Page 1 of 13

Organisation: Part three

Secrecy; Surveillance; Isolation from wider society; No private grouping within the organisation (No personal private circle or gathering or even meeting within the organisation)

‘A Party member lives from birth to death under the eye of the Thought Police. Even when he is alone he can never be sure that he is alone. Wherever he may be, asleep or awake, working or resting, in his bath or in bed, he can be inspected without warning and without knowing that he is being inspected. Nothing that he does is indifferent. His friendships, his relaxations, his behaviour towards his wife and children, the expression of his face when he is alone, the words he mutters in sleep, even the characteristic movements of his body, are all jealously scrutinised. Not only any actual misdemeanour, but any eccentricity, however small, any change of habits, any nervous mannerism that could possibly be the symptom of an inner struggle, is certain to be detected. He has no freedom of choice in any direction whatever. On the other hand his actions are not regulated by law or by any clearly formulated code of behaviour. ... Thought and actions which, when detected, mean certain death are not formally forbidden,’ 1984 George Orwell

One of the immediate results of having a doctrine of ‘Black and White’ (explained before as one of the main characteristics of the destructive cult’s doctrine), is the establishment of real or imaginary enemies and living in a ‘permanent’ ‘state of the war’ within the cult. The existence of a real or imaginary ‘strong’ and sometimes ‘blood thirsty’ enemy who wants to destroy the cult, is the best excuse for cult leaders (and may I say most of the politicians as well) to create fear (used as the main ingredient in influencing their audience) and to establish an absolute state of ‘Secrecy’ and ‘total Surveillance’ within the cult (or even in the case of rulers in the country). Extreme, destructive cults, among them ‘Terrorist cults’ and some political cults, including those with ‘left’ and ‘Marxist’ ideologies, have no difficulty in producing facts and figures about these real or imaginary ‘enemy’ waiting to crash the group.

As an example, MeK was never short of a ‘strong enemy’, thanks to their strategy and tactics under the banner of ‘armed struggle’ and sometimes ‘revolutionary terrorism’. Their enemy during the Shah’s era and after the revolution was very real and persistent in trying to destroy the organisation; this is why an absolute state of secrecy and its immediate result, surveillance, was and is one of the main characteristics of the group. But even small groups not in a state of real war, can create their own enemy and create the same atmosphere within the group, as it has been explained by Alexandra Stein in ‘Inside Out’. Until a few years after her membership in a small Marxist organisation, she was unaware who the leader of the group was or what their name was. She knew the organisation as ‘O’ and its leader as ‘P.O.O’. Carol Giambalvo in her memoirs about WDU, of which she was a member, explains the same kind of secrecy and surveillances.i

The main rules of secrecy within a destructive cult, as I learned from MeK and I believe should be the same for almost all destructive cults, are:

‘A member should know only and only information he or she needed to do his or her job, nothing more, nothing less.’

‘Information is part of the wealth of the cult; therefore members should look after it with their life.’

‘Members should not ask or acquire information that he or she doesn’t need and should avoid by all means learning, remembering, or taking note of such information that he doesn’t need for doing his or her job.’

Page 2 of 13

‘Information means: “life and death” of your brothers and sisters, therefore must be dear to you as their life.’ii

‘Secrecy’ and ‘surveillance’ are the best tools in the creation of Milieu, described by Lifton as one of the main conditions for the creation of a state of ‘Mind Control’ and ‘Brain Washing,’ again essential for the survival of a destructive cult. The immediate results of a state of secrecy within a cult are as below:

1- A minimum exchange of information and even normal communication between members. This is necessary for the survival of destructive cults as they can stop any exchange of questions, doubts, criticism or rejection among members and at the same time it stops any kind of personal relationship between members taking shape. Therefore they can avoid any factions and mass defections taking shape within the organisation. In MeK we used to have a special term for it called ‘Mahfell’ meaning ‘gathering of members apart from organisational structure, chatting about their personal interests, joking and storytelling outside of the norms of the organisation, …’ ‘Mahfell’ making or gathering people around yourself or joining such a gathering was one of the most anti-organisational activities worthy of severe punishment and the harshest kind of criticisms.iii

2- Stopping people from asking questions, under the banner of ‘you don’t need to know such information’, expressing their views and doubts, and exchanging information with the outside world which might help a member to realize that they are prisoner of a cult.

3- A need for ‘surveillance’ with the excuse of a need for security and safeguarding of the organisation against the transfer of information to the enemy guarantees spying of members against each other. Therefore not only will leaders be aware of what is going on in the cult, but it will also stop any kind of friendship taking shape between disciples within the cult.

4- Creation of paranoia and phobia toward the outside world, necessary for mind control which will be discussed later.

Closed exit doors. Membership is for life. Defectors are traitor worthy of death.

