Israel’s Secret Relationship with Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult)
.
... MKO's secret ties with Israel do not begin or end with Iranian nuclear documents. They also unabashedly attend AIPAC functions. In fact, the MKO has intensive and very direct cooperation with the Iran Policy Committee, a spinoff of AIPAC. Mahan Abedin, a journalist for the Asia Times, reports that there are regular media reports which allude to direct Israel-MKO ties. [9] In an article that Abedin wrote in which he interviewed a former MKO member, Massoud Bani Sadr, BaniSadr disclosed that "the [MKO] is exclusively motivated by the interests of the cult, and ...
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
Mazda Parsi, Nejat Bloggers, August 08 2010
http://www.nejatngo.org/en/post.aspx?id=3252
In the 1960's when the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) was founded by a handful of Iranian university students, its ideology encompassed a classless, monotheist society which denied all symbols of Western capitalism and Jewish Zionism. With this denial came a penchant for violence and systematic killing—killing which the State Department recognizes as terrorism. Michael Rubin, an independent scholar who in 2009, led a workshop at the AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee—America’s pro-Israeli lobby) conference in Washington DC, wrote an article in 2006 titled “Monsters of the Left” in which he declares that the “MKO launched a wave of bomb attacks which targeted the Iran-American Society, the US Information office, the Hotel International, Pepsi Cola, General Motors, and the Marine Oil Company […] In a wave of bombings that continued into 1975, the MKO group attacked clubs, stores, police facilities, minority-owned businesses, factories it accused of having ‘Israeli connections,’ and symbols of state and capitalism.” [1] While carrying out these attacks, the MKO not only denounced Israel, but it supported the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), and in fact, during the 1970’s, some of the MKO’s core members went to train in PLO military camps. [2] The MKO’s hostility towards Israel and Zionism was so strong that it led them to bomb the Jordanian Embassy in Tehran, “to revenge King Hussein’s September 1970 crackdown on their PLO patrons," admits Rubin. [3] Israel may have been an enemy of the MKO at one time, but now they have warmed to them—because the ideology of the MKO has shifted, and Israel may be able to use them.
Now, the MKO could use a helping hand too because since the US-led invasion of Iraq, in the enclave of Camp Ashraf, a place the MKO has called home for over two decades, there is impending precariousness. The MKO fears for its future because they are no longer under the protection of Saddam Hussein, and there’s no telling what the shaky new Iraqi government will do. What's more, the U.S. government no longer considers MKO members in Iraq to have the “protected-persons” status the U.S. gave them in 2003, and is privately supportive of Iraqi government efforts to encourage the residents to leave. [4] At present, the MKO’s biggest fear is Iranian reprisal. Even though they helped bring about the 1979 Islamic Revolution, killing Americans and ousting the Shah, in the years following, they simply proved to be too power hungry for the Iranian regime. In a move which was designed to distance them from the regime, and gain support, they changed their ideology, and in the 1980’s joined Saddam Hussein and moved to Camp Ashraf in Iraq (where many of them still remain). During the time in Iraq, they killed Kurds in exchange for arms, and then turned against the government they helped bring to power—killing Iranian officials and civilians. Support they needed from Iran shriveled, and the people of Iran now hold the MKO accountable for their deadly attacks on citizens and officials throughout the last four decades. For the MKO leaders, Maryam and Massoud Rajavi, a worst case scenario would be deportation back to Iran because they are viewed as fascist cultists, and worse, traitors. With this kind of track record, a relationship between the MKO and Israel is weirdly devious—and secret.
The MKO sees the West’s support as their only hope for continued existence. In order to formulate opportunity within the framework of hope, they no longer denounce imperialism and Zionism. And in a last ditch move to maintain their dying support among a small minority of Iranians, they have turned to President Ahmadinejad’s “Zionist” foes—credulous Western politicians and, yes, Israel. Despite the MKO’s past admonition of Zionism, Israel has been obliging, secretly working with the MKO in opposition to Iran. In order publicly unite with the West, the MKO came to the media in 2003 and announced that Iran had nuclear warheads—which according to the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), turned out to be wrong. Not only was the information incorrect, but it was fabricated by the Israeli government. In June 2009, Gareth Porter, an expert on U.S. national security policy, published an article on IPS, titled "Report Ties Dubious Iran Nuclear Docs to Israel Analysis." Porter reveals that "Israeli intelligence was the source of the collection of intelligence documents which have been used to accuse Iran of hiding nuclear weapons research.” [5] Referring to various sources, Porter asserts that "the documents collection which the IAEA has called ‘alleged studies’ actually originated in Israel and in fact Israel intelligence assembled the documents." [6] According to Porter, “German officials have said that the Mujahedin E Khalq or MEK, the Iranian resistance organization, brought the laptop documents collection to the attention of U.S. intelligence, as reported by IPS in February 2008.
Israeli ties with the political arm of the MEK, the National Committee of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), go back to the early 1990’s and include assistance to the organization in broadcasting into Iran from Paris.” [7] The Germans have long been wary of the MKO and Germany's Office for the Protection of the Constitution has noted that the MKO’s propaganda campaigns often include attempts to contact members of parliament to inform them of the MKO’s alleged goals, encourage political support, and influence parliamentary debate about Iran.
MKO's secret ties with Israel do not begin or end with Iranian nuclear documents. They also unabashedly attend AIPAC functions. In fact, the MKO has intensive and very direct cooperation with the Iran Policy Committee, a spinoff of AIPAC. Mahan Abedin, a journalist for the Asia Times, reports that there are regular media reports which allude to direct Israel-MKO ties. [9] In an article that Abedin wrote in which he interviewed a former MKO member, Massoud Bani Sadr, BaniSadr disclosed that "the [MKO] is exclusively motivated by the interests of the cult, and as such it will cooperate with any constituency. If there is any hesitation in collaboration it stems from Israeli reluctance, since the Mujahedin because of its close relationship with the PLO, is not fully trusted by Israelis. On the other hand from an Israeli perspective, the [MKO] is the only viable tool against Iran."[10] In 2006, Connie Bruck, a writer for New Yorker, spoke with an Israeli diplomat who declined to elaborate on the MKO-Israel relationship, but did at least say to Bruck that “Israel had found the [MKO] useful.”[11]
Richard Silverstein points out that the Israeli lobby in Washington advocates tougher U.S. policy against the Islamic Republic. [12] And the MKO is all for it. In their efforts for starting a war with Iran, or impose crippling sanctions on it, the Israel lobby and the neocons have been aided by two groups of Iranian exiles: the monarchists, and members and supporters of the MKO. [13] Silverstein notes that “Israel is in the midst of a massive diplomatic, political and intelligence campaign, both public and covert, that could lead – if those officials behind it have their way – towards a military strike on Iran. It is a war for the hearts and minds of Americans. Or you might call it the war before the war. In intelligence circles, this Israeli project is known as perception management and defined by the department of defense as:
