorist group”

UK gov’t should revise antagonist stands to expand ties with Tehran – Diplomat anaging Director of IRI Foreign Ministry’s Western Europe Affairs Office emphasized here Wednesday any kind of expansion of ties with London depends on UK government’s revising of its antagonist stands regarding Iran. According to Foreign Ministry Press Department, Ali Dowlatyar made the comment in a meeting with the Head of the Middle East and North Africa Bureau of the British Foreign Office, John Jenkins. Dowlatyar added,”Intensifying of the MKO’s recent antagonist moves, pursuing measures aimed at imposing more limitations against our country, efforts aimed at closing the branches of Bank Melli Iran (BMI) throughout Europe, Mr. Tajik’s issue, immediate extradition of Mr. Badavinejad, and other issues of such nature cannot be ignored by Tehran.” He denounced a recent verdict issued by a British court, resorting the reasoning that the MKO terrorist grouplet has conducted no antagonist move during the course of the past few years, as a political verdict, arguing,”The great Iranian nation considers as unacceptable the double standards observed by Britain in its campaign against terrorism, regrading the recent verdict as a strongly antagonist act.” Touching on Tajik’s issue, too, the Foreign Ministry’s Managing Director of West Europe Affairs said,”It was obvious from the beginning that Mr. Tajik’s case is a conspiracy led by the US intelligence agents, and that the matter was politically motivated.”Dowlatyar added,”There are numerous questions related to Mr. Tajik’s case that have still remained unanswered and keeping in mind his physical conditions, and particularly his heart’s status, in addition to the nuisances and problems with which him and his family have been entangled during the past couple of months, this inhumane trend should end as soon as possible.” Jenkins, too, said,”As the British Foreign Secretary and other high ranking UK officials have stated, the British government considers the moves made by the terrorist group (MKO), as well as the moves made by the National Resistance Council, as shameful.”The Managing Director of the British Foreign Office’s Middle East and North African Affairs Bureau emphasized,”We, too, hate the MKO terrorist group, and despite the existence of lots of differences of opinion, that is something natural in relations among countries, we favor improvement and expansion of ties with Tehran.” Tehran, July 03, 2008

July 7, 2008 0 comments

Open Letter to Prime Minister, Gordon Brown

Dear Prime Minister, Your government’s recent move to de-proscribe the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation, while the elected government of Palestine and half the members of Lebanon’s parliament are on it, is a clear reflection of the policies pursued by your government, the American administration and the Israeli lobby in London and Washington toward the Middle East. It is hoped that this latest reckless showing of the ‘terrorism card’ in the Middle East will not bring harm again to the doorsteps of people in the UK and US as support for Al Qaida once did. (Though it does strongly imply an ‘empty hand’ in confronting the Iranian regime.)

Dear Sir, As you are aware, Iran-Interlink exists in order to expose the Iranian Mojahedin-e Khalq organisation (aka MKO, MeK, PMOI, NCRI, NLA) as a violent, destructive cult which systematically abuses the human rights of its own members. The MKO’s use of psychological and physical coercion against its own members has been well documented and needs no further reiteration. Iran-Interlink also aims to provide humanitarian support for victims of this cult who wish to leave and by renouncing violence, return to normal society.

As the representative of Iran-Interlink, together with Sahar Family Foundation of Baghdad, I am currently working closely with the government of Iraq and with the Kurdish Regional Government to rescue tens of disaffected members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq who have escaped the MKO’s military HQ at Camp Ashraf in Diyali province of Iraq. We understand that the Mojahedin-e Khalq is making every effort to stop this work; which includes approaching the UK and US governments to ask you to prevent people from escaping from their infamous camp.

As long as your government had proscribed the MKO as a terrorist entity, efforts by the group’s supporters, in particular the British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom, led by Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, to stop Iran Interlink from working had been somewhat limited. During this time, efforts were made by the editor of a major British newspaper with connections in parliament to put pressure on Iran Interlink in Leeds. Another individual was prevented by anti-terrorism police from carrying out further activities against us. The Home Secretary is informed how Lord Corbett and others have justified the assassination of myself and others involved in this work.

However, since the time your government clearly allied itself with the MKO by removing it from the terrorism list, the MKO has already stepped up its efforts to stop us.

