Skepticism about MEK’s alleged Iranian nuke revelation.
The neoconservative Iran Policy Committee lobbies for
terrorist Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult)
in Washington
.
... As for the Iran Policy Committee, the group has long called for U.S.-sponsored regime change in Iran, but with the caveat that such an effort be led by Iranians, specifically the MEK. Raymond Tanter, who founded and co-chairs the IPC, is a former fellow of the Hudson Institute and a current adjunct scholar at the AIPAC-formed Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Tanter has, for years, lobbied power-centers in Washington — with some success on Capitol Hill – to remove the MEK from U.S. terror lists and use them to conduct a cross-border insurgency against Iran from Iraq, where the MEK has been based ...
Ali Gharib, Lobelog, September 09, 2010
http://www.lobelog.com/skepticism-about-meks-new-iranian-nuke-revelations/
The Iran Policy Committee, a neoconservative-led group associated with the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK), held a press conference today in Washington to reveal what it said was a previously undisclosed Iranian nuclear site near the Iranian city of Qazvin.
The MEK, which, along with its political front group, the National Council for Resistance in Iran (NCRI), had representatives at the presser, claims it discovered the site through an “internal network of sources” in Iran.
But the source of the information — the MEK is listed as a terrorist organization by the State Department — and the group’s affiliation and promotion by U.S. neoconservatives pushing hard-line policies towards Iran are reasons for skepticism. Both the State Department and independent experts have raised several alarms about the reliability of the MEK’s claims.
While in the past, official U.S. sources have been willing to confirm information made public by the MEK, the State Department today told Fox News it would “study” the information, which included satellite images, and noted the MEK’s mixed record. “The MEK has made pronouncements about Iranian facilities in the past — some accurate, some not,” State spokesman P.J. Crowley told Fox. Indeed, the MEK was the first to reveal the existence of an Iranian nuclear facility at Natanz.
Some independent experts are also skeptical. While the MEK claims that the site has been under construction for five years — to the tune of $100 million — with tunnels being built for centrifuges. One expert, speaking to the Washington Post’s “Checkpoint” national security blog, noted that underground facilities are not synonymous with centrifuge work:
“We saw nothing in the images that suggests a centrifuge plant,” said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security. “There are many underground facilities in Iran.”
At his new blog, former National Iranian American Council assistant policy director Patrick Disney lays out a host of reasons to be skeptical about the new claims about Iran’s nuclear program from the MEK. (Disney’s piece is worth checking out in full.)
Far from being a “leading Iranian opposition” group — as the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, in its article about the new revelations, called the group — Disney casts doubts on the MEK’s ability to cultivate its “network of sources” in the Islamic Republic:
Long recognized as a terrorist entity, the MEK has been responsible for the killing of numerous Iranian and American civilians since the 1970s. Its cult-like membership maintains close to zero support among the Iranian people — a consequence of the group’s siding with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War. Thus, it is unlikely that the MEK’s networks in Iran are extensive enough to obtain credible evidence of any such nuclear facilities.
As for the Iran Policy Committee, the group has long called for U.S.-sponsored regime change in Iran, but with the caveat that such an effort be led by Iranians, specifically the MEK. The plan is something akin to the neoconservative emphasis on using the now-disgraced Ahmad Chalabi (since accused of being an Iranian spy) and his Iraqi National Congress exile opposition group to install a new government in Iraq.
Raymond Tanter, who founded and co-chairs the IPC, is a former fellow of the Hudson Institute and a current adjunct scholar at the AIPAC-formed Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Tanter has, for years, lobbied power-centers in Washington — with some success on Capitol Hill – to remove the MEK from U.S. terror lists and use them to conduct a cross-border insurgency against Iran from Iraq, where the MEK has been based.
Another IPC director is retired Gen. Thomas McInerney, who chairs the group’s advisory committee. An über hawk, McInerney has argued, among other things, that the U.S. ought to invade Syria in order to find the weapons of mass destruction that he alleges Saddam Hussein smuggled there before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. McInerney, a Fox News analyst who also sits on the military committee of Frank Gaffney’s neocon Center for Security Policy, was recently exposed by Talking Points Memo as a supporter of the “birther” conspiracy that alleges, despite replete evidence to the contrary, that Barack Obama was not born in the U.S. and is therefore ineligible to be president.
Is this unlikely marriage of accused terrorists and neoconservatives — both with mixed-if-not-poor records on intelligence in the Mid East — really where the U.S. wants to be getting its information about developments in Iran?
----------
Also
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8692
Espionage- Struggle for Survival
An insight into the Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult)
.
... This program sheds light on MKO treacherous activities during Iraq-Iran War and their engagement in various acts of espionage against their own country. The program focuses on the use of the MKO by Israel to attack Iran's nuclear program. The program talks with experts including Scott Ritter, Abolhasan Bani Sadr and Massoud Khodabandeh...
(Rajavi from Saddam to AIPAC)
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
Press TV, September 21, 2010
http://previous.presstv.com/doc
Part one
Link to download part one (15 min, 150 MB)
* * *
Part two
Link to download part two (15 min, 150 MB)
* * *
(Maryam Rajavi in terrorist cult's HQ in Paris)
(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)
----------
Also read: Bomb Blasts in Iran and The Raymond/Constance Tanter DC Divorce Case Is the MEK/MKO/PMOI/NCRI a Terrorist Outfit? . ... The 3 judge panel has apparently not been let in on the history of the MEK/MKO/PMOI in killing Americans working in Pahlavi Iran a generation ago. The preferred method of assassination was to block off an unsuspecting American defense contractor or Embassy official in Tehran vehicular traffic, and then to spray the car with automatic weapons fire. What were the “due process protections” accorded people like American Air Force Colonel Jack Turner of Dayton, Ohio, just one of the victims of the MEK/MKO/PMOI?... Mark Dankof’s America, Texas, July 18, 2010 My radio partner, Mark Glenn, sent me the Agency France Presse (AFP) release today containing the tragic-comedic news that a Washington, D. C.-based 3 judge panel on the U. S. Appeals Court has declared that the U. S. State Department “failed to accord the People’s Mujahideen Organization of Iran [PMOI]/Mujahideen-e-Khalq [MEK/MKO] the due process protections” necessary for the latter to appeal its classification as a terrorist organization. The 3 judge panel has apparently not been let in on the history of the MEK/MKO/PMOI in killing Americans working in Pahlavi Iran a generation ago. The preferred method of assassination was to block off an unsuspecting American defense contractor or Embassy official in Tehran vehicular traffic, and then to spray the car with automatic weapons fire. What were the “due process protections” accorded people like American Air Force Colonel Jack Turner of Dayton, Ohio, just one of the victims of the MEK/MKO/PMOI? My past article on the MEK/MKO/PMOI will serve as an initiation for the uninitiated. So will Ed Blanche’s research on this organization for The Middle East magazine, in June of 2009. In my past op-ed on the MEK/MKO/PMOI, I noted the following: And the ultimate paradoxes are these: First, Mr. Bush’s Operation Iraqi Freedom has resulted in the installation of a central government in Baghdad largely sympathetic to the IRI regime in Tehran, and with identical animosity to the MEK’s presence within its borders. Second, while Ed Blanche notes that it “was the MEK that disclosed the existence of Iran’s nuclear program in August 2002, stunning the U. S. intelligence and military establishments,” he fails to note credible information provided by Barry O’Connell and IPS’s Gareth Porter that the MEK’s role in “disclosing the existence of Iran’s nuclear program,” has been to serve as a clandestine conduit of information on the subject supplied by the Israeli intelligence community. Hello, Mossad, meet your new allies in the ‘Islamic-Marxist’ network worldwide. There you have it. The Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), or People’s Holy Warriors, is an “Islamic-Marxist” terror organization, which assisted in implementing the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979; was subsequently involved in guerrilla warfare operations against the very Iranian Mullahs they helped to bring to power; fought on the side of Saddam Hussein for 8 years in the Iran-Iraq war between 1980-1988; and now, according to Barry O’Connell and Gareth Porter, is working with Jewish neo-conservatives and Israeli intelligence in planting false “intelligence” on Iran’s nuclear program with the American National Security State and Western news media, itching for a confrontation between Tehran and Tel Aviv—even as it now possesses an adversarial role with the very regime in Baghdad installed by Mr. Bush’s War. Confused? . . . Apparently, the 3 judge panel on the U. S. Court of Appeals in Washington also failed to consult the web sites of the Habilian Association , the Nejat Society , and Survivors’ Report.org. Turn off the Israeli propaganda beamed on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News, and see the reports on these web sites. One will learn that the MEK/MKO/PMOI has killed approximately 16,000 in Iran after the Islamic Revolution of 1979, along with many other things concealed from the American public by a Zionist-controlled media and national security establishment. For this trio of black-robed boobs on the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Nation’s Capital (along with the rest of us), two recent developments bear closer watching in the days ahead. The first is Chris Floyd’s post on the Jundallah-sponsored suicide bombing in Zahedan, Iran this past week, which is especially suggestive. Not one American in 100 could tell you that Jundallah has a reported working relationship with both United States and Israeli intelligence. What are the implications of this link, and Jundallah’s criminal activities in Iran? Are the CIA and Mossad brokering murder and terror in that country? Floyd, excellent as his writing and research are, missed one essential fact in this week’s analysis, a fact brought to international attention by Dr. Paul Sheldon Foote of Cal State Fullerton in a radio conversation with yours truly. Foote, a Ron Paul Republican, American Army veteran in Vietnam, and past denizen of the American Embassy in Tehran in olden days, tells us in that conversation that Jundallah has a working relationship with the MEK/MKO/PMOI in criminal acts of terror taking place in Iran with the full connivance of the United States government and Israel. What in the world is going on here? Are we forced to conclude that terror and murder are only defined as such when perpetrated by adversaries of the American and Israeli governments, but rationalized as “freedom fighting” when accomplished by our “allies?” Do once-governing concepts of international law and civilized conduct not apply to the Central Intelligence Agency and Mossad? And is there a relationship between the American government’s ongoing support for Israel’s lawless, immoral conduct in Iran, Gaza, and Palestine, and the disappearance of a Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branch committed to the Bill of Rights and the Constitution at home? Thomas Jefferson and James Madison understood that an American government mired in constant foreign interventionism and militarism abroad, was a threat to the liberties and happiness of its own citizens. What would they have said about the United States government’s service to the Israeli Lobby, and the linkage to the criminals in organizations like the MEK/MKO/PMOI/NCRI? Development number two involves a divorce case currently being litigated in Washington, D. C., involving Georgetown University professor Raymond Tanter and his estranged wife, Constance. Tanter’s profile at Right Web makes for interesting reading. The biography of the professor states that: Raymond Tanter is an adjunct scholar at the “pro-Israel” Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a visiting professor at Georgetown University, and founder of the Iran Policy Committee (IPC), which was established in January 2005 to promote regime-change strategies in Iran. Tanter’s experience also includes serving on the National Security Council during the first Ronald Reagan administration and as a Pentagon arms control advisor. Tanter has been a key advocate for U.S. support of the People’s Mujahedin Organization (MEK), which has been on the State Department’s list of international terrorist organizations since 1997, after it assassinated six U.S. citizens involved in selling weapons to the Shah. Shortly after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Tanter vociferously pushed this argument, claiming that supporting the MEK could replace a U.S. invasion of Iran. He said, “I think that regime change ought to be the policy of the Bush administration. But regime change doesn’t mean that you need the 4th Infantry Division to come in from the north and meet up in the south with the 3rd Infantry Division coming in from the south and the Marines coming in from the West. That is, Iran is not Iraq.” Instead, said Tanter, the United States could support the Iraq-based MEK so that it could launch a cross-border insurgency against Iranian targets. Tanter revived these arguments in a February 2010 IPC press release, claiming the “regime crackdown after the June elections has fomented a new cohesion among dissidents,” including the MEK and the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which is also considered a terrorist group. Said Tanter, “Designation of the NCRI and MEK as foreign terrorist organizations acts an obstacle to building a coalition of dissidents. The irony, however, is that members of the MEK are paying a disproportionate price by being singled out for hangings among the thousands of individuals arrested since June.” Both NCRI and the MEK also figured prominently during a 2005 IPC National Press Club briefing. Tanter said: “One military option is the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, which may have the capability to destroy hardened deeply-buried targets. That is, bunker-busting bombs could destroy tunnels and other underground facilities. But the Pentagon’s 2001 Nuclear Posture Review states that over 70 countries employ underground facilities for military purposes, while the United States lacks sufficient means to destroy these facilities. In addition, the Non-Proliferation Treaty bans use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states, such as Iran. Such a prohibition might not apply as much to Israel. In this respect, the United States has sold Israel bunker-busting bombs, which keeps the military option on the table. . . . “Empowerment requires working with Iranian opposition groups in general and with the main opposition in particular. The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) and the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) are not only the