Membership in cults, although perhaps never announced openly or blatantly, is for life, therefore there is no way out of a cult unless by escape or due to the decision of the cult’s leader, when he or she recognises a member is not obedient, not profitable or a nuisance for the group. Therefore in all destructive cults, exit doors are closed and those who dare to escape will be named as a traitor and in most destructive cults there is an unannounced sentence for them perhaps as harsh as ‘death’. Steven Hassan in ‘Combating cult mind control’ explains: ‘In a destructive cult, there is never a legitimate reason for leaving. Unlike non-cult organizations that recognize a person's inherent right to choose to move on, mind control groups make it very clear that there is no legitimate way to leave. Members are told that the only reasons why people leave are weakness, insanity, temptation, brainwashing (by deprogrammers), pride, sin, and so on. Members are thoroughly indoctrinated with the belief that if they ever do leave, terrible consequences will befall them, their family, and / or mankind. Although cult members will often say "Show me a way that is better than mine and I will quit,” they are not allowed the time or mental tools to prove that statement to themselves. They are locked in a psychological prison.’iv

For many extreme or destructive cults, including ‘Terrorist cults’, membership of members end with their death or the end of the cult itself and as we have seen some prefer to kill all members along the leader, as Jim Jones and David Koresh did, rather than letting them free.

Page 3 of 13

In ‘Al Qaeda: All members of the organization were asked to sign agreements that they would devote their lives to the submission of all creation to the will of Allah. Al-Fadi signed the document as one of Al Qaeda's founding members. Then he took the bayat (oath of allegiance) to Osama bin Laden, which involved fasting, self castigation with a whip made of small chains, and days of indoctrination.’v To guarantee life time membership ‘Both the Thugs and Assassins were indoctrinated as children and were shockingly effective in their operations.’vi

In MeK Rajavi, once talking to representatives of MSS, (supporters of MeK) said: ‘Our entrance doors are closed, as we have a very high standard for membership of MeK. But our exit doors are wide open, anyone who wants to leave is free to do so.’vii This was before MeK completed its transformation into an extreme cult. Later he repeated the same thing with some modification, he said: ‘This is the right of anyone who wants to mollify his or her oath with the leadership of this organisation, leave it and join a better one. It is much better he goes toward his own ideal. But there is a condition that he has to return rights of the organisation back to the organisation, especially matters related to the organisation’s information and security. As an organisation is some kind of collective work and we share the same destiny and we can affect each other’s destiny, therefore one has no right to take your information which means your security and destiny with himself. …’viii This is a very big ‘But’ or ‘If’ which for many members who announced they wanted to leave meant years of prison, with the excuse of ‘having information about the organisation which might fall in the hand of the enemy’. These conditions are vague and general enough that can be interpreted by the organisation as they wish. Even a simple member with little or no information can be accused of having very sensitive information and there is nobody who can prove otherwise. Dictators have always used vague and general excuses for imprisonment, torture and execution of defectors and MeK is no exception. Security and information is just an excuse as according to the confession of the organisation itself, the enemy had many ‘spies’ within the organisation and was and is well aware of even small details of the group. I can even claim information that the Iranian government knows about MeK, is not only unknown to ordinary members but many high ranking members are unaware of it. The truth is that ‘Information’ and ‘security’ of the group was and is and will be an excuse for imprisoning people inside the cult and a warning to others of what leaving means.ix

‘Ghoolos’ or Members who are free to leave, or in another word those who in the eyes of the cult are useless, ‘nuisance’ and should be expelled:

In all destructive cults there are members who are not cost effective (organizational or material or both), in other words the cost of keeping them in the organisation is more than their benefit materially or spiritually for the group. Cost itself can be material cost which means that the group has to spend more money to keep them in the group than what they might earn for the cult. And it can be organisational cost, which means the amount of time supervisors have to spend to educate or manipulate a person or force them to abide by the rules of the organisation exceeds the benefit of him or her for the group. In MeK these kinds of people are called ‘Ghoolos’ and lieutenants were always in fights with each other to get rid of Ghoolos by transferring them to each other’s departments. In many cases they could persuade a Ghoolos to leave MeK or could find an excuse to expel themx. Being lazy, selfish, asking too many questions, sometimes even an accusation of having a mental problem or sleeping/eating too much, and more importantly creating some sort of personal subgroupxi (as mentioned before in MeK called ‘Mahfel’) within the MeK were enough excuses for calling a person a Ghoolos.

Hard to leave even if the exit doors are wide open:

Leaving cults is not easy to do even if their door is wide open; Margaret Singer explains few of the problems one must face to be able to leave the cult. She explains: ‘When a person is taken in by

Page 4 of 13

coercive psychological and social influence of a cult, she or he experiences what I call the five D's’: Below are Singer’s reasons and few more reasons that I think are as important as Singer’s five d’s:

1- Deception in the recruitment process and throughout membership. {You don’t know what is right and what is wrong and even if you find out that you have been deceived as you have been faced with this reality that ‘most honest, selfless, kind, …’ people in the world (that you thought the cult leader and his or her lieutenants were) have been so deceitful, how can you trust anyone else? Sometimes you prefer to live with the devil you know instead of trusting a new one.}

2- Debilitation, Because of the hours, the degree of commitment, the psychological pressures, and the inner constriction and strife. {as we will see in Influence techniques, when you pay so much for a cause, you don’t want to accept or believe that it has been wrong, you prefer to persuade yourself that you are wrong and the cult leader is right, rather than accepting that you have sacrificed so much in vain. Also you have to realize that after leaving you have to face family and friends and their sarcastic remarks about how foolish you have been or how wrong you have been …}