On my return from a recent trip to Baghdad (where my security was fulfilled thoroughly by the government of Mr. Noori Al Maleki) and passing though the Kurdish region (where I was protected to the best possible standards thanks to the Regional Government of Mr. Barzani), I was sadly informed of plans by the MKO through its UK agents to assassinate me and colleagues which include my British wife, Anne Singleton.

I have been informed that private investigators have been hired to undertake covert surveillance against myself and my colleagues and in addition, contacts have been formed with criminal gangs, whose use to the MKO can only be wondered about. As experts in this cult and its methodology, we have previously warned that MKO leader Massoud Rajavi has issued a ‘death sentence’ against the members of Iran Interlink. In an announcement made immediately after his organisation was removed from the UK terrorist list, in a TV satellite program broadcast from London, Rajavi gave the order for this assassination to be carried out. The well established code to the cult members for an assassination order is the allegation of “travelling to Iran” and the subsequent allegation of “working for the Iranian regime”.

Since your government has taken the responsibility for the future actions of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation (Rajavi cult) by trusting its claims to have renounced violence and removing it from your list of proscribed organisations in the UK, I am sure that you agree that the security of myself and my family and my co-workers as well as the security needed to continue our humanitarian work in the UK rests now more than at any other time on the shoulders of your government.

Yours sincerely, Massoud Khodabandeh Leeds, U.K.

Massoud Khodabandeh, June 30, 2008

July 1, 2008 0 comments

Britain’s Immoral Support of Terrorists

In response to the British Parliament’s removal, on June 23, of the Iranian Communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, NCRI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) terrorists from the United Kingdom’s list of banned terrorist organizations, Amir Taheri (“Iran’s Troubling Opposition”, Wall Street Journal, June 26, 2008, page A15) posed this question: “Does all of this mean that the British decision is morally wrong and perhaps politically counterproductive?” Taheri’s answer was “an unequivocal yes” if this had happened in January 2003 but “not so sure” today. Taheri’s change in position was based upon his questionable claim that the MEK has not committed any terrorist acts since it attacked an Iranian village in January 2003.

Taheri failed to explain that American and coalition military forces attacked Camp Ashraf , Iraq in 2003. Since April 2003, American and other military forces have protected Camp Ashraf , Iraq . The MEK terrorists could not continue terrorist activities from Camp Ashraf , Iraq without the approval of American military forces. There have been numerous reports in the American media of the use of the MEK terrorists by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and by the American Special Forces in Iran and in areas surrounding Iran for spying and for terrorist activities. There have been additional reports of MEK terrorist activities since 2003 in the Iranian media, such as:

http://www.presstv.com/

irandidban.com

Taheri failed also to explain where the terrorist leader, Massoud Rajavi, is being held now. There have been media reports that the American military has been holding Massoud Rajavi in Iraq since 2003. Amazingly, Taheri has suggested that the MEK must hand over to the Iraqi prosecutors those in the MEK responsible for the atrocities committed against the Shiites and Kurds in Iraq to please Saddam Hussein. The American military is holding or protecting many of these terrorist criminals in Iraq . France provides a safe harbor for other MEK terrorists.

For different views, read Massoud Khodabandeh and Anne Singleton’s views at http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=4701

Taheri noted that the British Parliament’s action will enable the terrorists to recruit members and to raise money in Britain . Taheri failed to address the issue raised by Massoud Khodabandeh and by Anne Singleton about permitting MEK members at Camp Ashraf , Iraq to leave Iraq .

Anne Singleton has provided the following links for researchers who want to read the discussions in the British Parliament leading to this decision:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm0806

23/debtext/80623-0015.htm#08062346000001

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708

/cmhansrd/cm080623/debtext/8 0623-0016.htm

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708

/cmhansrd/cm080623/debtext/80623-0017.htm

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm2007

08/cmhansrd/cm080623/debtext/80623-0018.htm

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld2007

08/ldhansrd/text/80623-0013.htm#08062349000003

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/

ldhansrd/text/80623-0014.htm

Paul Sheldon Foote, June 26, 2008

http://360.yahoo.com/paulsheldonfoote

Link to the Article”Iran’s Troubling Opposition”by Amir Taheri (WSJ)

http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=4720

June 26, 2008 0 comments

Iran-Interlink welcomes UK de-proscription of Mujahedin

Iran-Interlink welcomes UK de-proscription as Iraq moves to expel MKO terrorists

Following a ruling by the Court of Appeal, the UK government has removed the Mojahedin-e Khalq organisation from the British list of terrorist entities.

