(Click on the image for the PDF version of the letter)
Washington Times: In a Letter to Secretary Clinton,100 Iranian-American Scholars & Experts Call for Delisting of MEK
Washington Times: 100 Iranian-American Scholars & Experts Call for Delisting of MEK
September 15, 2011 by
The US State Department Positioned on the Wrong Side of History
September 15, 2011 by
THE WOMEN’S INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Secretary Hillary Clinton! Who’s to be held accountable for the death of my brother who was killed by Iraqi forces when they raided Ashraf in July 2009?
Are you aware that we, in Camp Ashraf, are paying the price for the “goodwill gesture” the State Department made to the mullahs in labeling the MeK? We are paying the price with our bodies and souls, with the pierced hearts and blood soaked bodies of our beloved!
Hanif Immami and Asefeh Immami in Camp Ashraf
Can you even begin to imagine how my heart was scarred when I stood before the dead body of my beloved brother and 46 other friends in Camp Ashraf? They had all trusted the U.S. government and had relinquished their weapons, as part of an effort to ‘secure’ Iraq, and were hence rendered defenseless before the Iranian regime and its proxies in Iraq – hoping that in return the U.S. would remain committed to protecting them. Indeed my heart has been scarred; a deep scar, as deep and as painful as the lessons learned in history, to be sadly enough, repeated again when justice is compromised time and again for meager political gains. As the beacon of hope for a nation yearning for freedom, what is the crime of the Iranian people’s resistance and residents of Ashraf? Is it not the simple fact that they have persisted in their struggle for freedom and for having their sacrificed everything?
Ever since the responsibility for our security was handed over by the U.S. government in 2009, we, the 3,400 Iranian dissidents residing in Camp Ashraf, Iraq, including 1000 women, have consistently been subjected to acts of aggression, non-stop psychological torture, a comprehensive and inhumane siege, violence and murder at the hand of the Iraqi government. Iraqi forces have injured more than a third of the residents. Injuries that have yet to heal in light of hindrances by the Iraqi Committee for Suppression of Ashraf in denying the residents access to proper medical treatment. I, myself, was injured twice during the course of these hostilities. During this period, since 2009, and in the course of two deadly attacks perpetrated by Nouri Al Maliki, the Iraqi PM at the behest of the Iranian regime, we have lost 47 of our dearest friends. The henchmen justify their crimes against residents of Ashraf by saying, “you are on the U.S. terror list!”
It goes without saying that this designation is a betrayal of the Iranian people and their just resistance movement which is striving for freedom and democracy and only serves the Iranian regime – the leading state sponsor of terrorism – by conceding to the wishes of the mullahs and it lacks any legal merit.
Almost a year has passed since a Washington district court of appeals ordered the State Department to reevaluate its decision to list the MeK. But unfortunately, and since there are elements within the State Department who are have positioned themselves on the wrong side of history, nothing has changed in the futile policy of appeasing the mullahs. In the meantime, the Iranian people and their resistance continue to pay the price with their blood, each and every day. The bitter fruit of maintaining the MeK on the list is consolidation of the mullah’s grip on power; a gift to the Iranian regime, Iraq, and anyone else who hopes that one day the residents of Ashraf are annihilated and, each day, they are conspiring to realize this dream.
While expressing my deepest discontent at this unjust designation, I ask Secretary Clinton to immediately remove the MeK from the list. The list is the proper place for the terrorist regime ruling Iran not the Iranian resistance. Delisting the MeK, also, guarantees the security and safety of residents of Camp Ashraf and sends a message of solidarity to the Iranian people: the U.S. State Department, as in nations affected by the “Arab Spring”, supports them in their struggle for democracy and freedom.
Delisting the MeK has been delayed long enough and keeping them on the list is no longer acceptable. Each second and each day that passes, and they remain on the list, we suffer another cherished human life.
Having signed an agreement with each and every resident of Ashraf, including my brother Hanif, the United States is specifically responsible for protecting their lives; a responsibility it has, unfortunately, turned its back on when it was needed the most – when the residents were attacked and under a barrage of gun fire and explosion of grenades and when they were rammed by humvees and armored personnel carriers – instead of protecting them, America stood idly by and looked on as the blood of innocent people was spilled in Camp Ashraf. The U.S. government will be held accountable for any foreseeable atrocity that occurs in Ashraf.
http://thewip.net/talk/2011/09/the_us_state_department_positi.html
An Interview With Camp Ashraf Representative Shahriar Kia
September 13, 2011 by
TOP SECRET WRITERS
Back in May of this year, I wrote an article about a massacre that took place at Camp Ashraf in Iraq.
Camp Ashraf is the home of Iran dissidents that are currently unarmed and relatively harmless, however they have a long history of coordinating attacks against the Iran regime. Some people would call those attacks part of a long-term revolution against a terrible dictatorship, while others would call the efforts of the MEK a form of terrorism.
There are even questions about the validity of historical accounts involving the involvement of the MEK in the death of soldiers and defense contractors in the 1970s, and the takeover of the U.S. embassy in 1979, where 52 Americans were held hostage for over a year.
Shahriar Kia has been one steadfast supporter of Camp Ashraf, wants the camp to remain where it is, and refutes all efforts from foreign diplomats that want to aid residents of the camp by moving them out of the camp and disbanding the group.