3- Dependency, as a result of being cut off from the outside world in many ways. ‘You become completely dependent on the group for your entire social needs, your family needs, your self image, and your survival. … You become like a child for whom any thought of independent action is totally confusing and unbearably overwhelming’. {When I left MeK, after almost twenty years being dependent on the cult for everything, my first feeling after the initial joy of leaving was fear and powerlessness. I was not able to make a simple decision, as for twenty years I had learned to wear according to the needs of the cult, eat what was given in the collective bases, laugh at the humour of cult and cry at sadness defined in the cult. Even simple shopping in the local supermarket was an enormous task for me, how should I choose and on what basis? How to choose my clothes, as I had no sense of aging or taste or appropriateness. Later you will see when you lose your individuality and identity in cults it is not easy job to regain them. All said this doesn’t mean that people in cults don’t make decisions or don’t shop or buy clothes. They do but according to their ‘cult personality’ for the job given to them by the cult, according to the taste and dictation of the cult.}

4- Dread, because of beliefs instilled by the cult that a person who leaves will find no real life on the outside. {In destructive cults after one leaves they have to face the devil as they say when you leave you will take sides with the devil, you will be corrupted, you will join the camp of the enemy … one who leaves has to face his phobia, paranoia, disgust toward the outside world and sad part of it is that they doesn’t recognise that all these feelings have been seeded in them by the cult. He or she will see them as a real entity, nothing to do with the cult and part of their beliefs, therefore while they try to avoid ‘the devil’, they will remain in the psychological or even physical prison and isolation of the cult even after leaving.}

5- Desensitisation: so that things that would once have troubled them no longer do (for example, learning that money collected from fund-raising is supporting the leader's lavish life style rather than the cause for which it was given, or seeing children badly abused or even killed.)’ {In other words I can say in cults one will lose their principles and morals and will substitute them with the cult’s ones. After leaving, it is very difficult to regain the moral and principles that one has had before joining the cult (because in the cult most of them have been rejected through ‘logic’ and long ‘rational’ talks of leaders) and at the same time morals of the cult would sooner or later be rejected by him after leaving the group.}

Page 5 of 13

6- Belief: ‘Why it’s hard to leave: Belief: beliefs and act on their ideas is very appealing to people. … We want to believe in something. … You believe in the goals and in the people who are doing these things with you. You believe in the leader. You believe you are going to accomplish something. In most cults, you are told that, in order to live out the group's belief, you must make certain changes in yourself. So you say, "Okay, I accept that. I believe this, I agree with it, and I'll make those changes, “and slowly those changes begin to have a radical effect on your thoughts and actions, though you are not highly conscious of this effect.’ {After leaving a cult you suddenly feel the loss of a very strong belief or system of beliefs loss of being useful, loss of feeling that you are the saviour of the people, religion or even the world. In simple words you lost all your previous beliefs when you went through brainwashing procedures of the cult and when you leave the cult, you say goodbye to whatever you have been taught to believe during membership of the cult, therefore at this point you feel you have no beliefs or at least no real objective or incentive or aim to lean on and decide about your future life.}

7- ‘DESENCY and LOYALTY: another major influence that keeps people in cults is that most people are decent, honest beings. They want to do good, be altruistic, and achieve something in their lives. And they are loyal. Once most people make a commitment to something, they don't easily renege on that commitment. ... So not wanting to be a quitter becomes yet another element that keeps them in the cult.’ {Later when I talk about the use of influence techniques by cult leaders, I will explain how ‘commitment’ will force us to remain in the cult, just because we want to stand by our words and promises.}

8- Authority: for those who learn or are forced to live under strong authority, like in prisons or military camps, it is very difficult afterwards for them to live in an environment without strong authority, who direct and decide all actions of them. ‘Another major point of influence is that we're brought up to respect authority figures, leaders, people who are going to give us answers. ... Who “know better." .... The leader knows better. The leader has all powerful answer. Your questions and doubts are discouraged. ...In particular, when you question, you may be made to look ridiculous and called a renegade, a spy, an agent, a non-believer, or Satan, or whatever disparaging terms are used in your particular group. {In MeK you might be called: Borideh or Mozdor (mercenary) or spy of the regime, ..} To question means you don't believe enough. ... When you're a cult member, a great deal of your environment and many of your life choices are controlled: your financial resources, access to information, the work you might do, your free time, your social circle, sometimes even your sex life is controlled. You adapt and learn to function and survive in order to remain part of the group. It’s easier to conform, to go along with the flow and try to be a good believer and a good follower than to resist {and leave}.’ {Again later, I will discuss how difficult it is to say no to the authority that you have accepted as legitimate, however irrational or immoral their order is.}

9- Peer Pressure and lack of information: ‘Cult members feel that way because nobody else is speaking out - because nobody can speak out. … Since we are social animals, it is difficult to resist such pressures. .. The number of members or followers is often exaggerated to make the group look larger and more popular; and world events are distorted, not only by the leader but by his inner circle of leadership as well.’ {Apart from this when you eat, sleep, fight, struggle, laugh and cry with them and loose ‘martyred’ friends for the cause of cult, you create a very strong bond and new emotions and memories which are very difficult to overcome and leave the group. Particularly when you think and imagine that those whom you mutually love and respect, soon after leaving will become your blood enemy and they will call you a traitor, Judas etc.}

Page 6 of 13

10- Separation from the past: ‘You break with your past. … Meticulous reporting mechanisms to monitor members' behaviour when they are away from the cult. In this way, your entire universe becomes the people you are with; … eventually you forget about your past. You even forget who you were before you joined. In some groups, people take on new names and often don't know the real names of the other members. ... Pseudonyms ... new identify in this context, to think about leaving becomes completely overwhelming. If escape even crosses your mind, you think, where would I go? … Not to mention that many cult members have little access to money, and just on the practical side, don't think they could get very far even if they did leave.’ {A friend from MeK once privately told me: ‘even if I want to leave, where should I go? I have lost my family and friends; I have rejected them a long time ago and they have got used to the idea that I am dead. My parents are gone and are not around anymore to accept me as I am and my siblings don’t care anymore. What should I do in the outside world? Things I have learned here like how to solicit etc are not useful in the outside world. How can I support myself, being penniless? I am too old to be able to start a new life all over from point of zero.’ In MeK, those who are in Iraq, if they leave, they don’t dare to go back to Iran not only because of the fear that has been seeded in them during past decades but also because of phobia, disgust and paranoia. They cannot go to other countries because of a lack of documentation and a lack of knowledge and expertise to be able to earn their expenses.}

11- Lack of confidence and doubt: Self-confidence is one of the major obstacles for a brainwasher to manipulate the mind of a person. This is why from day one all destructive cults try very hard to replace self-confidence in new members, with ‘collective confidence’ or ‘cult’s confidence’. If a person stays in a cult for a long time, and goes through different procedures of mind manipulation, they will definitely lose major parts of their self-confidence. This is why it is very difficult for many people to leave a cult, as in doing so they need some sort of self-confidence and on top of that, as they know how weak they are, they cannot trust themselves to be able to survive in the outside world. Having doubt in themselves will weaken their self-confidence as well. After all they think that it was them who chose the cult and became its member and they will see how wrong they were, therefore it is very difficult for them to trust themselves wholeheartedly once more to make a major decision such as leaving a cult and starting their life in the outside world from point zero.

12- Guilt over Participation: guilt and shame keeps people in cults. Guilt toward wrongs that you have done while member of the cult, including lies you have told others, and in some cults members are forced to break the law for different reasons. This also leads to fear of punishment by the law being another reason for members to be afraid to leave a cultxii. This is especially true in the case of ‘terrorist cults’ and violent cults, where people might have killed someone or have committed a major crime by the order of the cult.

13- Collective life and Collective self: Cult life has its own attractiveness as well, namely a sense of belonging, especially in modern life where many people suffer greatly because of loneliness, and loss of a sense of belonging. On the other hand although cults will rob you of your individuality and self-respect, instead in many cults you will find a new collective self-image which gradually becomes dear to you and you don’t want to lose it easily. An image of being ‘vanguard’ of people, a ‘soldier’ of new Messiah, a ‘leader’ of proletariat, ‘Mojahed’, ‘Martyr’ etc.. One who is a member of a cult feels they are a special person, vanguard of a goal, and it is very difficult for them to leave the cult and suddenly become nobody, one of billions of human beings whose life is not significant and has almost no influence in other people’s life.

Page 7 of 13

At the same time, they make cult life look increasingly safe and attractive, the kind of security which in the outside world doesn’t exist, or is very hard to gain, especially after living in a cult for some timexiii. In ‘All God’s children’ we read: 'Parent or family problem? None of those here, the recruit is told. “Financial worries?” We take care of our own. Sex-related anxieties, or worries about relationships with members of the opposite sex? We live lives of purity. All premarital sex is wrong, and so your worries are over, the problem never comes up,' say members of most new religious movements.’xiv

14- Only way: Cults teach you that their way is the only way for the struggle. In the case of -political cults, the only way to salvation, and in the case of religious cults, the only way toward peaceful life., With their ‘black and white’ kind of ideology they will teach you that everything else is black, corrupt, wrong, devilish, etc and then every now and then they invite to leave if you know any better way of ‘fighting against enemy’, ‘path toward happiness’. As at the beginning of this article you saw Rajavi told members they can leave ‘if they know any other alternative of struggle against the regime’ while at the same time he has named those who don’t fight with the government as traitors toward God and people, and has rejected all other opposition groups as ‘mercenaries’ of foreign governments, or creation of the regime itself. Therefore yes cult leaders sometimes invite you to leave and then they will show you a few doors and reject them one by one. You are left not knowing how to leave when there is worse kind of situation behind each door than where you are at the moment. This is why many members reach the conclusion that to leave the cult, they have to forget all about the aims and objectives that they originally had, or stay in the cult for the rest of their life.

15- Punishment to leave:

‘You become ‘UnPerson’, you don’t exist, you never existed; Nothing will remain of you, not a name in a register, not a memory in a living.’ 1984 George Orwell

‘Many groups chase after defectors. They threaten them, punish them, and put them under house arrest. ….’ Singer adds: ‘One woman I counselled who had tried to leave her cult was held by armed guards in the cult compound for a year before she finally escaped. For two years afterward, she slept with her clothes on so she would have a chance of getting away if the leader sent his guard after her.’xv

Well here comes the dilemma that defectors face leaving cults: if they say nothing, they are betraying their own conscience, as they have seen wrong and have understood what has happened to them and how their freedom and humanity has been stolen, and are not prepared to say or do anything about it. After all, If you witness a murder or robbery and say nothing or do nothing you are criminal in the eyes of law, sometimes as much as the murderer or the thief. Apart from this after you understand what has happened to you, you feel responsible to warn others, especially the younger generation about what has happened and it could happen all over again if you don’t do anything or say anything about it. In this case you never can be at peace with yourself. And if you say or do anything about your experience; you will be called ‘Traitor’, ‘Mercenary’ of the ‘devil’ or ‘enemy’, ‘apostates’, punishable by words and deeds, even death.xvi

Here are some example of cults behaviour toward their defectors, especially those who dared to say something and were not ready to keep silent.

Jim Jones allegedly used his 'angels' to wreak vengeance against members who left and against their supporters as well.’xvii

Page 8 of 13

‘Jeannie Mills, a former member of the People's Temple and outspoken critic of the Reverend Jim Jones, was murdered by persons unknown, along with her husband and children, after the massacre of Jonestown.xviii

‘Stephen Bryant, a former devotee of the Krishnas, was murdered, shot in the head by a member of the group, allegedly at the instruction of one of the Krishna leaders.’xix

‘Paul Morantz, a lawyer litigating against Synanon, the drug rehabilitation program, was bitten by a rattlesnake placed in his mailbox by cult members.’xx

MeK doesn't believe in an honest and dignified life of its members after leaving, therefore when they leave they are expected to have a shameful life, be ashamed of leaving, as ‘they have left not because of wrong of the MeK, but because they couldn’t cope with the struggle, they couldn’t suffer the pain and hardship of the fight against the enemy. …’ Therefore they must behave as a broken person, regretful and ashamed of their shortcomings, because of breaking their oath with ‘God’, ‘People’, ‘country’ … ‘loss of nobilities such as struggle for freedom, humanity, honesty, patriotism, …’ they should do nothing, carry on having a miserable, lonely life. hey have surrendered themselves to their animal instincts and have fallen from the ‘heaven of MEK’ on earth and have lost their status as a ‘Mojahed’ and have become an ‘ordinary person’. And when they behave differently, revile what had happened to them, as they are considered as a person or better to say ‘unPerson’ without will power of their own, therefore somebody else instead of MeK must be in control of their will power and source of their activities. i.e. The Iranian government and perhaps the Iranian ministry of information or Imperialism, the CIA or Intelligence service. They consider them as a slave and a slave cannot be without a master. If they are not a slave of MeK, then whose slave are they? Nobody but the enemy, and what they do and say ‘is the proof of them being agent of enemy and devil.’

Most MEK dissidents, as long as they haven’t left the base of the organisation are forced to confess and criticise themselves in front of members as being ‘selfish’, ‘sexist’ (as there is strict rule for celibacy within the organisation) and give clear facts and examples of their ‘wrong behaviour’. In the next stage they have to write and sign a confession that they have been ‘Borideh’(this means ‘cut’ or divided, disconnected, or separated from ‘the body of the organisation, and as MeK put it equal to ‘resistance’, ‘people’, ‘country’, ‘God’ … therefore it implies the person has been cut from ‘body of the resistance’, ‘body of people’, ‘country’, ‘God’). Accepting to be a ‘Borideh’, within MeK is the worst thing one can accuse himself of; the punishment after confession in front of others, is to become ‘Bangalli’. ‘Bangalli’ means bungalow, as MEK’s base in Iraq consisted of some buildings and many bungalows attached to each other, in between there were some bungalows separated from others; when MeK had only a few dissidents per year, they could tolerate them easily and used to put them in these bungalows, till either they changed their mind and regretted what have they have said or done and return to the body of the organisation, or MeK could find a way to get rid of them, if their rank was less than ‘Member’ and they had refugee status or citizenship of any European or American countries, they used to send them back to that country.

But in cases of those who didn’t have these privileges or their status within the organisation was higher than ‘member’, in many cases they were surrendered to Iraqi authorities or were sent to Iraqi refugee camps in Ramadi or Heleh. If a defector chose to be a ‘good’ one and say nothing and do nothing against the MeK, be apologetic for leaving the organisation, they are safe from verbal and physical abuses of the organisation and in some cases even MeK has helped them financially and legally as well, to keep them within the range of ‘supporters’ and as a member of their public meetings and demonstrations outside of the

Page 9 of 13

Iran. And if they are not, they will soon be titled as ‘Traitor’, ‘Mercenary of Iranian regime’ and in some cases ‘Agents of foreign powers’.

Up to now MeK, in its publications, websites and published books, has announced the names and particulars of hundreds of such defectors as ‘agents’ of the Iranian government or foreign powers. For examples you can refer to MEK’s publications:

‘Nashrieh’ number 73 under title of {Iranian regime and foreign powers are} ‘Benefiting from ‘Borideh’ traitors’.

‘Nashrieh’ number 156; ‘Revelation of … {names of people} who were collecting signature {from defectors against MeK}’.

Boltan number 205: ‘Letters, writing between Iranian information ministry and defectors in Ramadi camp in Iraq.’

‘Mojahed’ number 299; ‘Information awareness’ about communication of agents of Iranian information ministry with children of Members of MeK in Sweden, asking them to send letter to their parents.’

Mojahed’ number 305; …. {name of a defector} a ‘spy’ and ‘torturer’, she has come back to Sweden to spy.

‘Mojahed’ number 310; ‘Establishment of a ‘sport centre’ and a ‘book shop’ by ‘pupil executioner’xxi in Germany’.