Commenting on this move, Iran-Interlink representative Massoud Khodabandeh said, “Whether and why the Rajavi cult is listed as a terrorist entity or not, is the responsibility of national governments and is linked to the security concerns and political manoeuvring of the countries involved to suit their own national interests. For organisations like ours which are working to rescue the members of this destructive cult, this move makes our work that much easier and we welcome it. De-proscription of the MKO in the UK has opened a much needed window of opportunity for these people to reach safety in the west. It is vital now for the MKO’s supporters in Britain, led by Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, to immediately undertake to remove the remaining 3,300+ uniformed militants from Camp Ashraf where they have been incarcerated for five years under American protection and bring them to safety in the UK. They can then continue what MKO second-in-command, Maryam Rajavi, describes as their ‘peaceful’ opposition to the Iranian regime in line with British interests.”

Massoud Khodabandeh visited Iraq in February and June this year and reported that the Iraqi government is pushing hard for the removal of all foreign terrorist groups from Iraqi territory. Since introducing a law which specifically designates the MKO as a terrorist group, the Iraqi government is currently negotiating with the American military a timetable for the expulsion of all members of the group who are not to be prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Previous attempts by Iraq and the UNHCR to have the group removed have been hampered by the terrorist label in western countries. No country could legally accept them. Now that Britain no longer believes the MKO is concerned with violence, the UK must become a place of safety for the group’s remaining members to take refuge.

Massoud Khodabandeh commented: “In this respect de-proscription of the MKO in the U.K. will enable Britain to fulfil its obligations to the members of this group who have been engaged in engineering the violent overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in close alliance with western interests, for nearly three decades. We cannot expect Iran or Iraq to offer succour to people who have committed acts of violence against the people of those countries. It is clearly the responsibility of the MKO’s western backers to now rescue them.”

Anne Singleton, author of Saddam’s Private Army, commented: “whether it is described as a terrorist entity or not, the Mojahedin-e Khalq is a destructive cult. As such its members are denied even their most basic human rights. They exist in a condition of modern slavery. They do not enjoy freedom of thought or belief. Out of this situation, MKO leader Massoud Rajavi’s mercenary quest for power has cost many thousands of lives. Some western politicians are eager to exploit this group for their own interests, but cannot do so without taking full responsibility for the lives and wellbeing of those they seek to use, and any acts of violence they will perpetrate in future by adhering to Rajavi’s ideology.”

June 24, 2008 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq out of Iraq, into Britain

Labour stands up to judges by backing Tehran on dissidents

Gordon Brown is preparing to defy Britain’s most senior judge to keep an Iranian opposition group on the list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

Ministers will begin moves to lift a ban on the People’s Mujahidin Organisation of Iran (PMOI) tomorrow after Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, found that there was no evidence it was “concerned in terrorism”.

However, Mr Brown has ordered Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, to ban the PMOI’s military wing instead, The Times has learnt. The Prime Minister is said to be keen to take on the courts following the decision to free the radical cleric, Abu Qatada, on bail.

Critics say that his determination to keep the PMOI on the list of outlawed organisations owes more to diplomatic pressure from Iran than with the fight against terrorism.

The dissident group, which claims to be working for a democratic, socialist, Islamic government in Iran, was first banned in Britain in 2001 by Jack Straw, then Home Secretary. He later admitted that it was included “at the request of the Tehran Government”. It is a criminal offence for a person to belong to or to encourage support for a proscribed organisation.

Supporters say that the PMOI gave up violence five years ago and point out that it helped to provide evidence of Iran’s nuclear programme in 2002. Last month the Court of Appeal, led by Lord Phillips, upheld a previous ruling that the ban was perverse. The Court of Appeal stated that the Home Secretary “could not reasonably have formed the view” that the PMOI intended to revert to terrorism.

A Whitehall official has told The Times that the Government will seek to ban the PMOI’s military wing, the National Resistance Army of Iran (NLA) — even though the group says that it is defunct. Ministers are also considering changing the law to expand the grounds on which groups can be banned.

The Home Secretary hinted at further action immediately after last month’s ruling by the Court of Appeal. “The PMOI has a long history of terrorism and this is why it was proscribed both in the UK and by other countries around the world,” she said.