Actions to convey and/or deny information … to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders … ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to [US] objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception and psychological operations.” This is a parallel policy which is consistently held by the MKO, and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). In hope that Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the MKO, will become the puppet of the United States—a shoe in the door in Iran, the NCRI's website maintains a canopy of praise for the U.S. for anything which is against Iran and the Iranian people. (Recently the NCRI’s website ran a headline that states, “Maryam Rajavi, President elect of the Iranian Resistance, welcomed the imposition of new sanctions against the mullahs’ regime by the US and the European Union") [14]. The relationship with the US, the sanctions, and the underlying reasons and ramifications for pressing sanctions should be seen as more complex for the Rajavi’s, as they deem themselves Iranians—because Iranians are simply too savvy, and they know that sanctions are just a simplistic reprisal. The Rajavi’s attitude and blind devotion to U.S. policy, along with their support for the Israeli lobby shows that they are out of touch with Iranian sentiment. Iran doesn’t like Israel’s attitude and blind devotion to itself and its expansion. For Iranians, Israel demonstrates a haughtiness that doesn’t chronicle nicely with the rest of the Middle East, and Israel’s policy towards Iran is to pressure the U.S. to do what Israel wants. After 9/11 Iran held sympathy for the U.S. and offered to exchange al-Qaida terrorists for MKO terrorists [15]. But the Bush administration neoconservatives declined after Israelis met with Manuchehr Ghorbanifar (an unreliable intelligence source for the U.S. who was involved in the Iran Contra scandal). The Jerusalem Post reveals that at least one of the meetings was quite specific with regard to an attempt to torpedo better US/Iran relations:
"The purpose of the meeting with Ghorbanifar was to undermine a pending deal that the White House had been negotiating with the Iranian government. At the time, Iran had considered turning over five al-Qaeda operatives in exchange for Washington dropping its support for Mujahadeen Khalq, an Iraq-based rebel Iranian group listed as a terrorist organization by the State Department." [16]
According to Juan Cole, an expert on the Middle East, “The neoconservatives have some sort of shadowy relationship with the Mujahadeen-e Khalq Organization, or MEK [MKO]. Presumably its leaders have secretly promised to recognize Israel if they ever succeed in overthrowing the ayatollahs in Iran. When the U.S. recently categorized the MEK as a terrorist organization, there were howls of outrage from ‘scholars’ associated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, such as ex-Trotskyite Patrick Clawson and Daniel Pipes.”[17]
MKO ties with US and Israel officials might offer short-term benefits to the group. But they will harm the fame of those who currently support them. Despite all effort made by the MKO propaganda campaign to win the support of AIPAC which “has a lot of weight” in U.S. congress according to Massoud Bani Sadr, the MKO "have not been able to pass a single substantial resolution in support of the organization in congress. Note also that the US government regards the Mujahedin as a terrorist organization and does not want to create another Al-Qaeda."[18] For now these strange bedfellows must remain a secret.
References:
[1] Rubin, Michael. "Monsters of the Left."Frontpagemagazine.com 13 January 2006: Web. 30 Jul 2010.
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=6036.
[2] Abrahamian, Ervand. The Iranian Mojahedin. London, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. p 127.
[3] Rubin, Michael. Ibid
[4] McNaught, Anita. "Iranian Militant MeK Group Losing Fight to Stay in Iraq."Fox News” 12 January 2009: Web. 30 Jul 2010.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0, 2933, 479404, 00.html.
[5] Porter, Gareth. "Report Ties Dubious Iran Nuclear Docs to Israel." IPS 3 June 2009: Web. 31 Jul 2010.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=47081.
[6]Porter, Gareth. Ibid
[7]Porter, Gareth. Ibid
[8] According to Mahan Abedin, an Independent Iranian journalist for the Asia Times and an expert on Iran, Iraq, and Islamic movements and ideologies.
See Abedin, Mahan. "Dissent and Defection: An Iranian Confession." Asia Times Online (18 may 2006): Web. 31 Jul 2010.
[9] Abedin, Mahan. "Dissent and Defection: An Iranian Confession." Asia Times Online (18 may 2006): Web. 31 Jul 2010.
[10] Bruck, Connie. "A Reporter at Large: Exiles." New Yorker 6 March 2006: 48.
[11] Silverstein, Richard. "AIPAC’s Hidden Persuaders." Guardian 15 May 2009
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/
cifamerica/2009/may/13/aipac-iran-us-obama.
[12] Sahimi, Muhammad. "The Israel Lobby, the Neocons, and the Iranian-American Community." Antiwar.com 21 November 2009: Web. 2 Aug 2010.
[13] NCRI website
[14] Windrem, Robert. "Al-Qaida Finds Safe Haven in Iran." MSNBC.com 24 June 2005: 2 Aug 2010.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8330976/.
[15] Cole, Juan. "AIPAC's Overt and Covert Ops." Antiwar.com 30 August 2004: 2 Aug 2010.
http://www.antiwar.com/cole/?articleid=3467.
The article Juan Cole cites, which is no longer available online, originally appeared in the Jerusalem Post.
[16] Cole, Juan. Ibid
[17] Sherwell, Philip. "Israel Launches Covert War Against Iran." Telegraph 16 February 2009.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeas
t/israel/4640052/Israel-launches-covert-war-against-Iran.html
[18] Bruck, Connie. Ibid
(Maryam Rajavi directly ordered the massacre of Kurdish people)
----------
Also
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8339
Israel’s Iranian Opposition?
(Representatives of Pro-Israili interests rully to promote Mojahedin Khalq terrorists)
.
... Bolton and Aznar were there to represent a transatlantic coalition of neoconservative pro-Israeli interests who seem to wish to promote the PMOI as the legitimate opposition to Iran's clerical regime. Bolton’s credentials need no rehearsal here, but let’s not forget that Aznar has recently signed on as a founding member of a European Friends of Israel, in the face of the disastrous repercussions of the Gaza Freedom floatilla raid. The reason for this is fairly clear: on the issues of Israel and on Iran's nuclear program the Green Movement is dedicated to ...
, Mondoweiss.net, June 28, 2010
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/06/israel%E2%80%99s-iranian-opposition.html
Two days ago, I found it curious to learn of a large rally held in Paris by the People's Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI, also known as MEK or MKO) by reading the headlines on Ynet and on Ha’aretz. I usually follow Iranian opposition events via various other Iranian websites, where the rally was not mentioned. And while the Israeli press can be counted upon to have nearly daily entries in its hysterical campaign towards a military confrontation with Iran, it still seemed curious to find this rally by a relatively discredited Iranian opposition group featured so prominently on these Israeli websites. But then reading closely the matter was clarified somewhat (from Ha’aretz):
The rally by the PMOI, which Washington considers to be a terrorist organisation, was attended by former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton and Jose Maria Aznar, the former prime minister of Spain.
Bolton and Aznar were there to represent a transatlantic coalition of neoconservative pro-Israeli interests who seem to wish to promote the PMOI as the legitimate opposition to Iran's clerical regime. Bolton’s credentials need no rehearsal here, but let’s not forget that Aznar has recently signed on as a founding member of a European Friends of Israel, in the face of the disastrous repercussions of the Gaza Freedom floatilla raid. The reason for this is fairly clear: on the issues of Israel and on Iran's nuclear program the Green Movement is dedicated to promoting an independent policy for the country. While it is likely they would take a very different tone and approach to both issues, the Green Movement will likely do little to satisfy the interests of the Israel Lobby and neoconservatives for a pro-Israeli and subservient Iran. With the PMOI as the only reasonably well-established alternative, these groups have thrown their lot in with them. If the confrontation with Iran becomes military in nature, it seems likely that the PMOI will be (again) touted by these interests as the “leadership in exile” for any regime-change scenario.