I decided to interview Shahriar directly and ask hard questions about the controversial group, and to dig further into its real history.
An Interview with Shahriar Kia
TSW (TopSecretWriters): We’ll get to the current status of Camp Ashraf in a moment, but first let’s explore the history of the MEK, because that is what so many Americans have a problem with, and it is what makes it difficult to support the people of Camp Ashraf.
In the 1970s, the MEK did not like U.S. support for the pro-Western shah, so U.S. soldiers and defense contractors were killed. This is documented. Could you explain why American citizens should overlook that history and support the MEK being taken off the terrorist list today? Could you also comment on whether it’s true that the MEK supported the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy where 52 Americans were held hostage for well over a year?
And finally, with the actions of your group against the Kurds and Shiites during the 1970s, it seems understandable that the MEK would not be welcome in Iraq because there is so much animosity from those groups.
How do you envision MEK members surviving if they remain in Iraq, in the face of so much hatred for those past deeds?
SK (Shahriar Kia): Before all, let me just clarify the known fact that allegations being circulated by supporters of the policy to appease the mullahs in the U.S. and Europe against the MEK – the main democratic opposition group resisting the mullahs – is, plain and simple, part of a plan organized by the Iranian Ministry of intelligence (MOIS). The MOIS appropriates great sums of money to run a campaign of disinformation with the aim of discrediting its opposition.
These measures are to deceive western governments, supply its international lobbies with added fuel and extend its life. Allegations about the killing of American officers in the 70’s, backing the invasion of the American embassy in Tehran and taking part in the suppression of Kurds and Shiites in Iraq are only partsof this campaign and, simply put, are nothing but bogus lies. (See Enclosure # 21)
In 1999, Reuters reported that Mr . Mrtin Indyk , then-Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs , Publicly acknowledged that “the Iranian government reminded us” to put the Iranian Resistance on the FTO list.
In August 2002, Mr.Indyk told Newsweek that “the Mojahedin’s designation was a part of Clinton’s policy of rapprochement with Tehran.”
You referred to the U.S. support for the Shah.
It’s totally true that the Iranian people were discontented with the U.S. for its support of the Shah’s dictatorship, loathed by the Iranian people, and this is exactly what caused the Iranian people to have some sort of mistrust when it came to U.S. policy.
This feeling is not limited to the people of Iran; today many officials in the U.S. admit that America’s great mistake in backing the shah is what led to the current state of affairs in Iran. There is no doubt that three decades of mullah’s rule is a direct result and offspring of the shah’s dictatorship.
The American and British led coup against Dr. Mossadeq, marginalized the middle class and the reformists and drove them out of the political landscape, and paved the way for Islamic fundamentalism to emerge as an alternative.
Khomeini’s rise to power in Iran was the building block and the beginning for the spread of fundamentalism and terrorism throughout the Middle East.
The MEK was, from the outset, the main opposing force against the religious dictatorship in Iran and throughout the past three decades has paid a heavy price for its resistance against the religious fascism ruling Iran.
The fact that MEK opposed America’s support of the shah, however, doesn’t in any way link the killing of American officers to the MEK.
The struggle for freedom and democracy against the most ruthless and brutal dictatorship of recent history, which in the name of Islam knows no boundaries in perpetrating any and all atrocities against its opponents, has taken a heavy toll on the MEK and its members.
Execution of pregnant women, execution of youth as young as 13 and 14 years, sanctioned rapes of young girls before their execution, massacre of 30 thousand supporters and members of the MEK imprisoned within a few months in 1988 are all only a portion of the mullahs’ atrocities in Iran.
The Iranian regime’s current effort to massacre the residents of camp Ashraf is, in effect, an effort to complete an unfinished genocide by mullahs started years ago against members of MEK.
These allegations, which are being disseminated by the mullahs against the MEK, are nothing new. However, since the mullahs did not succeed in eliminating the MEK and the Iranian resistance was not curtailed, the mullahs have shifted gears and begun a smear campaign with the aim of demonizing the MEK.
Their main objectives are to discredit their main opposition group, to create confusion and thus justify the execution of MEK members in Iran (MEK sympathizers who were recently executed in Iran like Ali Sare,I, Jaffar Kazemi and …) and massacre of camp Ashraf residents.
What Sort of Iran Government Does MEK Desire?
TSW: Obviously the MEK and America share common interests in removing the current Iranian regime from power, however it appears that our motives are polar opposites. It is our impression that while Americans would like to see the regime replaced with Democracy and Freedom, your group would prefer Shiism and Marxism – is this true?
Also, from what I understand, the MEK is still an anti-Iran group that seeks the overthrow of the Iran regime. Can you describe the ideal scenario that the MEK members would like to see happen in Iran? What sort of perfect government and society do you envision?
SK: The MEK aspires for democracy, freedom and the establishment of a secular government in Iran. Our foreign policy will be based on peaceful coexistence, peace, regional and international collaboration and adherence to the UN charter. We shall have relations with all nations.
The only solution to putting an end to the tragedy of the Iranian regime and preventing a human catastrophe is bringing about a regime change in Iran. This is our mutual interest. This change will not be realized neither by foreign military intervention nor by appeasing the mullahs.
As stated by Mrs. Rajavi on numerous occasions, there exists a third option of regime change by Iranian people and their Resistance. This could be reached by putting an end to the appeasement policy and removing the MEK from the FTO list.