Iran has been exerting pressure on ministers to keep the ban on the PMOI, which is part of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. “They have threatened to withdraw diplomats over this unless the ban stays,” one well-placed figure said

Francis Elliott, Deputy Political Editor,

June 22, 2008 0 comments

Errors in UK Court Decision

A recent UK Court of Appeals decision to uphold a lower court ruling that PMOI (MEK, or MKO) is no longer “concerned in terrorism” revealed serious flaws and a lack of sophistication in the UK legal framework when it comes to combating terrorism. In addition to other vital means, a serious fight against terrorism requires a mature legal system that could not be easily manipulated by deceptive tactics and faulty reasoning developed by terrorist organisations in their efforts to take advantage of our legal apparatus with its pre-911 outlook and structure. After all, leaders of such organisations are known to be masters of deception and PMOI’s leaders are no exception.

Paragraph 38 of the above ruling that has been quoted by the press appears to be the pivotal wisdom behind the UK Appeals Court decision

[http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/443.html]

38- An organisation that has temporarily ceased from terrorist activities for tactical reasons is to be contrasted with an organisation that has decided to attempt to achieve its aims by other than violent means. The latter cannot be said to be ‘concerned in terrorism’, even if the possibility exists that it might decide to revert to terrorism in the future.

In Paragraph 16, the Court takes note of the PMOI statement that: “The PMOI’s permanent cessation of any military activity is the result of a deliberate choice to abandon all military action and instead to use political will as a means of bringing about freedom and democracy in Iran. Taking account of domestic and international circumstances, the PMOI decided at an extraordinary Congress held in Iraq in June 2001, to put an end to its military activities in Iran (i.e. to all its military activities). The decision taken by the extraordinary Congress was ratified by the two ordinary congresses organised in early September 2001 and 2003. This policy has been stated publicly and the PMOI’s leadership and membership signed statements to this effect.”

The Court then quotes several other statements purported to be made by the PMOI and its representatives “denouncing terrorism.” To better illustrate the flaws in the Court’s thinking that led to its erroneous decision, I have quoted most of these statements below directly from the Court’s ruling:

29. On 6 September 2004, in a public and formal address, then PMOI Secretary General, Mrs Moj[g]an Parsai, announced, ‘As it has declared on many occasions, the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran condemns all forms of terrorism and has played a major role in a combating terrorism and fundamentalism under the banner of Islam – inspired by the clerical regime…

In February 2006, in her speech on the anniversary of the fall of the Shah, the PMOI’s current Secretary-General, Ms Sedigheh Hosseini, who was elected in September 2005, again condemned violence and called for a peaceful solution. She said ‘We have said before and reiterate now that we are categorically opposed to and condemn any type of violence.’ She added, ‘We announced our commitment to the call by the Iranian Resistance’s President-elect in October 2003 for a referendum… ”

…

49- (a) there was a significant change in the nature of the PMOI’s activities in 2001 and thereafter, and…

(c) the nature of the rhetoric employed in their publications and propaganda by the PMOI and other, related, organisations such as NCRI, changed significantly during 2001 and 2002 such that, from 2002, we were not shown any material which either claimed responsibility for any acts that could fall within the definition of terrorism for the purposes of the Act or even reported the actions of others carrying out such activities

Denouncing Terrorism!

To realise the manipulations and deceptive tactics that led to PMOI/Mek outsmarting the UK Courts, one needs to understand the language behind the statement attributed to the organisation. Just like any other cultic group, PMOI has its own lingo with self-serving definitions of words and phrases. This is even more true when it comes to defining loaded terms such as “terrorism.” The following arguments can be made to illustrate the disingenuous and demagoguery nature of the group’s statements to the court in “denouncing terrorism.” They also show the lack of sophistication in the EU legal system PMOI has taken advantage of.

The truth of the matter is, not only has MEK refused to denounce violence in its Farsi (Persian) publications, but a review of its recent Farsi materials reveals the opposite. A true denouncement of terrorism should start with a publicly-stated commitment to peaceful and non-violent agenda in the group’s mainstream media, and in its native language. To whisper anti-terror statements to non-Iranian audience without first defining terrorism, and yet publicly glorifying violence under the façade of “revolutionary military resistance” is a known deceptive tactic for those familiar with terror groups. When PLO decided to abandon its military campaign against Israel, and before it was taken seriously by the international community, they publicly announced the shift in their views for their own people in their native tongue, Arabic. PLO also publicly vouched for its commitment to peaceful settlement of its conflicts with Israel followed by announcing its readiness to join the negotiation table.