This is not entirely new. During the Bush years, the PMOI sought alliances with the neoconservatives in the US, with a number of bipartisan congressmen acting as intermediaries to call for their removal from the terrorist list, and to advocate for their recognition as a legitimate Iranian opposition group. They are now at it again, with a new move to give legitimacy to the group launched just days ago, with a number of congressmen signed on. In the past, highly-placed neoconservatives such as Richard Perle have attended PMOI-related events and spoke positively of the group. And the group has done much to complement the interests of these allies: they were instrumental in building up the case for Iran's nuclear program, and have supplied intelligence they claim to have gathered from inside Iran to bolster the case for an arms program -- it's unclear how accurate or legitimate this intelligence may be, but there are certainly shades of the famous WMD intelligence relating to Iraq in all of this.
Among most prominent activists in the Iranian opposition, the PMOI is rarely remembered kindly, when they are bothered to be remembered at all. Already discredited among most Iranians for their alliance with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, and despised by Kurds everywhere for willfully participating in Hussein's genocidal campaigns against them, the Mojahedin have come to be seen by most Iranians as an embarrassing aberration in the political landscape. While the Islamic Republic has a virulent hostility towards the group, most secular left or reformist Iranians also will have nothing to do with the group and reject its inclusion in any coalitions to oppose the regime. In Europe and the US, during anti-regime demonstrations supporting the Green Movement, the appearance of PMOI flags or leaflets often led to standoffs and even fights among the demonstrators, with PMOI agents far outnumbered. They now stand all alone in the Iranian scene, with their only true supporters drawn from the Israel Lobby and the margins of US and European politics.
What is so strange is that there they had once acted as the vanguard of revolutionary activity and as a synthesis of leftist and Islamist idealism in the first years of the post-revolutionary period. However, in exile they have been transformed into a political irrelevancy, made worse by their adoption of cult-like policies to maintain discipline in their ranks. The group demands of the rank-and-file a troubling adoration of the figure of Maryam Rajavi, the nominal leader of the group, relying on systems of regular debriefing and self-criticism which are mandatory for all members. Furthermore the group exerts control of many aspects of members' personal lives, including in matters of marriage, divorce and parenting. Given what they have become, any idea of their resurgence as a valid player in Iranian politics strikes me as one of the most terrifying possibilities for Iran's future. Their placement on the US terrorism list was clearly a political gesture during Clinton's administration, but many Iranians find them more troubling for reasons other than the terrorist acts they have carried out.
Rather than hear me describe these, I think it's better to let the PMOI represent themselves -- in videos they have produced. Also, here, and here and here (and you can find many more just by clicking on the related videos or googling the group’s other videos). It baffles the mind that the PMOI are so blind as to how out-of-touch their fascistic aesthetics are with the ideals of Iran's democratic opposition and their supporters. Check out the videos linked above, produced by the PMOI to publicize "celebrations" and other group events held in their base in Iraq, and tell me if you don't find a chill creeping down your spine… Echoes of Triumph of the Will, or the Dear Leader…
Bizarrely, the PMOI continues to enjoy support even among some on the US left. The Huffington Post, for example, offers a forum to two of the group’s more active US propagandists, Ali Safavi and Alireza Jafarzadeh. It seems likely that we’ll be hearing more about them once again as the talk of a military confrontation grows. It’s no surprise that the neocons and Israel’s most steadfast supporters are also now openly backing the PMOI.
-------
Also read:
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8321
Aznar and Bolton in Paris against Iran
(Aznar and Bolton joined forced to found the Friends of Israel Initiative)
.
... speeches by former Spanish Prime Minister José-Maria Aznar and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton - who recently joined forces to found the Friends of Israel Initiative- calling on the State Department to stop considering the People’s Mujahedin as a terrorist organisation and on the European Union to unilaterally reinforce the sanctions against Iran ...
(Maryam Rajavi in terrorist cult's HQ in Paris)
Voltairenet, June 28, 2010
http://www.voltairenet.org/article166102.html
On 26 June 2010, the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (Mujahideen-e-Khalq) convened a gathering of their members at Taverney, near Paris. --------- Also: Struan Stevenson support for Zionist backed Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, Rajavi cult) terrorists . ... Struan Stevenson is a strong advocate of the Washington/Zionist backed foreign terrorist group, Mojahedin-e Khalq(MKO) which continues with its illegal presence in Iraq. The Government of Iraq had charged that the MKO have been actively interfering in Iraqi affairs over the past six years. The MKO base Camp Ashraf (now Camp New Iraq) was used as a covert meeting place for Saddamists ... Press TV, June 23, 2010 ------------- -------- Also: Allawi tarred with the MKO’s Saddamist brush (who is Struan Stevenson?) . ... Struan Stevenson is a strong advocate of the Washington/Zionist backed foreign terrorist group, Mojahedin-e Khalq(MKO) which continues with its illegal presence in Iraq. The Government of Iraq had charged that the MKO have been actively interfering in Iraqi affairs over the past six years. The MKO base Camp Ashraf (now Camp New Iraq) was used as a covert meeting place for Saddamists ...
Iran-Interlink, March12, 2010 Ayad Allawi is being dragged into a controversy created by Western Baathist supporters. Struan Stevenson MEP, Chair of the European Parliament’s Iraq Delegation has said he has received many letters claiming that widespread fraud had taken place in the Iraqi election on March 7. Struan Stevenson is a strong advocate of the Washington/Zionist backed foreign terrorist group, Mojahedin-e Khalq(MKO) which continues with its illegal presence in Iraq. The Government of Iraq had charged that the MKO have been actively interfering in Iraqi affairs over the past six years. The MKO base Camp Ashraf (now Camp New Iraq) was used as a covert meeting place for Saddamists. The MKO also has some of its members working in the European Parliament. Mass letter writing and scaremongering accusations without evidence are typical MKO tactics. Before the election, former Iraqi MP Saleh al-Mutlaq was barred from standing for election because of his association with the MKO – he channelled funds for the terrorist organisation. Now, after the election, Struan Stevenson has claimed “Major efforts are exercised to deny the win of former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi”. It looks as though Mr Allawi is also being tarnished by association with supporters of the former Saddam regime. ------- Also Iraq and the American Pullout (West is also seeking the trial of leaders of Mojahedin Khalq, MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult) . ... As is seen in the above mentioned part of the article, for the first time a semi-official source in the west is seeking the trial of the leaders of the MKO, and for the first time the international demand is heard that the cult leader Rajavi and his wife must face justice in international courts. Although it is late, it is still positive to find that with the arrest warrant issued by the Iraqi Supreme Criminal Court, the resistance of the Camp Ashraf Families is eventually giving its fruit and the International call for freeing the victims of the cult and trying the leaders ... Sahar Family Foundation, Baghdad, July 31, 2010 The World Today, publication of the British Chatham House Conservative Political Club, has an article by Rachel Schneller, (FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER, US STATE DEPARTMENT, CURRENTLY INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS FELLOW, and COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS) titled IRAQ AND THE AMERICAN PULLOUT published in its August 2010 edition, Voume 66, Number 8/9. In this article we read about the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO – Rajavi cult) in Iraq as follows:
------- Also read: Iraq and the American Pullout: Separate We Must . ... MEK also participated in the 1979 take-over of the US Embassy in Tehran and so its members, as designated terrorists, are not eligible for resettlement in the US. Camp Ashraf, however, postpones the inevitable and risks becoming another Guantanamo Bay. MEK members who took part in acts of terror should face justice, possibly through an ad hoc United Nations tribunal that would ensure a fair trial. Those exonerated should then qualify for resettlement ... Rachel Schneller, Chatham House, August 2010 PDF fomate The World Today, Volume 66, Number 8/9 The withdrawal of United States combat troops on August 31 falls during Ramadan, the Muslim month of fasting and prayer; a timetable better suited to the American political cycle than to conditions in Iraq. Ramadan usually sees a spike in violence as religious fervour combines with heat and hunger. But delaying the withdrawal another year would mean the Iraq war surpassing the Vietnam war in length. The timing could have been better for Iraq, but withdrawal is overdue for the US. Having never been justified in the first place - legally, strategically, or defensively - it is time to endmilitary engagement in Iraq.