This will set free the potential of the Iranian people and their resistance in bringing about change in Iran. One of the main obstacles in the way of change in Iran, which has harnessed the potential for change in the Iranian people, is the unjust listing of the MEK.
The Iranian people and their resistance are, undoubtedly, in the same front with the civilized and democratic society in confronting Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism, although we may have our points of disagreement. Any delay by the U.S. and the Europeans in standing by the side of the people will only have detrimental consequences for world peace.
What the MEK and residents of Ashraf desire – for the future of Iran – is democracy, freedom and the establishment of a secular government based on the principle of separation of church and state.
This charter was published by the Washington Times on March 31, 2007 and I’ve included a (Enclosure # 13).
UMaryam Rajavi’s Ten Point Platform for Future Iran
1. From our point of view, the ballot box is the only criterion for legitimacy. Accordingly, we seek a republic based on universal suffrage.
2. We want a pluralist system, freedom of parties and assembly. In Iran of tomorrow, we will respect all individual freedoms. Expression of opinion, speech and the media are completely free and any censorship or inquisition is banned.
3. In the free Iran of tomorrow, we support and are committed to the abolition of death penalty.
4. The Iranian Resistance is committed the separation of the church and the State. Any form of discrimination against the followers of all religions and denominations will be prohibited.
5. We believe in complete gender equality in political, social and economic arenas. We also committed to equal participation of women in political leadership. Any form of discrimination against women will be abolished. They will enjoy the right to freely choose their clothing.
6. We want to set up a modern legal system based on the principles of presumption of innocence, the right to defense, and the right to be tried in a public court. We also seek the total independence of judges. Cruel and degrading punishments will have no place in the future Iran.
7. We are committed to the Universal Declaration of Humans Rights, and international covenants and conventions, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention Against Torture, and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of discrimination Against Women.
8. We recognize private property, private investment and the market economy.
9. Our foreign policy will be based on peaceful coexistence, international and regional peace and cooperation, as well as respect for the United Nations Charter. We will establish relations will all countries.
10. We want the free Iran of tomorrow to be devoid of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction.
The Impending Massacre at Camp Ashraf
TSW: Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has stated that the government will shut down Camp Ashraf by the end of the year. The population does not want the MEK in Iraq because of past deeds. The U.S. troops, which provided protection during the American presence there, is coming to an end. Can you truly envision any scenario other than leaving Iraq and settling somewhere that is safer for Camp Ashraf residents?
Also, how high is the threat against Camp Ashraf and how often do attacks occur? Are there currently any defenses or is the camp solely dependent upon the diminishing U.S. presence?
SK: Residents of Ashraf are on the verge of a bloody massacre at the hands of the Iranian regime and the Maliki government.
The Maliki administration has announced that it is going to close camp Ashraf by the end of 2011. At a time when a guaranteed alternative has not been proposed to the camp residents, this ultimatum only lays the ground work for Maliki to perpetrate another massacre in Ashraf which is bound to be greater in scale and bloodier than the previous.
From another standpoint, one should note that Nori Maliki owes his second term as Prime Minister to the Iranian regime. Were it not for Iran, al-Iraqiya was the victorious block and Dr. Alavi was the rightful Prime Minister.
In return for the Iranian regime’s support and the support of Iraqi parties affiliated with Tehran of Nori al-Maliki, it is required that camp Ashraf be shutdown in return and its residents extradited to Iran or massacred and the Iranian opposition must be dismantled.
This is what Tehran has officially demanded from Maliki.
There is no doubt in my mind that the mullahs in Tehran and Maliki have their minds set on carrying out another massacre in camp Ashraf. Presently, Iraqi armed forces are stationed in Ashraf with their armored personnel carriers and their guns directed towards the residents.
The inhumane siege against Ashraf continues. The 300 loudspeakers – placed in and around the camp by agents of the Iranian intelligence agency – are blaring profanity and threatening the residents around the clock; exposing the residents to psychological torture prevalent in Nazi concentrations camps.
Camp Ashraf is inhabited by 1000 Muslim women who are the prime target of Maliki’s suppressive forces and the terrorists in Iranian regime’s Qods force.
The residents are completely defenseless and unarmed in the face of a possible attack by the Iraqi forces and have no means of defending themselves.
It is unfortunate that despite the fact that each and every resident of Ashraf has signed an agreement with the U.S. in return for voluntarily handing over their arms, and despite being recognized by the U.S. as protected persons under the 4th Geneva Convention and despite U.S. assurances that pending final disposition of their case it is responsible for their protections; but time and again, when Iraqi security forces have launched attacks against the residents, the U.S. has turned a blind eye and has disregarded its responsibilities.
The U.S. government’s failure to live up to its promises and agreements with the residents of Ashraf has brought about the disapproval of American congressmen, jurists and members of parliament the world over. (Documents of hearings at the U.S. senate and congress are available per your request).
This is a practical solution for Ashraf residents:
On May 2011 a practical solution was provided by European Parliament’s delegation to settle Ashraf residents in third countries. That was a comprehensive plan but, unfortunately, the US embassy in Iraq, in bringing forward the illegal, dangerous and hopeless solution to relocate the residents inside Iraq, acted practically as an impediment to the European solution.