This is a good paradigm to gauge MEK’s sincerity in its non-violent and peaceful approach, if indeed such commitment exists. PMOI has never believed that its past and present actions have amounted to terrorism. Therefore, when they make private statements denouncing terrorism, what they actually mean is denouncing the actions of others deemed to fall under the definition of “terrorism” in the group’s own dictionary.

The mullahs in Iran, rightly branded as the godfather of international terrorism, have done exactly the same. They too denounce terrorism, and even see themselves as the “victim” of such acts. They do this because they see the actions of others (their opponents) as terrorist activities, not their own. It seems as though the term terrorism is defined by the subjective underlying beliefs and causes of its perpetrators. PMOI claims whatever they do is aimed at the toppling of an oppressive regime, therefore it is justified. Consequently, violence and killing of others is not labelled as terrorism, it is worded as “revolutionary military resistance” as stated in the PMOI’s various Farsi (Persian) publications.

To make my point even clearer, I pose the following key, yet simple question to those who seem to have believed PMOI’s private statement in denouncing terrorism. Does PMOI believe that its military actions in the past fit the definition of terrorism? Any answer but a definitive “yes” to this question leads to a logical conclusion that relying on the PMOI’s private remarks in denouncing what the group considers as terrorism is akin to believing Hitler’s orations in endorsing friendship and cooperation among neighbours. It is a pure manipulation.

The core philosophy of PMOI’s existence is based on violence and terrorism. This is depicted in the group’s emblem as well as the logo of the group’s Farsi (Persian) weekly, the Mojahed.

As seen in the pictures above (left), there is a Koran verse that sits on top of a globe. The informal translation of this verse reads “God has given His priority and special blessings to the warriors (Mujahedin) of His path than the non-warriors (sitters).” This crystallises MEK’s core ideology to establish a world under the Islamic laws. The Earth meridian on the left side of the globe emphasises MEK’s beliefs in internationalism. Also as evident in the emblem, the term Mojahed has graphically metamorphosed into an arm bearing a rifle. This is meant to portray MEK’s core philosophy that military might is the only means of achieving the organization’s goals. The picture on the right is the PMOI’s weekly logo. In this logo, a mirror image of the word MOJAHED in projected as a rifle (April 30, 2008), again, to depict the group’s core view that violence and terrorism is the way to go. The Farsi statement at the bottom of the pictures above refers to National Liberation Army (NLA), the group’s main apparatus of violence and terrorism, and reads “long live NLA as the mighty arm of the heroic people of Iran.” (Mojahed weekly, No. 906, May 7, 2008).

Once again, emphasizing violence and terrorism as the PMOI’s main artery of its existence. With regard to the absence of terror activities by MEK in the past five years (supposedly the threshold period for removal from the FTO list), it would suffice to remind the English maxim that “the wolf may lose his teeth but never his nature.” The group was disarmed after the coalition forces raided Camp Ashraf in 2003, effectively pulling the teeth of its terror machine. The savage nature of PMOI has remained intact, however.

A strong court system is needed if we are serious in combating terrorism. The UK court fell short of a mature legal framework when it was manipulated by the PMOI. This should teach other courts in EU to be alert and cognizant of terror groups tactics. Terror groups like PMOI are capable of deceiving politicians and the public. They take advantage of a porous legal system and waylay for the due time to show their true barbaric nature.

Ahmad Baaraan – Paris, May 19, 2008 – ABaaraan@yahoo.fr

May 19, 2008 0 comments

Open Letter to UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown

Dear Prime Minister,

The ruling of the UK court of appeal on May 7 indicates that the government has failed to win an appeal against a previous court ruling to keep the terrorist MKO on its proscribed list. However, the ruling has led to an increased tension that may face your country with new challenges. Although your government has insisted that it will ensure that public safety is not endangered by de-proscription of the terrorist MKO, and as the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith reiterated "We will ensure that the safety of the public is not in any way jeopardised by this and tighten legislation if necessary”, it might imply that the government and the judiciary system walk on opposite lines.