best source for intelligence on Iran’s potential violations of the nonproliferation regime. The NCRI and MEK are also a possible ally of the West in bringing about regime change in Tehran. . . . “The international community should realize that there is only one group to which the regime pays attention and fears: the Mujahedeen-e Khalq and the political coalition of which the MEK is a part, the National Council of Resistance of Iran. By delisting the NCRI and MEK from the Foreign Terrorist Organizations listing maintained by the Department of State, it would allow regime change to be on the table in Tehran. With regime change in the open, Tehran would have to face a choice about whether to slow down in its drive to acquire nuclear weapons or not. . . .” Into this labyrinth maze of American think-tanks, neo-conservatives, the Israeli lobby, an impending Third World War, and the MEK/MKO/PMOI/NCRI, steps one Mrs. Constance Tanter. Mrs. Tanter publicly alleges in Washington, D. C.-based Divorce Court proceedings, and to many journalistic contacts, that Raymond Tanter utilized agents of the MEK/MKO/PMOI to terrorize her into signing a capitulationist divorce settlement in Paris, France, home to MEK/MKO/PMOI leaders-in-exile Masoud and Miryam Rajavi. She also alleges that Tanter directly, or indirectly, threatened her with “elimination.” These allegations will presumably be examined by the Court. While ushering at Washington’s National Cathedral recently, Mrs. Tanner claims that amidst the throngs of hundreds there, she was approached by a Middle Eastern man, who handed her a napkin. Her story to Paul Sheldon Foote, a bishop at the Cathedral, and yours truly, is that the napkin contained a simple message: Drop it, or die. Are the allegations in this divorce case anger-driven fiction straight out of a Hollywood script for an Edward Woodward episode of The Equalizer? Or are they a terrifying microcosm of a cosmic tragedy playing itself out in a clandestine battle of governments, intelligence agencies, hoodlums, and terrorists? One thing is not in doubt. Netanyahu’s globally public utterances, along with those of the Israeli lobby and American neo-conservative stooges like John McCain and Joseph Lieberman, underscore that war with Iran and the mass murder of Iranians, is the desired outcome for these constituencies, no matter how many thousands of innocents are killed or how far afield of true American national security interests this Zionist-driven madness really is. You heard it all first from Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. And as for Constance Tanter, she plans on telling her story to Mark Glenn and Mark Dankof in a future broadcast of The Ugly Truth. Stay tuned.
-------- Also Documentary lashes western supporters of Mojahedin Khalq (MKO, MEK, NCRI, Rajavi cult) terrorist group used against Iranians and Iraqis . ... 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 ... Press TV, Iran Today documentary program, June 30, 2010 Link to the video ------------ Also 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 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: 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 ...
Voltairenet, June 28, 2010 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: 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: 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 ... Link to the document (pdf file) ------- 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)
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8443
http://mark1marti2.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/
bomb-blasts-in-iran-and-the-raymondconstance-tanter-
dc-divorce-case-is-the-mekmkopmoincri-a-terrorist-outfit/
Mark Dankof: The MEK/MKO/PMOI terror organization.
Does it have the fingerprints of the CIA, Mossad, and MI6?
Dr. Raymond Tanter: The Intersection of Georgetown University,
the MEK/MKO/PMOI/NCRI, and the Israeli-influenced WINEP
Alban Towers in Washington: DC Headquarters of The Iran Policy Committee
Constance Tanter: Targeted by Raymond Tanter and
the MEK/MKO/PMOI in divorce settlement proceedings?
(Alejo Vidal-Quadras , Mojahedin Khalq logo, Struan stevenson )
(Maryam Rajavi in terrorist cult's HQ in Paris)
(massacre of Kurdish people)
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8346
http://www.presstv.ir/programs/detail.aspx?sectionid=3510506&id=132768#132768
Link to the video
same video on Blip.tv:
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8339
(Maryam Rajavi directly ordered the massacre of Kurdish people)
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/06/israel%E2%80%99s-iranian-opposition.html
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=8321
(Maryam Rajavi in terrorist cult's HQ in Paris)
http://www.voltairenet.org/article166102.html
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/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://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=6789
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871/
(Camp Ashraf)
(Massoud and Maryam Rajavi the cult leaders)
http://iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=6775
http://www.rand.org/news/press/2009/08/04/?ref=homepage&key=t_iraqi_mek_flags
(Massoud Rajavi and Saddam Hussein)
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2009/RAND_MG871.pdf