It is worthy to mention that the the any relocation of the residents inside Iraq is the same that Nouri-al- Maliki was seeking to carry out since two years ago. Such proposal by US Embassy in Iraq would in fact lead the 3400 inhabitants of camp Ashraf to Maliki’s slaughter house, while the US government and its embassy’s support for this solution could significantly act in favor of it.
At the hearing session dated 27 July, Congressman Ted Poe declared “Relocation inside Iraq is the joint desire of Iranian and Iraqi regimes.”
On the contrary, there is an international consensus that compulsory dislocation inside Iraq would only the way for another massacre of the Ashraf residents and this is a reality which has been proved so far.
Besides the Iraqi and Europeans’ opposition to relocation inside Iraq, on July 21stthe Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed an amendment to the funding bill, which obliges the US government to prevent compulsory relocation of the Ashraf residents inside Iraq’.
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, Member of the U.S. House of representatives, announced in the same hearing session to the officials of the state department that “The U.S. State Department will be responsible for any further bloodshed in Ashraf. You, the State Department, will be held accountable for the loss of lives of unarmed civilians.”
In order to put the solution in practice:
1. A UN monitoring team should be stationed there to monitor the events and to see what is taking place there.
2. The refugee status of camp Ashraf residents should be reaffirmed by making a group determination with regard to themby the UNCHR,eventhough a temporary status,to grant them the right of international protection.
3. An immediate investigation regarding the April 8th massacre should be launched under auspices of the United Nations.
4. The iraqi government must be pushed to follow the call of United Nations Secretary General to refrain any use of violation and to end the inhuman siege and psycological torture; and to withdraw armed troops inside the camp, where there are close to 1000 muslim women.
5. United States and the European Union should support theEuropean Parliament’s solution to transfer the residents to third contries as well as providing their protection until the end of this project.
Final Words
Shahriar and supporters of Camp Ashraf provide more than enough evidence showing that the people of Camp Ashraf are currently nowhere near worthy of being included on any terror list. They turned in their arms – their only source of protection against outsiders – to the U.S. in exchange for protection.
It seems clear that the U.S. is letting them down. Even worse, as the end of the year approaches, the senseless slaughter of innocent residents at Camp Ashraf appears inevitable.
Ryan Dube is editor-in-chief of TSW and an electrical engineer in the aerospace industry. He spends his time investigating declassified government documents, legends and conspiracy theories. Ryan has 232 post(s) at Top Secret Writers
http://www.topsecretwriters.com/2011/09/interview-camp-ashraf/
Take Iran opponent MEK off terror list
September 12, 2011 by
CNN Opinion
Editor’s note: Louis Freeh served as director of the FBI from 1993-2001; Lord Corbett of Castle Vale heads the British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom; and Rt. Hon. Lord Waddington QC is a former British home secretary and leader of the House of Lords. Freeh has received payment for travel expenses and speaking at conferences organized by groups that want People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran removed from the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations.
(CNN) — Congressional leaders and former top U.S. officials are pressing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to remove Iran’s main opposition group, the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran, from the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations. So what should Clinton do?
Let’s consider the background. The People’s Mujahedeen, also known as the MEK, is the Iranian mullahs’ worst nightmare. Since 1981 it has waged a costly and deadly battle to unseat the ayatollahs’ regime, but it is a battle for the soul of Iran of which it can be immensely proud.
In 1997, the Clinton administration added the MEK to the State Department’s blacklist in what a senior administration official, according to the Los Angeles Times, described as a good will gesture to Iran — thought at the time to be moving toward a more moderate form of government. The Bush administration maintained the ban, which many saw as an effort to persuade the Iranians to abandon their nuclear weapons program. But Iran is no closer to moderation and its nuclear ambitions get closer and closer to fulfillment.
Former U.S. officials calling for the MEK to be de-listed include former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, three former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs, two former directors of the CIA, former commander of NATO Wesley K. Clark, two former U.S. ambassadors to the U.N., former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, a former White House chief of staff, a former commander of the Marine Corps, former U.S. National Security Adviser Fran Townsend, now a CNN contributor; and even President Obama’s recently retired National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones. Their call is backed by 93 members of Congress, who have signed a bipartisan resolution urging the president to revoke the designation, and by prominent Democratic and Republican leaders such as Howard Dean and Rudy Giuliani.
In deciding whether to delist the MEK, Clinton should consider the following:
First, the decision to classify an organization as a terrorist group must be based on fact. Up until now, 10 courts in Britain, France, the European Union and the United States have looked at the evidence and ruled that the group is not involved in terrorism. Britain’s Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission and later the Court of Appeal looked at the U.S. State Department’s reasons for listing the group as a terror organization in great detail and rejected them as irrelevant or found that the allegations’ sources and accuracy could not be established. The courts confirmed that the MEK halted armed activities against Iran in 2001 and voluntarily disarmed in 2003.
Second, the ban has put the lives of 3,400 MEK members at Camp Ashraf, Iraq, at great risk. In April, Iraq’s Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a close ally of Iran, ordered an armed raid on the camp that left 36 residents dead and 350 injured. But when a bipartisan congressional delegation questioned al-Maliki in Baghdad about the incident, he said the United States had no right to complain about such violence when it was directed at a group the State Department itself called terrorist. Lifting the ban would remove any pretext for another military assault against the unarmed and defenseless MEK members at Camp Ashraf.