We come to understand that you are well aware of the four past decades’ notorious activities of MKO and its future terrorist potentialities when we hear the Home Secretary saying the group has "a long history of terrorism and this is why it was proscribed both in the UK and by other countries around the world”. For sure, such a perception is based on confidential intelligences that for security reasons the public opinion has to be uninformed but are raison d’être for keeping MKO on the list.

In contrast, the court relies only on some partial evidences of the past four years for its judgment. MKO cessation of militarism and terrorism claimed by the group and to which the court refers as an evidence has never been the result of a deliberate choice but forced on it following the coalition forces attack to Iraq as part of fulfilling a mission of uprooting terrorism. There are clear evidences to show that MKO military activities continued right up to the allied invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Even right now they are openly promoting terrorism and threatening their critics in the EU and US.

How is that a globally blacklisted terrorist group decides overnight to abandon all military action and instead to use political will as a means of bringing about freedom and democracy to Iranian people while majority of its fighters are still active in a military camp, many of them held against their will. Furthermore, have you ever received any officially issued statement concerning MKO’s forswearing terrorism?

It is an undeniable fact that MKO remains a terrorist group and will retain its terrorist potentialities even if removed from all countries’ lists. It might only question credibility of claims to combat terrorist threats. MKO’s resort to militarism is not the outcome of a once deliberate decision to abandon it deliberately but innate in its early ideology and methodology of struggle. As once openly asserted by Mehdi Abrishamchi, Maryam Rajavi’s first husband, military infrastructure of the organization stems from its ideology; “We are not the ones to decide the necessity of an organized or aggressive struggle; we are not the ones to decide where to an organized or unorganized struggle leads us. It is not our mentality to decide the necessity of an armed struggle”.

At the time when the terrorist cult of Mojahedin has to be prosecuted for countless instances of terrorist operations against Iranian and Iraqi people, we are shocked to see it is nearly acquitted of its crimes and orders to unleash it of its controlling tag, and somehow, apologized for the injustice done against it by its proscription! It won’t be out of the blue to picture MKO and Maryam Rajavi in particular insisting on an official apology from the UK government, Ministry of Justice and even Her Majesty’s Court.

There are some speculations for the reasons behind the court’s ruling; political reasons, ties of some kind and lack of knowledge about the group’s terrorist nature. No doubt, the escalated tension between Iran and the West plays a role to keep MKO on the scene for instrumental use against Iran. That is the case with a number of the US politicians causing challenges among the country’s administration. It is also the same with some British MPs. It has to be studied to what extent such condemned relations can influence and benefit a country’s national interests and solve internal as well as global problems if the politicians feel a responsibility to have a share.

The stigma of conducting ties with proscribed terrorists is too bad for the advocates of a nation. For any political or maybe personal reasons, ties with the individuals and entities that threaten people’s security is a blameworthy act.

It has to be also pointed out that MKO manipulate sophisticated techniques to establish close friendly ties with politicians who are in dark about the true nature of the organization and fail to have access to accurate evidences on the group’s past history. It is mostly because MKO’s history is a mess of complexity and hardly any outsider can become acquainted with the complexities of its history. Presented evidences on the group’s history in the three past court rulings are good examples to notice.

MKO only believe in a black and white world and whoever walks in the former side is the foe and has to be confronted. If the supposed foe is too powerful to confront, the language of profanity and threat will substitute. MKO’s blasphemous and threatening tone in reaction to the EU Council of Ministers’ decision and other international and humanitarian organizations that disclosed truths on violent nature of the group portend heavy costs that the European states have to sustain. Your country, as a member of European Union, can well prevent unexpected violent moves by MKO agents if well ordered countermeasures are taken and the members are put under close surveillance. Any remiss in close monitoring and investigating of MKO’s activities results in irreparable damages that make statesmen confront great challenges regardless of the heavy price that will be imposed on Western citizens.

Long known as a globally blacklisted terrorist group, MKO is transformed into a destructive cult and a cult of personality as proscribed by the US state Department report in May 2007. In many cases, MKO is referred to as second to al-Qaeda for its globally threatening features and, in spite of being expelled from Iraq, majority of Western countries’ security apparatus are cautious about penetration of its members since they know they would have a hard task to deal with the organization. And your country is not an exception.