’Mojahed’ number 312; ‘Information awareness’ … ‘revelation of …… {names of few defectors} as spy of Iranian regime in Germany, …. In Sweden, …. In ‘Ramadii camp’ in Iraq’. ‘Mojahed’ number 320: ‘Revelation of ….. {few other names of defectors} as spy of the regime.’

‘Mojahed’ number 332: ‘Meeting of {Iranian} mercenaries {code name for defectors dared to talk against the MeK} in France.’

‘IranZamin’ dated second of June 1995; ‘Information minister {of Iran} brings …. On the scene.’xxii

‘Boltan’ 14th April 1992: ‘Traitors ….. {name of few defectors} interview with BBC {Persian broadcast of BBC}. ‘IranZamin’ 18th September 1995 ‘traitors …. In BBC’.

I will not carry on writing whatever has been written in MEK’s publications against its defectors, as it could be the subject of another long book. Also as you will notice I am unable to name hundreds of defectors named by MeK and the organisation’s insults against them. To learn more about the suffering of MEK’s defectors you can also refer to ‘Human Rights Watch’ report about their cases: In the summary of the report it is written: ‘The Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO or MeK) is an armed Iranian opposition group that was formed in 1965. … During Saddam Hussein’s last year in power, some Iranians held in Abu Ghraib prison were repatriated to Iran in exchange for Iraqi prisoners of war (POWs). These were dissident members of the MKO who had been sent by the organization for “safekeeping” in Abu Ghraibxxiii. The release of these prisoners in 2002-2003 provided a direct window into conditions inside the MKO camps that was previously inaccessible to the outside world. Human Rights Watch interviewed five of these former MKO members who were held in Abu Ghraib prison. Their testimonies, together with testimonies collected from seven other former MKO members, paint a grim picture of how the organization treated its

Page 10 of 13

members, particularly those who held dissenting opinions or expressed an intent to leave the organization. The former MKO members reported abuses ranging from detention and persecution of ordinary members wishing to leave the organization, to lengthy solitary confinements, severe beatings, and torture of dissident members. The MKO held political dissidents in its internal prisons during the 1990s and later turned over many of them to Iraqi authorities, who held them in Abu Ghraib. In one case, … was held in solitary confinement for eight-and-a-half years inside the MKO camps, from September 1992 to January 2001. The witnesses reported two cases of deaths under interrogation. Three dissident members—{for obvious reason I prefer not to name people here}—witnessed the death of a fellow dissident, …, inside their prison cell in Camp Ashraf. … told Human Rights Watch that he also witnessed the death of another prisoner, …, after he was returned from an interrogation session to a prison cell that he shared with ... The level of devotion expected of members was in stark display in 2003 when the French police arrested Maryam Rajavi in Paris. In protest, ten MKO members and sympathizers set themselves on fire in various European cities; two of them subsequently died.xxiv Former members cite the implementation of the “ideological revolution” as a major source of the psychological and physical abuses committed against the group’s members.’xxv

In religious cults in addition to physical punishments and all the above mentioned dilemmas and sufferings, you are forced to believe that whatever you do is for God and blessed by God and religion. Therefore after leaving you feel that you have betrayed God and religion, therefore after escaping those real and physical punishments you still think of punishments waiting for you after your death. In one of the conversions that I had with Masoud Rajavi after I escaped MeK, he told me ‘come back as I don’t want you to become ‘Khasara fel donia va akhara’; a few Arabic words from the Koran meaning ‘loosing life and after life’.

i She explains: ‘…WDU leadership was able to rationalize the institution of the most convoluted and extreme forms of

security rules and regulations. These served a variety of purposes: --to keep members from talking amongst themselves

about taboo topics (such as real names, personal or political histories, locations of party facilities, what went on at meetings);

--to generate mistrust about a particular member when necessary (for example, implying that someone was an agent and

calling on members to be cautious and even shun); and --to create feelings of defensiveness, paranoia, and isolation, which

eventually separated members from social, political, and family networks outside the organization. For the individual

member, living under these very stringent security policies added to the growing sense of alienation from society and thus

increased dependence on the organization. For the leadership, the result was an enhanced ability to control the members.

During the recruitment process, these security rules were used to discourage the recruit from asking too many questions.

Also it allowed the recruiters to remain vague in what answers they did give. Details about size of member-ship, racial or

sexual composition, geographic location, who else were members, or exactly what kind of work a new member might be

doing were not to be discussed. It was explained that this type of information was confidential, that it was exactly the kind of

"hard" information the State would love to get its hands on. … The outcome of such security lessons was that a recruit was

in fact told very little and was urged to act on faith. At the same time, certain deceptions were used to entice someone to join.

Most of the recruits coming out of Women and the State, for example, were told that they were joining a national

organization with "cells" around the country and in Canada, and that it was solely a women's organization. In reality, at the

time, the group was barely larger than the original 13 founders, it existed only in San Francisco, and it included both women

and men. Similarly, African-American and Hispanic recruits were commonly led to believe that the WDU had a large and

growing multinational membership, when, in fact, it did not. In the end, recruiters said whatever would work.’ { Carol

Giambalvo ; ‘The Cadre Ideal: Origins and Development of a Political Cult’, CSJ 9-1 1992; Sent: 08 August 1999; This

article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1992, Volume 9, Number 1, pages

1-77. affcarol@worldnet.att.net}

ii All from a book published by supporters of MEK outside of Iran in 1976, called ‘Behtar Mobarezaa Koonim’ meaning:

‘how to struggle better’.

iii Again in RAND report we read: ‘In addition to their geographic and ideological isolation, MEK members in Iraq are

severely socially and emotionally isolated, even within their communal living arrangements. Relatives and former spouses

are placed in different compounds and are not allowed to see each other. … Close friendships are considered “Liberal

relations” and are strictly forbidden. Members may freely communicate only with their unit commanders, and commander’s

permission is required for any other type of communication. Informants monitor conversations among members. In many

Page 11 of 13

cases, MEK members’ families in Iran have been told that their relatives had died or been killed.’ {. RAND’s report; titled: '

The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq; A Policy Conundrum 2009' was sponsored by Office of the Secretary of Defense of the

United States of America. P:71 The full report can be found in: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871/ }

iv Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control’; Park Street Press; 1988; P: 84

v Paul L. Williams; ‘Al-Qaeda; Brotherhood of Terror’; ALPHA, A Pearson Education Company; 2002; P: 2

vi Mia Bloom; 'Dying to Kill; The Allure of Suicide terror'; Columbia University Press/ New York; 2007; P: 11

vii MEK’s publication; ‘Mojahed’ 160; 14th July 1983

viii MEK’s publication; ‘Honouring of fourth anniversary of Ashraf and Mussa’s epic; Mojahedin’s Ashora; in residence of

the leader of new Iranian revolution’; Feb. 1986; P: 60

ix RAND report gives detailed information about the situation of those who want to leave MEK; in the report we read: ‘…

During the first year of consolidation, the JIATF (Joint Interagency Task Force-Ashraf) negotiated with the MEK to create a

process by which members who sought to leave the group could be transferred to the TIPF (Temporary Internment and

Protection Facility). The process for these “scheduled departures” allowed the MEK to conduct a multiday “debriefing”

period, during which the would-be “defector” (as they were referred to by the JIATF) would have his or her “sensitive”

knowledge of the MEK somehow erased. Although the debriefing was a clearly a ploy to threaten MEK members with

detainment in retaliation for their requests to leave the group, the JIATF allowed it. Despite this impediment, during the first

year of consolidation, the MEK transferred several hundred members to the TIPF –predominantly Iran-Iraq War POWs and

other Iranians who had been lured to MEK camps in Iraq. After this initial flood, departures dwindled to a trickle, but the

JIATF took no further action to encourage departures. The JIATF knew that the MEK leadership spread false information

regarding bad living conditions at the TIPF, but it took no action to counter this information, … In addition, it did nothing to

assist MEK members who wanted to escape Camp Ashraf without going through the debriefing period in the scheduled

departure process. … The only other way to leave was to try to run to the TIPF. The JIATF knew that the MEK was

constructing physical obstacles to make departure on foot difficult. For instance, the MEK built a guard post across from the

entrance to the TIPF, although the post’ ostensible function was to facilitate scheduled departures, it was clearly constructed

for one purpose: to place MEK guards in a position to tackle walkaways. Walkaways (or, in this case, more literally,

runaways) had to cover a potentially great distance of open ground, escape MEK patrols, and pass several physical obstacles

–including fences, berms, and concertina wire-before finally confronting and somehow getting past the guards stationed in

the post. Yet a number of MEK members attempted escape, and a few have successfully reached the TIPF.’ { RAND’s

report; titled: ' The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq; A Policy Conundrum 2009' was sponsored by Office of the Secretary of

Defense of the United States of America. PP: 46, 48; The full report can be found in:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871/ }

x Steven Hassan describes those who have been expelled from cults, as: ‘I've encountered quite a few people who were

kicked out of their group, ostensibly because they were bucking authority and asking too many questions. Others were

abused to such an extent that they were burned out and no longer "productive." Still others had developed serious physical or

psychological problems that required too much money for treatment, and had become a liability to the group. The people

who have been kicked out of a destructive cult are always in the worst shape of all former cult members. They feel rejection

not only from the group members, but, in the case of religious cults, from God Himself. .... These people, phobic toward the

world outside their cults, have been cast into what they view as utter darkness.’ {Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind

Control’; Park Street Press; 1988; P: 170}

xi Organising any personal subgroup or ‘Mahfel’ through personal friendship or common personal interest is one of the

biggest crimes within any cult, as sub grouping means members can find common interest, personal friendship, it will disturb

mind manipulation of the cult and can pave the way for distribution of information, questions and doubts among members

and therefore can create factions within the cult. The excuse of cults for being against sub grouping or ‘Mahfel’ is that, this

is habits and behaviours of people in outside world or as MEK used to teach us habit of ‘ordinary’ people who are ‘al-laf’

(have nothing serious to do and waste their time talking about useless subjects). A good member should direct their emotion

and interest toward love for the leader and group, and their interest within the doctrine of the group and their free time if

‘there be any’ for pursuit of the goals of the group. Steven Hassan explains the same thing by these words: ‘Cult member's

emotional allegiance should be vertical (toward the leader), not horizontal (toward peers). Friends are dangerous, in part

because if one member leaves, he may take others with him. ... Relationships are usually superficial within these groups

because sharing deep personal feelings, especially negative ones, is highly discouraged. ... Because the only real allegiance is

Page 12 of 13

to the leader, a closer look shows that such ties (between members) are actually shallow and sometimes just private fantasy.’

{Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control’; Park Street Press; 1988; P: 81}

xii In RAND’s report we will see how a fear of breaking the law and not having proper documentation were forcing people

in; in report we read: ‘To prevent MEK members from departing the camps, almost all MEK recruits were obliged to turn

over their identity documents to the MEK for “safekeeping”. The MEK now claims that these documents were securely held

until they were destroyed by coalition bombs. Although the group was invited into Iraq and given the use of land by Saddam,

the MEK never sought legal residence there. When recruits were brought into the country, Iraqi rules regarding alien visits or

immigration were intentionally not observed. With Saddam’s complicity, the MEK leadership was then able to threaten

recalcitrant members with persecution for their illegal presence in Iraq, which would mean incarceration in an Iraqi prison

for several years, followed by deportation to Iran, where, members were told, they would face certain persecution. By

bringing its members into Iraq illegally and then confiscating their identity documents, the MEK was able to trap

them.’RAND’s report; titled: ' The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq; A Policy Conundrum 2009' was sponsored by Office of the

Secretary of Defense of the United States of America. P: 75. The full report can be found in:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871/

xiii Ervand Abrahamian explains why many members of MEK didn’t leave the organisation even after all their promises were

wrong and after they suffered physically, psychologically, and emotionally. He says: ‘The fact that more did not drop out

needs some explanation. Most Mojahedin activists continued to believe in their ideology, especially the cause of radical

Islam. Most remained unshaken in their expectation that the second revolution was just around the corner, if not immediately

at hand. Most remained under the sway of Rajavi's charismatic personality. ... Most members could not envisage a life

outside the Mojahedin since the organization provided them with so much: a meaning for existence; a framework for

understanding the world; a channel through which they could fight the regime; a social network; even a family; and - which

should not be underestimated - food, shelter, and a daily stipend, however meagre. For many refugees in such places as

Paris, Rome, Delhi and Karachi, the exit from the organization could mean the entry into the ranks of the street homeless

{even worse as most of them didn’t know a word of language of host country, as they didn’t have time to learn and they

didn’t need it while they were in the cult and had no contact with outside world}. To leave the Mojahedin was thus no easier

than to cut off ties to a religious cult.’ Ervand Abrahamian; 'The Iranian Mojahedin'; Yale University Press; 1989; P: 256

xiv Carroll Stoner and Jo Anne Parke; 'All Gods Children' The Cult Experience Salvation or Slavery?' Chilton Book

Company; 1977; P: 158

xv All quotations from Singer are from: Margaret Thaler Singer ‘Cults in our Midst’; Jossey-Bass; A Wiley Imprint; 2003;

PP: 266; 274

xvi Steven Hassan explains: ‘Another issue for some former members involves harassment, threats, breakings, lawsuits,

blackmail, and even murder, particularly if the person goes public. Since groups believe that anyone who leaves is an enemy,

there is always some risk that something bad will be done to defector.....’ Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control’;

Park Street Press; 1988; P: 179

xvii Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control’; Park Street Press; 1988; P: xiii

xviii Robert Lindsey, "2 Defectors from People's Temple Slain in California,” The New York Times (Feb 28, 1980), A16.

Cited from: Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control; Park Street Press; 1988; P: 104

xix Lindsey Gruson, " 2 Hare Krishna Aides Accused of Child Molesting." The New York Times (Feb 18, 1987). Cited from:

Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control; Park Street Press; 1988; P: 104

xx Steve Allen, ‘Beloved Son: A Story of the Jesus Cults’ {New York:Bobbs - Merill Company, incl, 1982), 192 – 193 Cited

from: Steven Hassan; 'Combatting Cult Mind Control; Park Street Press; 1988; P: 104

xxi ‘Pupil executioner’ was a title given to one of the old members of MEK, once in the central committee of the

organisation. His name can be found in MEK’s publication: ‘communiqué of central committee’ dated 10th June1985; page

33 number 47.

xxii This is usually when a defector who has been silenced up to then, begins to talk. For example in my case almost 6 or 7

years after I left the organisation I was titled as ‘Mozdoor’ or mercenary, when my memoirs were translated into Persian,

when supporters could read it and learn about what is happening in the organisation. It is interesting that my memoirs in

English and other languages were out a few years earlier and till then, MEK was silent about it, as they didn’t feel threatened

Page 13 of 13

by them as it could not be read by the supporters and perhaps most supporters didn’t even know about it, Then their only

reaction was sending me a message via a friend saying: ‘We didn’t expect you writing and revealing our ‘family’ affairs and

secrets in outside world.’ But apparently the Persian version of the book hurtthem and they had to call me ‘mercenary’ as

well.

xxiii Former MKO members who were held in Abu Ghraib prison told Human Rights Watch that their cell doors bore a

plaque with “Mojahedin Safekeeping” [Amanat-e Mojahedin] written on it.

xxiv Arifa Akbar, “Human torches mark protest; 10 Iranian exiles become fireballs, two die martyrs,” The Independent, July

2, 2003.

xxv http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/mena/iran0505/1.htm#_Toc103593125 last visited on 16th July 2009