Finally, there is the broader issue of relations with Iran. Proponents of engagement with Iran claim that lifting the ban on the MEK would all but destroy any chance of future dialogue with Tehran. But what would be the point of such dialogue? Does anyone seriously believe the mullahs could be persuaded to throw away their attempt to obtain a nuclear weapon when the achievement of their ambitions is so close? And what would be the time frame for the talks, when Iran is believed to be less than one year from reaching nuclear breakout capability?
Delisting the MEK would send a strong signal to the millions in Iran who seek democratic change that the United States is on their side and has shunned the regime. It will tell the mullahs that the United States seriously intends to stop their outlawed activities and support democratic change in Iran just when Tehran is trying to use its influence to keep its anti-democratic and anti-Western partners in power in Syria and Iraq.
Delisting the MEK would lift the restrictions on the region’s largest Muslim group with a secular agenda and a democratic platform, whose moderate interpretation of Islam strongly threatens the mullahs’ fundamentalism.
The State Department, which has been unable to offer the courts any sound legal arguments for maintaining the ban on the MEK, now has a legal, moral and political duty to delist the MEK so it is not hampered in its work as the representative of those yearning for democratic change in Iran.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writers.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/09/12/freeh.corbett.waddington.mek/
President Obama; MEK Blacklisting Has Justified Murder Of My Daughter
September 11, 2011 by
OfficialWire.com
It is exactly 5 months since my daughter Saba was murdered, along with 35 others in a massacre lead by Al-Maliki forces at the behest of Tehran.
Global protest, sit-ins and campaigns are still ongoing.
The bloodbath in the Camp along with tens of clandestine arrests and kidnappings of MEK families in Iran is on also ongoing, justified by the US State Department’s blacklisting of MEK.
Furthermore, in July 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit ordered that the State Department re-examine the decision to keep the PMOI in the FTO list. Thirteen months on, the Department’s unusual reluctance in complying with the court order is unjustified and a contravention of the Rule of law.
In early 2004 a 16-month investigation period at camp Ashraf,60 miles north of Baghdad and home to some 3400 members of the MEK, was performed by nine US agencies including the FBI, the State Department, the Department of Justice, the Immigration Office, the DIA.
The objective was to screen every single resident of the camp. According to the New York Times on July 27, 2004, the US government announced: “U.S. Sees No Basis to Prosecute Iranian Opposition ‘Terror’ Group Being Held in Iraq”.
Following the D.C circuit court of appeals on July 16th 2010 ruled that the case be reviewed, a strong voice in the US congress has urged Secretary Clinton to put an end to the flawed policy of appeasing the mullahs in Tehran and the blacklisting of the MEK.
Since 2008 twenty courts in Europe issued definitive ruling for delisting MEK due to lack of evidence, which was later carried out. France’s judiciary in 2011 announced there is no evidence of terrorism against the MEK.
Yet, while the US State Department is still tendentious towards appeasing the mullahs, the “vociferous mediatic rage” by Iranian regime’s supporters and pundits in capitol hill is at its highest to persuade the Whitehouse to keep the MEK on the terrorist list.
The past 4 week engineered campaign with its thread back in Tehran has proved to any neutral bystander, that such efforts are part of a campaign to prevent regime change in Iran.
Meanwhile concerns by lawmakers and analysts worldwide is understating Whitehouse independent decision making regarding the delisting of MEK.
Both failed policy to push for dialogue or engage in change of attitude with a dead regime and using the terror tag on MEK as bate for the already dead and illegitimate clerics ruling Iran is a laid out chess game planned by Tehran .
Iranian officials’ interpretation of the policy to “engage” with the vicious tyrants in Iran has overtly been mocked as a sign of weakness on behalf of the Whitehouse.
Nevertheless my daughter, Saba, has paid the price for such misguided policy with her life. MEK is the only movement, whose rights according to international laws and principles of human rights have been deliberately overlooked under the pretext of “National Security” and the “US list of foreign terrorist Organizations.”
When it comes to understanding “realpolitik” the recent winds of change; ousting dictators one after the other will definitely reach the mullahs in Tehran.
The bitter truth for clerical regime pundits is that it is finally the opposition which will proceed to bring about a change in the turbulent country.
Despite the push to keep the Iranian pro- democracy opposition (MEK/PMOI) in the US black list, and disregard of millions spent in a ferocious – but repetitious smear campaign against MEK , the latest show of legitimacy by the organization in its election of a new Secretary General as well as several last gatherings has proved efforts futile.
The fruit of the argument could be read between the lines of a speech given by Mr. Jean Ziegler, Vice-President of the Advisory Committee of the UN Human Rights Council in a meeting in July this year: “Camp Ashraf is a source of inspiration and hope for the Iranian people in achieving democracy. If camp Ashraf doesn’t survive, one must say that for the Arab revolutions, for Arab revolutionaries who are looking for a reference, who are looking for an example, this would be a tragedy.”
He added that: “It is clear that from Egypt to the Nafous Mountains in eastern Libya and to Tunisia, all these youth are looking for a reference and an example. Ashraf is the illustration of what they are in search of.”
Any delays to end the policy of appeasement would come at the price of more lives being lost in camp Ashraf. The MEK must be delisted; the survival of human rights and democratic values is a necessity of the 21th century against dictators. The US must change its policy towards the Iranian regime and side with the Iranian people and its resistance.