The killing of a Brazilian man by armed plainclothes Metropolitan police who shot him as a preventive measure to guarantee the national security is a plain evidence that you are concerned about further possible violent, terrorist operations. It has to be taken into consideration that MKO is a bigger threat since it has merged terrorism with cultism, the latter being the second modern world’s nightmare along the former. Regardless of any court’s ruling, security systems have to be necessarily more watchful of the organization since it will be too late to deal with it after it has struck. A look at Iranian’s contemporary history depicting countless instances of MKO atrocities will be sufficient to remove any subsisting doubts.

Mojahedin.ws – May 17, 2008

May 17, 2008 0 comments

Geoffrey Adams: The British Govenment still regardes MKO as a terrorist organization

Iran summons British envoy over MKO

Iran summons the British ambassador to protest the removal of the Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) from the list of terrorist groups.

Geoffery Adams In a meeting with British ambassador to Tehran Geoffrey Adams, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for European affairs Mehdi Safari condemned a British court decision, which ruled in favor of the MKO.

Citing the MKO’s hostile measures taken against Iranian officials and the nation, Safari said removing the group from a list of proscribed terrorist organizations is ‘unacceptable’ and ‘politically motivated’.

The Iranian official advised the British government to act against the implementation of the verdict to avoid the serious effects the judgment will have on Tehran-London relations.

"The British appeal court’s ruling would only prove the UK government’s double standard policy regarding the issue of terrorism," said the Iranian official.

He also asserted that such measures were not appropriate for a European government that claims it fights terrorism.

Adams, for his part, said the British government still regarded the group as a terrorist organization but added that he would convey Tehran’s protest to London.

Referring to remarks by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband on the issue, Adams said the MKO is responsible for a series of vile acts of terrorism and that the British government had no plans to change its position regarding them.

Press TV, May 12, 2008

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=55336&sectionid=351020101

May 12, 2008 0 comments

Nejat Society Letter to The British Prime Minister

Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown

The British Prime Minister

Dear Sir

Nejat Society comprises former members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) and the families of active MKO members in Camp Ashraf in Iraq. Nejat Society aims to rescue those people who are mentally and physically captive in Camp Ashraf.

As you may well be aware, over 3,000 individuals reside in Camp Ashraf. They are completely isolated inside the camp and have no contact with the outside world. In these conditions they are subjected to the continuous psychological manipulation and mind control techniques which are practiced in all similar cults.

According to the rules within the organization, like many other cults round the world, cult members must not associate with members of their family. The MKO clearly states within the organization that the family is the ‘nest of corruption’ and all members should consider their relatives as their prime enemies and therefore reject and abandon them.

While Iraq was ruled by the former Iraqi dictator, the families of these members could only wait for many years without hope of seeing their beloved ones. Once Saddam Hussein was toppled in Iraq, rays of hope lit their hearts and they thought that their years of pain and separation were over.

This illusion faded quickly once they learned that now, under the protection of the Allied Forces in Iraq, the MKO leaders are still, unchallenged, enjoying the benefits of the isolation of Camp Ashraf in order to keep possession of the members. This is despite the fact that this organization remains designated as a proscribed terrorist group by the USA as well as Britain and the EU.

What is happening in Camp Ashraf in Iraq is a clear example of a cultic human catastrophe. These people have been highly manipulated for many years and in this state of illusion and deception are willing to do anything, including committing mass suicide or self-immolation.

The families of members of the MKO in Camp Ashraf in Iraq, as well as former members, consider the present active members to be the primary victims of this terrorist destructive cult, and urge you to take every possible step to facilitate their free access to the outside world and prevent a human catastrophe from taking place.

Recently, the Iraqi government has issued several statements demanding that Camp Ashraf be dismantled and the leaders of the organization put on trial for their crimes against the Iranian and Iraqi people, as well as crimes against their own members. We expect the allied forces will respect the decisions of the Iraqi government and will therefore make efforts to free the inhabitants of Camp Ashraf.

A further issue concerns those who have left the organization, rejected terrorism and who do not wish to go to Iran. These people are seeking safety in a third country. These are around 200 individuals who were living in the US forces controlled camp called TIPF. Some months ago about half of them were asked to leave the camp for unspecified destinations. The other half is still living in TIPF while their fate is not clear.

We expect the British government, as well as some active politicians like Lord Corbett who is a strong advocate of the MKO, to help these people who have been waiting for a third country to accept them for many years. The British government can surely accept some of these individuals and pave the way for other countries to take the rest.

Yours sincerely,

Nejat Society – Tehran, Iran

April 30, 2008 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts