MOJAHEDIN
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
Radical by Nature
20-Aug-2011
The presumption that the MEK would transform itself into a “moderate” political group if delisted is flawed. The MEK did not become “radical” as a result of being “listed” as a terrorist organization in 1997. It was an extremist group way before that date. What fuels its radicalism and taste for terrorism is not how it is termed by the State Department or the nature of its relationship with the U.S, but its fanatical ideology, pugnacious discourse, undemocratic structure, leadership, mission and agenda. So unless the act of delisting provokes by itself a miraculous mutation in the group’s genetic fabric (something that proponents of delisting have to prove), there is absolutely no reason to believe that the MEK would or even could go against its own nature and fundamentally change its behavior solely because of a new legal status. Expecting an inherently violent and erratic organization to relinquish its raison d'être and become pragmatic because of a mere change of designation is as absurd as removing a snake from the list of “reptiles” and expecting it to act as peaceful dove.
Delisting the MEK would more likely allow it to advance its agenda with more freedom and with much more funding and act out its twisted vision with a credibility bestowed upon it by a U.S stamp of approval.
Of course, no one denies that an unconventional political group, a paramilitary or any other non-state actor could potentially moderate itself if it is engaged in a conventional political process. But the conversion from an eccentric actor to a rational one is not automatic. And not every group is capable of it. It requires a minimum of rationality and reasonableness amongst the group’s leadership. It takes some element of moderation – eventually represented by a faction within the group - that can be enhanced and boosted through engagement and recognition. But with the MEK, we’re talking about a senseless monolithic cult - with absolutely no voice or seeds of moderation inside – with a violent mentality and language that has not evolved one bit since 1980 (they still shout “death to Khomeini” in their rallies 22 years after the former leader’s demise). We’re talking about a cult that did not hesitate to go as far as instructing its own members to set themselves ablaze for the sheer purpose of attracting media attention when it wanted to coerce France to release Maryam Rajavi after she was detained by a French judge for a few days in Paris in 2003.
So, the subject of debate is not a normal political group that has at one point made few bad choices, then reformed and now deserves a second chance to integrate. But an inherently spiteful and unbridled cult in which members are still expected to show an excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to their immovable leaders, where mind-altering practices (such as group chanting, collective rituals, denunciation sessions) are daily routine and where violence and coercion have been deeply engrained as very legitimate tools of achieving the end. Therefore, it is very unlikely that removing the MEK from the FTOs list would suddenly make its guru-style leaders change their ways (the only ways they know) or awaken the dormant forces of compromise and rationality within it so that it can act as a rational political actor.
Moreover, even if we accept the improbable assertion that delisting the MEK may somehow moderate its future behavior, it is still not a solid reason to do so. The State Department’s mission is not to close its eyes on the realities, history and current nature of an organization under review and to forgo all statutory criteria for designation in hope of taming or pacifying it. Its mission is to assess the current state of the organization and make a decision based on what it sees. A mere hypothetical prospect – or hope - of “moderating” the group in the future should not counterbalance all the actual and real facts supporting its designation as a FTO. If a group qualifies as a “terrorist organization” under U.S law based on its past actions, nature, ideology and material capacity to act violently then it should simply be called a “terrorist organization”. In other words, the process of designation is not about how we hope a particular group would act if delisted; but about what the group is or isn’t in its current form. Not calling a demonstrably dangerous organization what it so to induce it to change is not exactly a prudent or wise policy. Besides, it would send a terrible message to all other terrorist organizations about the United States’ resolve to fight terrorism.
Finally, among the State Department’s list of FTOs, the MEK is in one grim sense one of the few exceptions: The current leaders of the MEK, unlike the leaders of many other listed FTOs, are suspected with very probable cause of the highest and most serious crimes under international law – especially of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Whilst the members and/or leaders of many other FTOs – vicious and violent as they may be - are considered common criminals, outlawed rebels or simply “terrorists” liable for criminal prosecution under their respective domestic jurisdictions, the seriousness, nature and gravity of the crimes imputable to the MEK leadership is such that it makes them prone to prosecution in just any territory that they could be found. In other words, we’re not just talking about “terrorists” or “corrigible terrorists” that some proponents may, by a stretch of logic, even call “freedom fighters” but about alleged perpetrators of the most heinous and wanton crimes known to mankind. For this reason, it would be both irresponsible as a political act and disastrous as a legal precedent for U.S officials to take the risk of legalizing and legitimizing a group accused of the highest crimes, simply in hope of “moderating” its future behavior. Just imagine what sort of message such laxity could send to both the defenders and violators of international criminal law.
| Recently by Reza Nasri | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Iran vs the United States on the legality of using nuclear weapons | 3 | Sep 09, 2012 |
تحریمها، تبعیضها | 3 | Aug 08, 2012 |
| Why isn't the Iranian-American diaspora actively demanding that William Rogers sees his day in court? | 2 | Jul 02, 2012 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Oh no Libel!
by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Sun Aug 21, 2011 08:46 AM PDTShazede Kahn "Libel"! I am kidding you are free to your opinion. Just please read the charges made against me. In my book you have the right to say whatever you want. Maybe I disagree but as Voltaire said:
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Voltaire. Actually to be honest I won't fight to death; I am not expendable but I will not try to stop you having your say.
"The MEK will never become a moderate political force"
by Anonymous Observer on Sun Aug 21, 2011 08:36 AM PDTJust like the IR!
who cares
by asadabad on Sun Aug 21, 2011 08:14 AM PDTif they're "radicals". As long as they (only) fight and kill members of the regime, they're good in my book.
Listen up again! Islamists, NIAC's, CASMII's, Basiji's et al!
by Oon Yaroo on Sun Aug 21, 2011 07:40 AM PDTIslamists, NIAC's, CASMII's, Basiji's (INCB)
Let's make it simple for you to understand!
The world wants IRR destroyed and gone!
De-listing MEK, arming them to the teeth, and throwing them at the IRR like a bunch of mad dogs MAY do the job or MAY NOT do the job!
But it is certainly a logical and humanitarian step before US-Israel nuke let's say a few places in IRR to finally get rid of the cancer.
Now, which one do you prefer? Allowing the nature to take its process of madder dogs (MEK) eating the mad doges (IRR) or the nuke thing?
Now, all you INCB folks can jump up, down, and cartwheel across the floor if you wish but the process of delisting has already started and will continue and you can't do a thing about it! Can you?
IC ---> NIAC ---> IRI
by Shazde Asdola Mirza on Sun Aug 21, 2011 06:53 AM PDTSimple math for dummies.
M.Kazemzadeh
by khengali on Sun Aug 21, 2011 05:28 AM PDTIn an opinion posted on Aug. 21, 2011 at 1.02 A.M.After MK attacks BooBoos, on behalf of Mojahedin e Khalq, He asserts: ...If I win (meaning if MEK wins) we will have a democratic secular republic with civil liberties, human rights...
That's a pretty generous offer by MK and MEK. Thank you very much.But why do we want to accept your generous offer when you deny that same offer to your own rank and file?.Do residents of camp Ashraf, the only place you completely countrol, enjoy your democratic secular such and such now?.
Tell you what MK and MEK? tear down that fence surrounding camp Ashraf, open those gates and let your own people choose whether to stay or to go. Because if you don't then we will reject your generous offer and join BooBoos in recommending you put it in your pipe and smoke it.
Drinking while Typing
by BoosBoos on Sun Aug 21, 2011 01:46 AM PDTMassoud, in the sprit of good humor I'll just pretend you write your drivel after you've been drinking.
Not every one will agree that the *hikers* were really hikers (in fact the majority of the U.S. population doesn't think they were innocently hiking in PJAK and MEK territory); and not every one will agree with your suggestions that the MEK (a group on the EU and US terror watch list) should be delisted and set loose on the Iranian-American community.
My views are shared by people all over the world, in many countries, among many faiths, and among many ethnic and racial groups.
You're obviously not well - seek help.
اينا زدن به سيم اخر!
G. RahmanianSun Aug 21, 2011 01:31 AM PDT
Dr. Kazemzadeh: Read this news, //aftabnews.ir/vdchqinz623nxwd.tft2.html in the news section of IC.These guys are so desperate, they cannot control themselves, anymore. They've lost it. There's so much at stake for them, they'd say and do anything.
BoosBoos' Own Words
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Sun Aug 21, 2011 01:18 AM PDTBoosBoos,
Your words are the words of a hard-line element of the terrorist regime. You write that the hikers were intelligence operatives, make a remark about Jewish faith to join you, state that the justice system in Iran is not unjust, and compare the mass official rape done in Iran with inmates in the US raping each other. ONLY a hard-line fundamentalist would write what YOU wrote. The following are YOUR fascistic fundamentalist views:
//iranian.com/main/2011/aug/u-s-hikers-jailed-spying
Oh yeah, Osama was also a *hiker* ...
by BoosBoos on Sat Aug 20, 2011 03:09 PM PDT
They weren't *hikers* ... they were operatives; that's clear. There's more than a reasonable suspicion (probable cause) to believe that what they were doing was wrong. Further adding to their dilemma is that the US and Israel sponsor PJAK and MEK along that same border to carry out terror activites. If the situation was reversed, the U.S. would do the same.
Justice = Equal Application of the Law; Not propaganda for creating phony human rights complaints (which then detract from real human rights complaints).
Let's go hiking
by BoosBoos on Sat Aug 20, 2011 08:43 PM PDT
I'm going hiking in the mountains of Afghanistan near the Pakistan border (where the Taliban are) ... I'm looking for 2 Americans of the Jewish faith to join me.
( If you haven't noticed my sarcasm, these were intelligence operatives. Did you expect them to wear a hat that says "I am a spy" on it? )
Prison Rape
by BoosBoos on Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:21 PM PDT
In 2006, there were 2,205 allegations of rape in prison .....
However, they were all the the U.S. prison system. (Alex Coolman, "Trivializing Prison Rape," CounterPunch, August 1, 2003.)
I put that information here because people have left comments implying that the U.S. justice system is free of human rights abuses and somehow the shining standard bearer of evaluating whether these 2 people were lawfully convicted in Iran. People that leave those kinds of comments are totally out of touch with reality and should be sent back to the 2nd grade to start their education all over again.
The brain needs oxygen to work
by BoosBoos on Sun Aug 21, 2011 01:13 AM PDTMassoud, you don't even know who I am or my world views. So take your "Fascistic fundamentalists like you do not support civil liberties" statement and put it in your pipe and smoke it.
Terrorists lose rights - even Felons can't vote; but you want a terror cult to be de-listed and let loose among the public. No thanks dude.
Take off the purple hejab Massoud ... it's cutting off your brain's ability to work normally.
Thank you Ari :-)
by Disenchanted on Sun Aug 21, 2011 01:03 AM PDTI have been sparring with Masoud Kazemzadeh (MK) for a couple of days. I have used every fact and logic respectfully to show him and other readers that his position in defending MEK is preposterous.
All I could get him to admit was accusing me of being pro VF and other venomous statements that "likes of me have been killing likes of him" and other outlandish, desperate claims!
So I decided to show everyone what is it that he stands for. I am glad a good taste of yours found that appealing!
Fundamentalist Terrorism vs. Democracy-civil liberty
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Sun Aug 21, 2011 01:02 AM PDTBoosBoos,
Fascistic fundamentalists like you do not support civil liberties. Indeed we are the enemy of fascists like you. Although I strongly oppose the PMOI, I defend their civil liberties. Same with the monarchists. I criticize their policies, but I defend their civil liberties. For an example of the latter, see my defense of Dariush Kadivar when he was attacked by a supporter of NIAC and Trita Parsi. See
//iranian.com/main/blog/masoud-kazemzadeh/note-gratitude-dariush-kadivar
It is in the nature of the conflict between civil libertarians like me and fascistic fundamentalist like you to be enemies. By your nature, you are extremist, anti-democratic, violent, repressive, and terrorist. By my nature, I am moderate, democratic, civil libertarian. If I win, we will have a democratic secular republic with civil liberties, human rights. You are already in power and mass murdering, mass torturing, mass raping the Iranian people.
Masoud
New Hejab
by BoosBoos on Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:51 AM PDT@ Massoud: you're addicted to making excuses for MEK. The way to break that habit is to stop wearing a purple hijab and don't drive a tank to work any more.
If you buy a Toyota and baseball hat, after 2 or 3 months you'll feel much better.
May One Call This "appeasement" of the Terrorist Regime?
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:43 AM PDTFrom Reza Nasri:
Since 2006, Security Council resolutions aimed at compelling Iran to halt its nuclear activities have not only been counterproductive, but they have undermined the Council’s legitimacy even further. This is not just because the Security Council has sheltered an “Axis of Evil” nation from the current global financial crisis by cutting its ties to the doomed market. It is also because the Council’s irrational and illegal demands no longer suit Iran’s new stature within the regional and international conjuncture.
The balance of power has changed in the Middle East in Iran’s favour and this should be reflected in the Security Council’s policies. The Security Council can only obtain results from Iran if it abandons its obsolete, confrontational approach and recognize Iran as a significant regional power. In concrete terms, this means that the Security Council should put a moratorium on the sanctions and reassign Iran’s dossier back to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It must also restore Iran’s trust in the “international community” by establishing a sustainable cooperation regime in which Iran would play the role it deserves as a regional power.
However, there is a long way to go to rebuild that trust. Indeed, Iran’s history with the Security Council is a rather bleak one because of the Council’s rather “selective” approach to collective security.
//iranian.com/main/2009/feb/genuine-negotiations
Well reasoned essay.
by Ari Siletz on Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:37 AM PDTDisenchanted: brilliant satirical parody!
response
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:48 AM PDTI was NOT going to respond to this post. In my opinion, there was nothing original and significan in it. It mostly contained assertions. But because Disenchanted posted something about me, I decided to post this brief critique. Those readers who are interested in detailed discussions many wish to see my blog at:
//iranian.com/main/blog/masoud-kazemzadeh/great-news-pmoi-and-terrible-news-terrorist-regime
============================
RN: Whilst the members and/or leaders of many other FTOs – vicious and violent as they may be - are considered common criminals, outlawed rebels or simply "terrorists" liable for criminal prosecution under their respective domestic jurisdictions, the seriousness, nature and gravity of the crimes imputable to the MEK leadership is such that it makes them prone to prosecution in just any territory that they could be found.
MK: In actual FACT the PMOI was part of several court cases, and the courts decided that the label of terrorist was FALSE; therefore, the PMOI was de-listed in the UK and EU. The PMOI is present and OPENLY FOUND in the UK, France and many other countries. The no. 2 leader of the PMOI, Maryam Rajavi, lives in France and participates in conferences with a lot of political leaders from around the world.
...and Masoud Kazemzadeh (MK) said nothing!
by Disenchanted on Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:23 AM PDTthen they started killing each other and MK said nothing!
Then came revolution & they executed Pro regime folks w/o judicial proceedings and MK said nothing!
Then they started killing everyone with beard in streets of Tehran and MK said nothing.
They fled to Iraq and joined forces with hell bound Saddam to attack Iran and MK said nothing.
Then came Golf war and Shia and Kurds rebelled against Saddam. MEK came to Saddam help ran over them with tanks and MK said nothing!
Then they deprived their own members from freedom & basic human rights like, say dreaming or thinking and MK said nothing!
Then US state department put MEK on terror list! MK started blogging like crazy pretending he is defdending their civil libery and twisted every fact and logic to defend Rajavi while hiding behind nationalism and accusing everyone else of being pro VF!
The Purple Hejab - She looks like lavashak with a rifle
by BoosBoos on Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:55 PM PDTDelisting MEK will cause Iran to tighten travel restrictions on people in the diaspora ... maybe even cause a permanent travel ban. It certainly increases the chances that more people will be executed in Iran and that MEK will have more tools at its disposal to recruit your kids in the U.S. Imagine if Al Qaeda was de-listed: they would have someone at every shopping center and university soliciting donations and new members. Do you think under these circumstances the government in Iran is going to let people from diaspora travel back to Iran to visit friends or family without additional hurdles?