Saba Haftbaradaran , (born 21 February 1982 , was former student of Law graduate , who was killed in an attack on the refugee Camp Ashraf, April 8, 2011. Reza Haftbaradaran, one of the Ashraf residents and father of Saba is a politcal activist.
http://news.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=204689
Iranian opposition group not involved in terrorism
September 10, 2011 by
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
In recent months, the Iranian government in Tehran has waged an unprecedented misinformation campaign against its main organized opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq, or MEK, in order to influence the pending decision by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding the status of the group.
The U.S. Court of Appeals-D.C. Circuit struck down the decision in January 2009 by the secretary to maintain the MEK on the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) as flawed and in violation of the due process rights of the group and ordered a new review. After 14 months, there has been no decision.
The court has made it very clear that unless there is substantial support in the administrative record to show that the group has engaged in the past two years in terrorism or terrorist activity or has the capability and intent to engage in such activity that threatens the national security of the United States, the secretary must vacate the designation.
The MEK ceased its operations targeting Iranian military figures in 2001, renounced violence and terrorism, and turned over all the weapons it had for its protection in 2003 to the U.S. military. In return, it was promised the protection of its 3,400 members at Camp Ashraf under the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Since the U.S. handed over that protection to the Iraqi government in 2009, Iraqi forces have attacked the unarmed members of the camp, killing 47 and wounding 1,047 in what U.S. Sen. John Kerry described as a “massacre.”
President George W. Bush and other senior administration officials confirmed that the MEK revealed the existence of Tehran’s nuclear program, which triggered, for the first time, the inspection of Iranian nuclear sites by the International Atomic Energy Organization. Senior U.S. military commanders have confirmed that MEK’s intelligence has exposed Iran’s deadly meddling in Iraq.
Seven European courts have voted unanimously that the MEK is not a terrorist organization; the group was delisted in 2008 and 2009 in the United Kingdom and the European Union.
In the United States, House Resolution 60, introduced by Congressman Ted Poe, R-Humble, is co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of 93 members of the House, including in the Texas delegation Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee, Al Green and Gene Green and Republicans Louie Gohmert, Ralph Hall, Kenny Marchant and Pete Olson. It urges the secretary of state to delist the MEK.
When the MEK was first designated in 1997, a House majority and 32 senators, including Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, protested the action, describing the MEK as a “legitimate resistance movement.”
While the Arab Spring has brought down dictators, the prospect of an empowered opposition in Iran with the imminent delisting of the MEK is a nightmare scenario for the ruling ayatollahs loathed by a vast majority of the Iranians. This explains why Iran has been waging a frenzied campaign to maintain the MEK on the terrorist list.
Absent evidence of terrorist activities, Tehran’s functionaries have been targeting journalists in Washington and elsewhere, posing as legitimate opposition and attacking the MEK with unfounded accusations, such as having “cult-like” behavior. If that were to be the standard, the cult of Mac (Apple) would have been designated as an FTO.
An independent study by a former assistant secretary of state, Ambassador Lincoln Bloomfield, has unveiled an extensive operation by Iran’s intelligence service to disseminate misinformation. John Sano, the CIA’s former deputy for clandestine operations, told a National Press Club audience on Aug. 18 that through a sophisticated campaign, Iran’s Intelligence Ministry has shaped U.S. public opinion about the MEK.
Tehran has widely propagated that MEK killed the Iraqi Kurds in 1991. However, the current foreign minister of Iraq told a European Court in 1999 that the MEK was in no way involved in suppression of the Kurds.
Independent studies have shown that the MEK had no links to the assassination of six Americans in Iran nearly 40 years ago and that a self-styled Marxist splinter group, which also murdered MEK members, was responsible.
Tehran’s lobby suggests that the MEK has funded the activities of Iranian-American communities; this completely disregards the extensive contribution of the Iranian-Americans to this nation, as many of them are prominent business owners, executives, academics, professionals, engineers and artists.
Now is the time for the Unites States to stand with the Iranian people and with the values upon which this country was founded.
To this end, delisting the MEK is the first order of business.
Ali Soudjani is president of Apple Finance Company and president of the Iranian American Society of Texas.
Ignore Iranian regime’s lies on opposition group
September 8, 2011 by
THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
While Secretary of State Hillary Clinton edges closer to deciding to remove the Iranian opposition group, the Mujahedeen e Khalq (MEK), from a U.S. list of banned organizations, the international media has been awash with Iranian regime propaganda attempting to demonize the group.
In an attempt to counteract this tendentious public relations campaign, the group’s supporters, including senior figures in U.S., British, and European political circles, have waged their own media campaign to counter the Iranian propaganda.
Indeed, a recent independent assessment by a former senior State Department official debunked virtually all of the stale allegations that have been regurgitated by Tehran’s lobby inside the Beltway in recent weeks.
In the midst of this punch and counterpunch media campaign, it is crucial that Clinton’s decision be based upon genuine evidence. De-listing the MEK is a legal issue and Clinton must act on facts within the correct legal framework.
The MEK has fought similar legal cases in the United Kingdom and the European Union, and after numerous appeals it has been successful in being removed from those entities’ lists of banned organizations.
The British courts found that allegations made against the group were untrue and in some cases were initially propagated from Iran’s intelligence ministry. WikiLeaks revealed that, lacking any credible claim to maintain the ban on the MEK, the British government’s continued defiance was more about how Tehran would react rather than what its legal system required it to do. In fact, the British Court of Appeal told us much about how the MEK had been mistreated, finding that the British labeling of the MEK as terrorist was “perverse.” This was a severe indictment of the government’s refusal to delist the organization.
For the EU, the embarrassment was even worse. It was dragged kicking and screaming through court after court until it had fought its last battle and succumbed to the legal reality that the MEK could not legally be labeled a terrorist group.
The judgments of the UK and EU courts are significant because the propaganda the Iranian regime wants us to believe about the MEK today is exactly the same as that replayed before those courts. Yet, in the end, those courts could not resist the evidence.
Now it is time for Secretary Clinton to make her decision. If she does so based on the facts, there is little doubt that she will conclude that in legal terms the ban on the MEK is no longer justified. However, if Iranian propaganda is allowed to muddy the water or the hope prevails that Tehran can be appeased by continuing to ban this Iranian opposition group, then things may not be so simple.
Clinton is credited as being a woman of principle who has the wisdom and foresight to recognize propaganda and withstand pressures inviting her to trample on the rule of law upon which all democracies are based. Our bet is that she will not fall into the trap set by the Iranian regime and its apologists and will stick to her principles in making the right decision and removing the MEK from the terrorism list. Only time will tell if we are correct.
Tom Ridge is a former secretary of Homeland Security and governor of Pennsylvania. Lord Alex Carlile of Berriew was Britain’s Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
US Rally Calls for Protection of Iranian dissidents
September 6, 2011 by
THE HUFFINGTON POST
In an effort to prevent a humanitarian disaster, thousands of Iranians held a rally outside the US State Department to call for the protection of 3,400 Iranians resident in Camp Ashraf, Iraq and an end to the US ban on Iran’s largest opposition group, the Mujahedeen e Khalq (MEK). The issues are intertwined, because the residents of Camp Ashraf are supporters and members of the MEK.
The rally was addressed by US politicians and former national security officials who called on Secretary of State Hilary Clinton to listen to the thousands of Iranians gathered and end the US ban on the MEK. Their call was made not only because an end to the ban would allow the Camp Ashraf residents to be better protected, but because the ban is unjustified and lacking any legal basis.
Undoubtedly the US attitude towards the MEK has given the Iranian regime and its Iraqi counterparts the green light to carry out atrocities against the group. In the last two years, over 50 residents have been killed in Iraqi military assaults on the defenseless Camp and many more have been executed in Iran for their links to the group. The current US ban on the MEK has allowed the Iraqi government to do Tehran’s bidding on Iraqi soil on the US watch in that country.
- Thousands of Iranian-Americans from 41 states took part in a huge rally outside the State Department on August 26, 2011, urging Secretary Clinton to act swiftly and remove the principal Iranian opposition movement, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK) from the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations and Ensure Protection for Camp Ashraf.
My personal story of having suffered the Iranian regime’s terrorism tells us much about the great lengths this regime in Iran will go to silence its opponents.
I narrowly escaped death in 1990 in Istanbul, Turkey, where I was assisting Iranian refugees. The regime’s terrorists ambushed our car, and I was shot several times, once very close to my heart. My liver was pierced and has suffered permanent damage. It is currently being held together in a plastic mesh. Even after the assassination attempt, the regime twice tried to end my life in hospital where I was being treated. On one occasion, the regime sent its terrorists under the cover of Turkish police officers and on another they pretended to be friends visiting me. But on both occasions my colleagues who were in the hospital and police officers at the scene managed to foil the plot at the last minute.
At that time it was I who suffered the consequences of western misguided policies and today it is the residents of Camp Ashraf. These residents are today being slaughtered on Iraqi soil with the justification that the MEK is banned in the US, a ban which has been proven in the UK and EU courts to be perverse and flawed.
For the past 14 years the MEK has been unjustifiably banned to placate the Mullahs regime, in a vain hope that the Mullahs in Iran can be moderated. The time has come to end this illegitimate ban, because it is this ban today that is being used by Iran to carry out executions and this ban which the Iraqi authorities seek as justification for the massacring of unarmed civilians at Camp Ashraf.
Now Secretary of State Clinton must do what is just. She must do what the legal system of the United States requires her to do and what the courts of the UK and EU have shown to be the legally correct path in immediately removing the MEK from the US list of banned organizations. The judgments of the British and European courts have unequivocally proven that no case exists for maintaining a ban on the MEK.
The issue of delisting the MEK and hence preventing the massacre of Ashraf residents as Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the President elect of the National Council of Resistance has said “is the very test for the universal values that President Obama has committed himself to.”
Hilary Clinton must now answer the calls of the Iranian people and delist the MEK, sending a clear message to the people of Iran that we support their battle for freedom and democracy.
Hossein Abedini is a Member of Parliament in exile of Iranian Resistance
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hossein-abedini/us-rally-calls-for-protec_b_949818.html
Clinton should de-list MEK as terrorist group
September 1, 2011 by
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” – John Adams.
These words by one of the U.S. founding fathers should be the only criteria for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as she reviews whether to remove the main Iranian resistance movement, Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK,) from the State Department’s terror list.
As Americans, Southern Californians should care about this because America’s greatness, first and foremost, stems from its values and principles. Our values inspired many nations to stand up against tyranny and to challenge the status quo imposed on them by dictators. Over the years, our words and our commitments have been as solid as gold. And this is exactly the U.S. that the tyrants loathe, with the ruling mullahs in Iran at the top of the list.