-----------
Also: Interior Ministry announces receipt of arrest warrants for 38 leaders and members of Mojahedink Khalq (MKO, MEK, Rajavi cult) . ... The source said, in an interview with Alsumaria News, that the Mojahedin is accused of killing thousands of Iraqi citizens in coordination with the Iraqi security forces to suppress the uprising of March 1991, indicating that the investigations carried out proved the participation of members of the MKO in quelling the rebelling southern provinces and the north. " ... Alsumaria News, Baghdad, July 11, 2010 (translated by Iran Interlink) ------------
Also: UK government denies any contact with Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, Rajavi cult) terrorists . ... “The British Government has no form of contact with this organization, as a point of principle,” Foreign Office spokesman Barry Marston said. “The MKO was responsible for a number of horrible acts of terrorism against ordinary Iranians and have never unambiguously renounced violence,” Marston told IRNA. Marston said Britain “condemned acts of terrorism in Iran by criminal groups like Jondallah & the MKO, particularly horrific attacks against Mosques, security forces & innocent people.” ... IRNA, London, June 17, 2010 ----------- Also: Official American version of events at Camp Ashraf
... There were allegations during the year that some of the 3,400 members of the MEK terrorist organization located at Ashraf were denied the right to leave under threat of reprisal from MEK leaders. These allegations were corroborated by several former Ashraf residents who had fled the camp. Individuals claimed to have been subjected to psychological and physical abuse ... State Department, USA, March 2010 2009 Human Rights Report: Iraq Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices March 11, 2010 Link to the full report (...) a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life ... On July 28, clashes erupted at Ashraf in Diyala Province when the ISF attempted to establish a police presence inside the more than 3,400-person compound of the terrorist Iranian dissident group Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). The clashes resulted in the deaths of 11 MEK members and injuries to 30 ISF officers. The government credibly claimed the MEK provoked the clashes by staging a violent demonstration to block the ISF from entering the compound. (...) d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons ... There were allegations during the year that some of the 3,400 members of the MEK terrorist organization located at Ashraf were denied the right to leave under threat of reprisal from MEK leaders. These allegations were corroborated by several former Ashraf residents who had fled the camp. Individuals claimed to have been subjected to psychological and physical abuse, including threats of reprisal against family members and solitary confinement in Ashraf to discourage defections. ----------- Also: The secretary of US embassy exposed Mojahedin Khalq(MKO, MEK,PMOI, Rajavi cult) leadership . ... The second secretary of the American embassy in Baghdad, published a documented report on the crimes committed by the MEK’s leaders who bloodshed their own colleagues, raped the women of Ashraf, poisoned and executed dozens of the defectors ... Fars News Agency,Translated by Nejat NGO, October 22, 2008 Link to the orginal reprot (Persian) The Second secretary of US embassy report on the horrible crimes of MKO leader ----- Also: British Minister of State: We believe it is in the interest of residents to cooperate peacefully with Iraqi authorities . ... Government of Iraq would deal with the residents of the camp with respect for their human rights in co-operation with the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross. We believe it is in the interests of the residents to respect and accept the decision made by the Government of Iraq, and to cooperate peacefully with the Iraqi authorities ... House of Commons, British Parliament, March 16, 2010 David Drew (Stroud, Labour) To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent representations he has made to the government of Iraq on the situation in Camp Ashraf; and if he will take steps to ensure that residents of Camp Ashraf are not driven from Iraq. Ivan Lewis (Minister of State (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs), Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Bury South, Labour) We have discussed the situation at Camp Ashraf with the Iraqi Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the Human Rights Minister, the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Iraqi Government's Ashraf Committee. I met the Iraqi Foreign Minister in Baghdad in December 2009 and underlined the need for the Iraqi authorities to deal with the residents of Camp Ashraf in a way that meets international humanitarian standards. In addition we discuss the issue with the UN, US, and the EU. The Iraqi authorities have told the residents that they can no longer stay at Camp Ashraf but has given assurances that no residents will be forcibly transferred to a country where they have reason to fear persecution, or where substantial grounds exist to believe they would be tortured. The Iraqi Human Rights Minister confirmed to our ambassador on 27 January 2010 that the Government of Iraq would deal with the residents of the camp with respect for their human rights in co-operation with the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross. We believe it is in the interests of the residents to respect and accept the decision made by the Government of Iraq, and to cooperate peacefully with the Iraqi authorities. ---------- Also UK Parliament - some sensible answers to Mojahedin (Rajavi cult) claims . ... In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004... UK Parliament, April 20-21 2009 Written answers ----------- Also read: I. Summary II. Background III. Rise of Dissent inside the MKO IV. Human Rights Abuses in the MKO Camps V. Testimonies May 2005 --------- Also read: New document on Mojahedin Khalq released by RAND (The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq, A Policy Conundrum) RAND, August 05, 2009 A new document (133pages) was released today by RAND * * * Link to the document (pdf file) ... A RAND study examined the evolution of this controversial decision, which has left the United States open to charges of hypocrisy in the war on terrorism. An examination of MeK activities establishes its cultic practices and its deceptive recruitment and public relations strategies. A series of coalition decisions served to facilitate the MeK leadership's control over its members. The government of Iraq wants to expel the group, but no country other than Iran will accept it. Thus, the RAND study concludes that the best course of action would be ... ------- Also read: U.S. Handling of Mujahedin-E-Khalq Since U.S. Invasion of Iraq Is Examined (The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq , A Policy Conundrum) . . Jeremiah Goulka, Lydia Hansell, Elizabeth Wilke, Judith Larson, RAND, August 04, 2009 At the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Coalition forces classified the Mujahedin-e Khalq, a militant organization from Iran with cult-like elements that advocates the overthrow of Iran's current government, as an enemy force. The MeK had provided security services to Saddam Hussein from camps established in Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War to fight Iran in collaboration with Saddam's forces and resources. A new study from the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research organization, looks at how coalition forces handled this group following the invasion. Although the MeK is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States, coalition forces never had a clear mission on how to deal with it. After a ceasefire was signed between Coalition forces and the MeK, the U.S. Secretary of Defense designated this group's members as civilian "protected persons" rather than combatant prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions. The coalition's treatment of the MeK leaves it – and the United States in particular – open to charges of hypocrisy, offering security to a terrorist group rather than breaking it up. Research suggests that most of the MeK rank-and-file are neither terrorists nor freedom fighters, but trapped and brainwashed people who would be willing to return to Iran if they were separated from the MeK leadership. Many members were lured to Iraq from other countries with false promises, only to have their passports confiscated by the MeK leadership, which uses physical abuse, imprisonment, and other methods to keep them from leaving. Iraq wants to expel the group, but no country other than Iran will accept it. The RAND study suggests the best course of action would have been to repatriate MeK rank-and-file members back to Iran, where they have been granted amnesty since 2003. To date, Iran appears to have upheld its commitment to MeK members in Iran. The study also concludes better guidelines be established for the possible detention of members of designated terrorist organizations. The study, "The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq: A Policy Conundrum," can be found here. For more information, or to arrange an interview with the authors, contact Lisa Sodders in the RAND Office of Media Relations at (310) 393-0411, ext. 7139, or lsodders@rand.org. Learn More iconFull Document (http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871/) iconNational Security Research Area (http://www.rand.org/research_areas/national_security/) iconE-mail sign up (http://www.rand.org/publications/email.html) ------- Also read: Wahsington backed terrorists used to discredit Iranian demands for justice Fox News Channel: Communist Terrorist Television for Dupes . . Professor Paul Sheldon Foote, USA, June 20, 2009 On October 1, 2007, I posted “Fox News Channel: Communist Terrorist Television for Dupes”. http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-iongVI On June 20, 2009, the Fox News Channel devoted the entire day of live programming to coverage of the unrest in Iran. For supporters of the Iranian communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, NCRI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) terrorists, there was no need to watch their Sima Azadi television channel via satellite. Throughout the day, the Fox News Channel provided favorable coverage for the communist terrorists. Some examples were:
This military sect is commanded by Massoud and Myriam Rajavi, although it is not known whether Massoud is still alive since he hasn’t been seen in public since 2003.
While the Pentagon and the Obama Administration have detached themselves from this organisation, the Mujahedin continue to enjoy the support of the neo-conservatives, Israel and France, which hosts its headquarters.
Approximately 30 000 people from all over Europe listened to speeches by former Spanish Prime Minister José-Maria Aznar and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton - who recently joined forces to found the Friends of Israel Initiative- calling on the State Department to stop considering the People’s Mujahedin as a terrorist organisation and on the European Union to unilaterally reinforce the sanctions against Iran.
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8276
http://www.negaheno.net/1389/04/01/6407/
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=7885
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
http://iran-interlink.org
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8525
http://www.saharngo.com/en/story/1351
… AND WITHDRAW RESPONSIBLY
The US should, however, withdraw responsibly. Our departure will have consequences for many Iraqis. To ignore our responsibilities would, in the words of US Congressman Brad Sherman, 'Allow a human rights catastrophe to occur in Iraq just because we are in the process of leaving.' Representative Sherman was referring to the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq (MEK), about three thousand radical Iranians held in Camp Ashraf in Iraq who oppose the Iranian government. Baghdad has no sympathy for the MEK because it assisted Saddam Hussein in suppressing Iraqi Shi'a and Kurds. The US withdrawal could result in a piranha-like feeding frenzy as both Iraq and Iran exact revenge.
MEK also participated in the 1979 take-over of the US Embassy in Tehran and so its members, as designated terrorists, are not eligible for resettlement in the US. Camp Ashraf, however, postpones the inevitable and risks becoming another Guantanamo Bay. MEK members who took part in acts of terror should face justice, possibly through an ad hoc United Nations tribunal that would ensure a fair trial. Those exonerated should then qualify for resettlement.
As is seen in the above mentioned part of the article, for the first time a semi-official source in the west is seeking the trial of the leaders of the MKO, and for the first time the international demand is heard that the cult leader Rajavi and his wife must face justice in international courts. Although it is late, it is still positive to find that with the arrest warrant issued by the Iraqi Supreme Criminal Court, the resistance of the Camp Ashraf Families is eventually giving its fruit and the International call for freeing the victims of the cult and trying the leaders in an international court has now been heard. It seems that Rajavi is becoming more and more limited day by day.
The article is critical of the Americans who used groups like the MKO and others and are now leaving them alone in Iraq. As far as the Sahar Family Foundation (SFF) is concerned we do not worry about that. Our concern is that, as the article mentions, if even this group has been serving Washington, the matter must be dealt with in legal terms and they must first put on trial those subject to arrest warrants and of course then the ordinary rank and file must be transferred to the US. What is important is that the US administration must take responsibility for the group before they leave Iraq (refer to the RAND report for the US Defense Department). The leaders of the MKO expect to escape from justice and be treated as the French government did to be able to continue its cultic brainwashing in the west after all the crimes committed against the people of Iran as well as against the people of Iraq and even against its own members.
The American forces sooner or later will leave Iraq and will leave the Rajavi cult and other groups for the Iraqis. It is worth noting that when they leave Iraq, the MKO might face the revenge of angry Iraqi people. But in this case the responsibility of protecting them should not be left for Iran or Iraq; the US Forces must see to the matter before they leave.
Naturally the Americans would like to avoid taking up their responsibilities in this respect and would leave the problem of the MKO for the Iraqi government to solve, but as the article mentions it is important to follow all the legal procedures, and before any other matter the leaders must be separated from the rank and file. The entire inhabitants of Ashraf Camp (over 3000 individuals) who are the prime victims of a destructive cult could not be put on trial. The aim is only to try the leadership which is the sole answerable body for all the crimes committed for years, in a court under the supervision of international institutes. This is what Iraq is asking for and this is why Iraq has issued the arrest warrants for the leaders of the MKO. The body of the organization must be separated from the head and be freed and saved and in this regard the SFF is ready to cooperate in any possible way.
The demand of the west in general and the demand of the Iraqi government about the situation of the terrorist MKO in Iraq are more or less the same and apparently they both seek the trial of the leaders and saving the victims of the cult, and of course it is clear that the war mongering cliques influenced by the Israelis are opposing this general international demand.
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8504
http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/publications/twt/archive/view/-/id/2055/
http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/17003_wt081018.pdf
The United States has dug its military into the landscape, requiring enormous sums of taxpayer dollars to maintain its presence. It justifies its Iraq addiction by claiming only its soldiers can prevent Iraqis from killing each other and the Iraqi government from falling apart. For their part, many Iraqi politicians rely extensively on the US military, even as they call for the end of the occupation to score political points against rivals. It is an unhealthy, co-dependent relationship and the withdrawal will be a withdrawal in all senses of the word, possibly incurring further damage in the process if not undertaken responsibly.
IN CHAOS
Iraq's political landscape is in bad shape and likely to get worse, but there is nothing the US military can or should do to prevent this. Some argue that the combat presence should be extended, raising visions of renewed sectarian bloodshed, Arab-Kurd violence, and the lack of Iraqi security force competence as justification for renegotiating Washington's security agreement with Baghdad.
There are very real risks of violence and destabilisation, but committing US troops ad infinitum would have almost no impact on the underlying causes, and escalating violence should not justify another Iraq fix. On the contrary, a continued US military presence would deter Iraqis from taking-on the issues themselves, the only long-term solution to Iraq's problems, particularly in regards to security which is a domestic rather than international issue.
Once American combat troops leave, Shi'a followers ofMoqtada al-Sadr will be deprived of their favourite devil and will lose relevance unless they can turn their energies to solving the country's electricity crisis and improving relations with its Arab neighbours.
With fewer US bases, Al Qaeda in Iraq will have a reduced number of targets and its presence there is likely to diminish. After all, it has very few natural allies even among the Sunni Arab population.
Iyad Allawi's Iraqiyya party won a tiny advantage in the March 7 vote, but Allawi has squandered whatever mandate he had by failing to form a coalition with any of the other major political parties. His frequent travels to Sunni Gulf countries further alienate him from the Shi'a population.
The National Alliance, intended to unite the rule of Law party with the Iraqi National Alliance in an undefeatable bloc, has likewise frittered away its mandate by botching the basic issue of who will lead the coalition.
Nuri al-Maliki, supposedly a strong leader, clutches onto the premiership even as the country crumbles around him because of a lack of leadership. Death threats against party leaders abound, and at least three elected officials have already been assassinated.
If a new government has formed by August 31, it may exclude at least one of the main demographic groups: Kurds, Sunni, or Shi'a. As in 2005, there is no appetite for a national unity government that would put all parties into the same tent and force them to compromise on de-Baathification and Kirkuk, issues that Iraqis are willing to kill and die for, rather than make concessions on.
If a national unity government is rammed into existence, the reluctant players will spend their four years in office squabbling rather than tackling the tough issues. The alternative of leaving-out one or more parties, may result in increased violence, but it may also lead to the development of a healthy opposition, able to credibly challenge the government when it acts illegitimately.
WITHDRAW SLOWLY…
The US will not be going cold turkey in its withdrawal. With its remaining fifty thousand support troops and 1,300 civilians and diplomats, it would do well to focus on getting the country electrified and supporting constitutional reform, things Iraqis themselves see as major stumbling blocks for economic and political development.
Nothing would stabilise Iraq more than reliable electricity, which would allow business growth and employment of those who might otherwise join militias to support their families. Electricity would attract investment and make it possible for the oil and gas sectors to expand, increase refrigeration of vaccines and fresh food, benefit schools, and even have allowed more people to watch World Cup games; it is no coincidence that major protests prompting the Electricity Minister to resign occurred in June during the football tournament.
The delay in government formation both in 2005 and this year underscores the vital need to reform the constitution as well as the rest of the legal structure. The constitution's ambiguous, vague wording, written in haste and barely ratified in 2005, resulted in both Iraqiyya and the National Coalition claiming in March to have won the right to form the next government. Without the laws, courts, and constitution for political and legal solutions, Iraqis will rationally choose violence as the most effective means to solve problems.
…AND WITHDRAW RESPONSIBLY
The US should, however, withdraw responsibly. Our departure will have consequences for many Iraqis. To ignore our responsibilities would, in the words of US Congressman Brad Sherman, 'Allow a human rights catastrophe to occur in Iraq just because we are in the process of leaving.' Representative Sherman was referring to the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq (MEK), about three thousand radical Iranians held in Camp Ashraf in Iraq who oppose the Iranian government. Baghdad has no sympathy for the MEK because it assisted Saddam Hussein in suppressing Iraqi Shi'a and Kurds. The US withdrawal could result in a piranha-like feeding frenzy as both Iraq and Iran exact revenge.
MEK also participated in the 1979 take-over of the US Embassy in Tehran and so its members, as designated terrorists, are not eligible for resettlement in the US. Camp Ashraf, however, postpones the inevitable and risks becoming another Guantanamo Bay. MEK members who took part in acts of terror should face justice, possibly through an ad hoc United Nations tribunal that would ensure a fair trial. Those exonerated should then qualify for resettlement.
Even more desperate than the MEK are the estimated one hundred thousand Sahwa members, Sunni insurgents who initially fought against Americans in 2003-4 but then cooperated with them against Al Qaeda from 2005-8. Al Qaeda targets Sahwa members for betraying them, Shi'a militias despise them for working with the Americans, and the Shi'a government is reluctant to include the former insurgents in either the police or security forces.
Like MEK, Sahwa insurgents do not qualify for resettlement in the US. However, without Sahwa's assistance, US forces would almost certainly have been defeated. Having signed a deal with Sawha we should uphold our end of the bargain by protecting remaining members from being picked off by Al Qaeda or Shi'a militias. We should help Sahwa families join the US refugee programme; restrictions on resettlement should not apply to innocent spouses and children. The credibility of America as a strategic partner in the Gulf depends in large part on how we treat our Arab allies, including Sahwa members.
As the military withdraws, thousands of Iraqis will lose their jobs as translators and assistants. Along with income loss they will face death threats for having worked with Americans and will no longer have the protection of nearby forces. Those who want to be resettled in the US should have quick and efficient access to the Refugee Assistance Program. For those who do not wish to leave Iraq, generous severance packages should benegotiated, taking into account their increased need for security as US troops depart.
On August 31, there may not yet be a new government to escort the US out, let alone take responsibility for the country's security. People will undoubtedly still suffer from severe electricity shortages, with no air conditioning or refrigeration for most at the hottest time of the year. Clean water will be scarce and crops will be dying. There will be long, angry lines at fuel stations, rubbish mounting in the streets, and occasional explosions with accompanying screams and sirens. Basically, most people's idea of hell. But separate we must.
Rachel Schneller, Foreign Service Officer, US State Department, currently International Affairs Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations. The views in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the US Government or State Department
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8407
link to original (Arabic)
http://www.alsumarianews.com/ar/2/8758/news-details-.html
The Ministry of Interior on Saturday announced it had received the arrest warrants issued by the Iraqi High Tribunal against 38 leaders and members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq (aka MKO, MEK, PMOI) on charges of involvement in crimes against humanity. A source in the Criminal Court said the MKO who are wanted had been involved with Iraqi security forces in quelling the uprising of March 1991.
Aydan Khaled, Under Secretary of the Ministry of Interior for Police Affairs said in interview with Alsumaria News, "The Ministry received the warrants from the High Court against 38 leaders and the Mojahedin accused of committing crimes against humanity."
According to Khaled, "The Interior Ministry circulated judicial orders to all police stations in Baghdad for their implementation and investigation". He noted that "the Ministry does not have complete information on the whereabouts of the elements of the MKO wanted for arrest, whether they are inside or outside Iraq."
The Undersecretary of the Ministry of Interior for Police Affairs said that "the ministry had no statistics or information for the pursuit of elements of the Organization for crimes at this time", pointing out at the same time "the breaches of law by the elements of the Organization in Ashraf camp included attacks on Iraqi police officers and prevention of families of members of the organization coming from Iran to visit their children and their families within Camp Ashraf ".
The violence which broke out in Camp Ashraf which was demilitarized after the transfer of responsibility for camp security from American troops to Iraq in July 2009, has led to the deaths and injuries of nearly three hundred members of the Mojahedin organization, including 25 women, with 110 of the Iraqi security forces among the wounded and dead…
It is noteworthy that in late January of last year, 2009, the Mojahedin had been taken off the European Union list of terrorist organizations. The Iranian government strongly condemned the resolution, and the Government of Iraq has long tried to close the camp and find a solution to relocate the residents inside, either through return to Iran or through transfer to places deep in the desert or to a third country, but things remained the same.
For his part, a source in the High Criminal Court said that "the arrest warrants issued against 38 of the MKO members comes against the background of charges of killings and torture against Iraqi citizens in 1991."
The source said, in an interview with Alsumaria News, that the Mojahedin is accused of killing thousands of Iraqi citizens in coordination with the Iraqi security forces to suppress the uprising of March 1991, indicating that the investigations carried out proved the participation of members of the MKO in quelling the rebelling southern provinces and the north. "
The source, a judge in the Criminal Court who asked not to be named said the "most wanted leaders of the MKO, include leader Massoud Rajavi and his wife Maryam Rajavi."
The regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein assigned the members of the MKO to the Iraqi Army and Republican Guard in its military operations in the provinces of the North and South to end a popular uprising in March 1991 against the regime of Saddam Hussein after his defeat in the Kuwait war. The MKO's role is especially important because of the survival of its military arsenal which was safe from any damage due to [U.S.] aerial bombardment of Iraqi sectors, and the destruction, most of which was in Kuwait and its surroundings in the ground offensive of the Allied forces in the twenty-fourth of the month of February 1991…
------------
More coverage in Iraqi Media:
http://www.alsumarianews.com/ar/2/8758/news-details-.html
http://www.alsumarianews.com/ar/1/7407/news-details-.html
http://www.iraqi123.com/ar/articles/9789/.html
http://www.anbaaiq.com/NewsDetails.aspx?ID=57166
http://www.darabeen.com/index.asp?fname=/2010/07/07-07/2010-7-7-8-8-40.htm&dismode=x&ts=7/7/2010%208:15:46%20AM
http://hajr.homeftp.net/hajrvb/showthread.php?p=407127766
http://www.batnaya.net/forum/showthread.php?t=62405
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8265 
http://www.irna.ir/En/View/FullStory/?NewsId=1183391&idLanguage=3London June 17, IRNA -- The British Foreign Office Thursday denied any links with the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MKO) terrorist organisation despite removing the anti-Iran group from its proscribed list two years ago.
“The British Government has no form of contact with this organization, as a point of principle,” Foreign Office spokesman Barry Marston said.
“The MKO was responsible for a number of horrible acts of terrorism against ordinary Iranians and have never unambiguously renounced violence,” Marston told IRNA.
“Neither do we believe this group enjoys any kind of popular support inside Iran,” he said after British Ambassador Simon Gass was summoned to the Foreign Ministry in Tehran following accusations of UK involvement in terrorist plots.
The MKO were among the first terrorist groups to be outlawed in the UK in 2001, but also became the first to be deproscribed two years ago, leading to suggestions that the move was politically motivated coming at a time of deterioration in relations.
The UK government has always accepted that the anti-Iran group have never categorically given up terrorism but insisted that it was forced to remove it from their banned list after losing a court ruling that was supported by many MPs in 2008.
Marston said Britain “condemned acts of terrorism in Iran by criminal groups like Jondallah & the MKO, particularly horrific attacks against Mosques, security forces & innocent people.”
“Accusations that Britain has had any involvement in supporting such groups is ridiculous and untrue,” he said, adding that the UK government takes “terrorism extremely seriously, so in principle we'd be ready to cooperate with the Iranian authorities relating to credible evidence of genuine acts of terrorism."
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
http://iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=7991
.jpg)
(Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, cult leaders)
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/nea/136069.htm
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/nea/136069.htm
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=5290
http://www.nejatngo.org/en/post.aspx?id=2062
http://iran-interlink.org/fa/?mod=view&id=5281
The second secretary of the American embassy in Baghdad, published a documented report on the crimes committed by the MEK’s leaders who bloodshed their own colleagues, raped the women of Ashraf, poisoned and executed dozens of the defectors.
According to FNA reporter in Baghdad, the second secretary of American embassy in Baghdad, William, revealed the bloody violence of Masud Rajavi, MKO leader, against the dissident members, in the third and forth chapter of the report on the actual situation of Mujahedin.
The American official, who investigated the documents and files on Mujahedin, has been one of the authorities who control Camp Ashraf. The report reads:
Like Malik Farough, the former king of Jordan, Masud Rajavi abuses even his female colleagues.”
In another part of the report you can read:
” Rajavi has expanded sexual relations with the female military, political and administrative ranks of the group. He also ordered the doctors to do hysterectomy surgery on some of them.
He noted that he has watched the films of the confessions of the women.
The second secretary of the American embassy mentioned that Rajavi sent the husbands to the deadly operations so as he can reach the wives and possess them in Napoleon’s way. In the existing documents in Ashraf you find out that some of the deaths in the group were not random but intentionally planned. In his long report William noted three cases of the planned deaths and wrote:
”the confessions of some of group members reveal that Rajavi was involved in 19 cases of death personally ordering the assassination.”
This American authority points out poisoning of the members and writes:
“Rajavi ordered the silent death, poisoning some friends or colleagues.
He added:
Now, it is clear for the US that MEK’s leader was involved in the suspicious death of his colleagues who were killed under his order but their death was reported falsely as the result of sickness or accident.
He continued mentioning that the forces of MEK are disappointed at the present time in Iraq and present no benefit to the US administration in the current Iraqi scene.
In a part of the report he writes:
Most of Mujahedin forces are suffering dangerous mental diseases and are likely to commit suicide or homicide.
Besides the Iraqi security authorities stressed that the Americans investigated some individuals who confessed that the MEK leader was involved in the assassination of Iranians residing abroad and some defectors of the group. To commit the assassinations, MKO enjoyed the assistance of embassies of the Saddam’s regime and his security organizations. 
(Camp Ashraf)
http://iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=7870
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-03-16a.322053.h&s=ashraf#g322053.r0
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=6288
Monday, 20 April 2009
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
Iraq: Mujahedin-e Khalq
David Drew (Stroud, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received of alleged attacks on residents in Ashraf City by members of the Iraqi secret service; and if he will make a statement.
Bill Rammell (Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; Harlow, Labour)
holding answer 20 March 2009
We are aware that such allegations have surfaced in the Iraqi media. We have discussed these allegations with the US, who retain a presence inside Camp Ashraf, and with the Iraqi government. We have seen no evidence to support the allegations.
Written answers
Monday, 20 April 2009
House of Lords
Iran
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass (Crossbench)
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they have taken to ensure that Camp Ashraf residents who are members of the People's Mujaheddin Organisation of Iran are not expelled to Iran by the Iraqi authorities; and what alternatives to that they have proposed through the United Nations.
Lord Malloch-Brown (Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; Labour)
Responsibility for the security and administration of Camp Ashraf was transferred on 1 January 2009 from the US to the Iraqi authorities. Prior to this handover the US received assurances from the Iraqi authorities towards their clear commitment to the humane treatment and continued well-being of the camp residents. The US retains a presence at the camp in an advisory/monitoring capacity.
The Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights visits the camp and has delivered assurances to a representative body of the residents. The International Committee of the Red Cross follows developments at the camp closely and continues to visit. It also discusses on a confidential basis all of the issues surrounding the camp with the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) and the Iraqi and US authorities.
The UN High Commission for Refugees has previously determined that Camp Ashraf residents do not qualify as refugees. While there is no evidence to suggest that the Government of Iraq intend forcibly to relocate the residents, our Embassy in Baghdad has requested a call on the Ministry of Human Rights to make known the level of interest in this issue in the UK and to remind the Iraqi Government of their earlier assurances. Our Embassy in Baghdad is also pursuing the possibility of a visit to the camp by a consular official.
Written answers
Tuesday, 21 April 2009
House of Lords
Iraq
Lord King of West Bromwich (Labour)
To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the Government of Iraq to safeguard the human rights and safety of Iranian residents in Ashraf City; and with what results.
Lord Malloch-Brown (Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; Labour)
The US held responsibility for the security and administration of Camp Ashraf until 1 January 2009. Responsibility was then transferred from the US to Iraqi authorities. The modalities of the transfer had been discussed by both sides with UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq. Prior to the transfer, the US received assurances from the Iraqi authorities towards their clear commitment to the humane treatment and continued wellbeing of the camp residents. The US retains a presence at the camp in an advisory/monitoring capacity.
The Government of Iraq have stated that no Camp Ashraf residents will be forcibly transferred to a country where they have reason to fear persecution. The Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights visits the camp and has delivered assurances to a representative body of the residents. The International Committee of the Red Cross follows developments at the camp closely and continues to visit. It also discusses on a confidential basis all of the issues surrounding the camp with the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MeK) and the Iraqi and US authorities.
While no specific representations to the Government of Iraq have been made, our embassy in Baghdad has requested a call on the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights to make known the level of interest in this issue in the UK and to remind the Iraqi Government of its earlier assurances. In addition to this, as stated by my honourable friend, Bill Rammell, Minister of State for the Middle East, during an adjournment debate in Westminster Hall on 25 March 2009 (Hansard, col. 90WH) "the British embassy in Baghdad is pursuing the possibility of a visit by a consular official to Camp Ashraf" to ascertain whether any of its residents might be entitled to consular assistance.
Library of the House of Commons
In brief: Camp Ashraf and the Geneva Conventions
Standard note: SN/IA/05022
Last updated: 20 March 2009
Author: Arabella Thorp
Section: International Affairs and Defence Section
What is Camp Ashraf ?
Ashraf is a settlement in Iraq’s Diyala province, near the border with Iran, which houses the headquarters of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI), also known as Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK) or Mujahideen-e-Khalq Organisation (MKO). The PMOI is the main body in the coalition of Iranian opposition groups known as the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), and is regarded as a terrorist organisation by a number of states but has now been removed from the UK and EU lists of terrorist organisations. It sided with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, but following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 the PMOI surrendered to US forces and 3,800 PMOI members were disarmed and cantoned in Camp Ashraf. Some 370 have since been voluntarily repatriated to Iran , and in 2004 restrictions and controls were removed. The Iraqi government has stated its intention to close the camp and expel all PMOI personnel from Iraqi territory.
Who is responsible for the inhabitants of Ashraf?
The main responsibility to protect civilians lies with the states that have effective control over them. From 2003 until 31 December 2008 US forces protected Camp Ashraf. Then on 1 January 2009, control passed to the Iraqi Government, under the new US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. Both the US and Iraqi governments have given assurances that, within the framework of Iraqi national legislation, Ashraf residents will be treated in accordance with international humanitarian law and with the principle of non-refoulement in particular. The UK considers the issue primarily a US rather than a UK responsibility.
What are the main concerns?
Lliving conditions at Ashraf are not generally a cause for concern, although an explosion damaged Ashraf’s water-supply station in February 2008. The main concern is that its inhabitants would be at risk of torture or other serious human rights violations if they were to be returned involuntarily to Iran. Iraq has reportedly given Ashraf’s inhabitants two options: return to Iran or find a third country for exile. Iraqi officials have however stated that PMOI members would not be forcibly repatriated to Iran and have called upon the international community to offer asylum to Ashraf’s occupants.
People who have left Camp Ashraf voluntarily have reported 'brain-washing', forced indoctrination and rough treatment by the PMOI of those who wanted to leave the camp.
This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public.
Do the Geneva Conventions apply?
In July 2004, the PMOI forces in Ashraf were declared by the US to be ‘protected persons’ under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, because they had not been belligerents during the Iraq War. The Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians who, as the result of an international armed conflict or of occupation, find themselves in the hands of a country of which they are not nationals. It states that in no circumstances shall a protected person be transferred to a country where he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions or religious beliefs.
In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004.
What other international law is relevant?
Under the international law principle of non-refoulement, no-one should be deported, expelled or repatriated if there is a real risk that they may be subjected to any kind of ill-treatment, or that they may face persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The US has ratified international conventions embodying this principle (the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1984 UN Convention Against Torture), but Iraq has not. However, non-refoulement is widely recognised as a principle of customary international law that binds all states.
Further reading
Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre, Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), 5 March 2009 [available through the Parliamentary Intranet]
Juan-Pedro Schaerer, Iraq: ICRC activities in behalf of Iranian nationals living in Ashraf, 3 December 2008
Zouhair Al Hassani, ‘International humanitarian law and its implementation in Iraq ’, International Review of the Red Cross Vol. 90 No. 869, March 2008
Knut Dörmann and Laurent Colassis, ‘International Humanitarian Law in the Iraq Conflict’, German Yearbook of International Law 47 (2004), 293–342
International Committee of the Red Cross, Protected persons and property and international humanitarian law [viewed 20 March 2009]
Amnesty International, Iraq: No Iranians in need of protection should be sent to Iran against their will, 28 August 2008
Amnesty International, Security agreement puts 16,000 Iraqi detainees at risk of torture, 28 November 2008
Massoud Khodabandeh (former member of PMOI), Camp Ashraf: a test of US-Iraqi relations, 7 April 2008
Iran Interlink, Nejat Society Asks UK to Support Iraqi Government Plans for Camp Ashraf Victims, 11 December 2008
Hon. David Kilgour, J.D., ‘Catastrophe on horizon for Camp Ashraf refugees’, Middle East Times 8 October 2008
House of Lords debate, Iraq: Ashraf City, HL Deb 2 March 2009 cc504-6
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=797http://hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/iran0505/
No Exit
Human Rights Abuses Inside the Mojahedin Khalq Camps 
http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=6789
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871/
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=6775
http://www.rand.org/news/press/2009/08/04/?ref=homepage&key=t_iraqi_mek_flags
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2009/RAND_MG871.pdf
http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=6538
http://360.yahoo.com/paulsheldonfoote
wherPSJekBajGbbDj1yv4Tfku0?p=193
During the 11:00 – 11:30 AM (PST) segment, Fox News Channel showed MEK supporters in front of the White House waving their communist flags. The panelists for this segment, Charles Krauthammer and Courtney Kealy, failed to identify or to condemn the supporters of the communist terrorists. These terrorists have murdered American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of Iranian and Iraqi civilians. In September 2002, former President George W. Bush’s White House published a background paper for Bush’s remarks at the United Nations listing the MEK as a pretext for the Iraq War. In 2003, American and coalition forces attacked and killed some of the MEK terrorists at Camp Ashraf, Iraq.
In a later segment, Congressman Darryl Issa (Republican—California) commented that empowerment of people has changed Communist China for the better!
During Shepard Smith’s segment, Smith showed a video of the MEK rally in Paris, France and identified them as the PMOI. The only negative reference to the MEK occurred when Amy Kellogg speculated that the MEK might be responsible for a possible suicide bombing at Ayatollah Khomeini’s shrine in Tehran. Shepard Smith neither responded nor indicated that PMOI and MEK are two names for the same communist terrorist organization.
During Geraldo Rivera’s segment, former Senator Rick Santorum, who was a strong supporter of the MEK in the United States Senate, noted that former Senator (and now Vice President) Biden had originally opposed the Iran Freedom Support Act.
http://www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=792
Then, Geraldo Rivera showed video of Maryam Rajavi’s MEK rally in Paris, France and interviewed Fox News Channel Foreign Affairs Analyst, who headed the NCRI office in Washington, DC until the Federal Government closed the office.
In 2007, Fox News Channel viewers could claim to have been duped by relying upon the Fox News Channel for news. Now, Fox News Channel viewers have no excuses. Those who rely upon the Fox News Channel as a source of accurate news are traitors to all Americans who fought or died fighting communists. Americans do not need to look to Iran or to the Middle East in search for America’s worst enemies. America’s worst enemies are in America.
(Daniel Zucker, Maryam Rajavi and ALi Safavi)
(Ali Safavi as the commander of Saddam's Private Army in Iraq)
(Maryam Rajavi directly ordered the massacre of Kurdish people)
(Rabbi Daniel Zucker with Maryam Rajavi!)
(massacre of Kurdish people)
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
(Maryam Rajavi in terrorist cult's HQ in Paris)
(massacre of Kurdish people)