Yet, due to the injustice imposed on Iranian dissidents by a misguided policy, not only our values and prestige are on the line, but also 3,400 innocent, defenseless dissidents are on the verge of being massacred at Camp Ashraf in Iraq, where they are at the mercy of a pro-Iranian regime in Baghdad. None of us wants to see a humanitarian crisis because of a wrecked policy that should have been rectified a long time ago.
After the European Union’s and the British highest courts found no relationship between the MEK and terrorism, the E.U. and U.K. removed the terror designation.
On July 16, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., reviewed the MEK case and, similar to the high courts in Europe, found the terrorism allegations and label against MEK unfounded, ordering the State Department to review the designation.
As admitted by its original designers in 1997, this designation was made not on the basis of facts and the law but as part of a political decision for appeasing the religious fascist rulers of Iran in search of “moderates” who were never found.
In Iran, this policy provided the Islamic regime with an unprecedented opportunity to accelerate its nuclear bomb efforts and to prepare the grounds for Ahmadinejad’s faction to further the extremist policies of the Tehran government.
The State Department’s unjust designation of MEK as a foreign terrorist organization has been invoked on many occasions by the Iranian clerical regime as a justification for execution of political prisoners in Iran.
It is also providing an excuse for the Iraqi government’s approach to the residents of Camp Ashraf, who are “protected persons” under Geneva Fourth Convention, on behest of the Iranian regime.
In a total disregard for the legal process, the State Department has dragged its feet for more than a year.
In recent months, dozens of prominent Americans from both parties and more than 100 members of Congress, including Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA,) have insisted that the law must be respected and the unlawful designation of MEK must be annulled, calling on Secretary Clinton to reverse the unjust listing. Mr. Rohrabacher has joined 93 other colleagues, including the Armed Services and Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairs, Howard McKeon and Darrel Issa, as well as democrats Loretta Sanchez and Bob Filner, in co-sponsoring H.R. 60, which urges the secretary to de-list the MEK.
Meanwhile, the Iranian government and its lobby in the U.S. are understandably quite nervous over the possibility that the Secretary could delist MEK in the next few weeks. They have embarked on a propaganda campaign against PMOI and the Americans who support the MEK and respect for the law.
Tehran’s rulers recognize that the designation of MEK has been the cornerstone of the defunct policy of appeasement and has been the main obstacle that has impeded democratic change in Iran.
“National Iranian American Council” (NIAC,) reportedly the Iranian regime’s primary lobbying arm in the U.S., the has been consistently calling for a soft policy, to the point of even opposing sanctions against the Revolutionary Guards, known to be the godfathers of terrorism in the Middle East and the world. NIAC is now spearheading the demonizing campaign of MEK and tries to discredit prominent senior former U.S. government officials who have supported justice and delisting of the MEK as well as calling for U.S. fulfillment of obligations to protect the residents of Camp Ashraf.
Secretary Clinton should make her decision on MEK based solely on the evidence and the facts, the “stubborn things.” Then we all can claim rightly that this is the U.S. we inherited from John Adams.
http://articles.ocregister.com/2011-09-01/news/30107354_1_terror-list-camp-ashraf-mek
Iranian Media: How to Tell a Lie – A Big Lie?
September 1, 2011 by
StopFundamentalism.com
The presence of a crowd of thousands of Iranian exiles in front of the State Department in Washington, calling on the Secretary of State Clinton to remove the main Iranian opposition movement, Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), from the U.S. terror list, has certainly drawn considerable media attention during the past few days. But one article, coming from a peculiar Iranian daily can be considered as a satire piece rather than a news article.
The Iranian daily, Keyhan reported on 29 August that only 25 showed up at the said demonstration siding with those in Washington who say MEK has no popular support!
Iranian media are known worldwide to not have any credibility for the news they blare out and this one seems to be just that. But it seems that the Iranian media, for their outrageous claims to be considered as at least to be partly true, resort to a Goebbels style, ‘Big Lie’ propaganda technique: “to tell a lie so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”
Nevertheless, it is said that a picture speaks a thousand words, or may be a few thousand considering the picture above in this case.
According to reports, the Secretary of State Clinton will be making her decision soon whether to keep the main Iranian opposition group, MEK on the US terror list or remove it once and for all.
On the other hand MEK’s main home in Iraq, Camp Ashraf, has been the center of major international attention after it was raided by Iraqi forces last April leaving 36 MEK members who resided in Ashraf dead and over 350 wounded.
The Ashraf residents are unarmed Iranian refugees considered as Protected Persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention who have lived in Ashraf, Iraq for the past 25 years but the Iraqi government refuses to recognize their status and threatens to extradite them back to Iran.
Since the reports of decision by Secretary Clinton surfaced, a media war began in the United States between on one side the supporters of the MEK in the US calling for the removal of the group from the US black list and on the other side, the Iranian well known lobby, National Iranian American Council – NIAC run by an Iranian established collaborator, Trita Parsi.
The rally in Washington on Friday was part of efforts by supporters of the MEK to show their solidarity and draw the attention of the State Secretary to another human catastrophe at hand if the group is not removed from the US list of Foreign Terrorist Organization. Iranian and Iraqi authorities have repeatedly referred to US blacklist as reason to justify crackdown on the Iranian opposition members in Ashraf.