Causes and Ramifications of De-Listing of the PMOI from the U.S. State Department’s FTOs List


Masoud Kazemzadeh
by Masoud Kazemzadeh

Causes and Ramifications of De-Listing of the PMOI from the U.S. State Department’s FTOs List

I. Derivers of American Foreign Policy

1. The Clinton administration placed the PMOI on the FTOs (Foreign Terrorist Organizations) list in order to reward President Khatami’s moderation. This had less to do with what the PMOI or Khatami (and the fundamentalist terrorist regime) had actually done, and had more to do with what policies would serve the national interests of the U.S. Some times foreign policy is determined by ideals, but usually it is by interests. When ideals and interests are in conflict, most governments choose their interests in the determination of their foreign policy. Foreign policy is not about consistency. For example, the U.S. State department knew full-well then, and knows full well now, that the fundamentalist regime had engaged in unambiguous TERRORIST activities. For example, the terrorist regime mass murdered political prisoners in 1981 was done by Ayatollah Khomeini and at that very time Khatami was one of the main leaders of the regime. Under Khatami’s leadership of Keyhan, the  regime’s mouthpiece, Keyhan viciously attacked the moderate forces such as Mehdi Bazargan and others pro-democracy forces (Bani Sadr, etc). Khatami was one the main propagandists of the fundamentalist regime in that period. Khatami was one of the main persons who authored Khomeini’s statements. From the invasion and takeover of the American embassy to the creation of the terrorist Lebanese Hezbollah, the magnitude of the actual terrorist actions of the fundamentalist regime is huge and Mohammad Khatami was among the leaders of the Islamic Republican Party, in Majles, editor-in-chief of Keyhan, and in the government.

When the State Department listed the PMOI in the FTO, it was not because Khatami was a decent democrat, but despite the FACT that Khatami was part of the leadership of the fundamentalist regime responsible for horrendous terrorist crimes. The U.S. closed its eyes to the terrorist crimes committed by the fundamentalist regime because it believed that Khatami would moderate the policies of the regime.

One of the funniest ironies is that among the examples of PMOI’s terrorism is that it supported the embassy hostage taking. It is true that the PMOI supported the hostage taking, but it was Khomeini and Khatami and the hard-liners and reformists who actually took the Americans hostage and kept them for 444 days. The actual terrorist ACTON was committed by the gang under the leadership of Khomeini, Khatami, and Khamenei. The PMOI supported those terrorist actions. There is a HUGE difference between ENGAGING in terrorist ACTIONS on the one hand, and supporting those terrorist action on the other. Khatami was guilty of being a prominent member of the gang that engaged in taking terrorist action, while the PMOI was guilty of supporting those actions by Khomeini and Khatami. Fundamentalists (reformists and hardliners) were the terrorists inside the embassy holding Americans hostage. The PMOI was outside marching and supporting the fundamentalists inside engaging in the terrorist action.

Therefore, the actual deeds were not the primary criteria. The interests of the U.S. was the primary determining factor. The State Department was following the decision of the White House in deciding to help and reward President Khatami DESPITE the FACT that in actual fact Khatami and the regime he represented was a main terrorist entity in the world. Khatami was promising a set of policies, and the U.S. wanted to reward those new policies. Therefore, the State Department rewarded the terrorist regime with listing the PMOI. Historical actions were ignored and new interests were the deciding factor.

In sum, what is germane is what each group could do today that would be in the interests of the U.S. or undermined them.

2. The Obama administration’s primary policy towards the fundamentalist regime was to sit down and negotiate with Khamenei with no pre-conditions. Hence, President Obama made the Norooz messages and used the term "The Islamic Republic of Iran," and repeatedly stated that it wants to reach agreements based on "mutual interests and mutual respect." There was no mention of the FACT that this regime is the primary state sponsor of terrorism and that the Supreme Leader in one of the top terrorists in the world. The Obama administration’s policy was to reach an agreement with the regime and therefore the Norooz message and private Obama letters to Khamenei.

For the sake of reaching an agreement with the regime, when Khamenei was brutalizing and murdering the protesters after the June 2009 election, the Obama administration refused to side with the protesters. The INTEREST of reaching an agreement with the hard-line regime on the nuclear enrichment issue was the primary concern of the Obama administration. If President Obama sided with the protesters and called for the change of the regime with democracy, then Khamenei would STOP the negotiations with the U.S. government. Therefore, President Obama made some mild remarks after great pressure. President Obama’s policy to sit down and talk with the regime provided legitimacy to the hard-line regime and strengthened the regime and had a demoralizing impact on the Green and pro-democracy protesters. President Obama chose what he regarded as American’s INTERESTS (reaching an agreement with the regime which would end the nuclear enrichment) and ignored America’s IDEALS (of democracy, freedom, human rights).

II. A New Policy Towards the PMOI

It became plain that the Obama policy of engagement with the regime had totally failed. Despite President Obama pursuing the policy of sitting down with officials of the regime to reach an agreement, no such agreement was reached. It is now more than 2 years and 1 month since President Obama took office. The regime has more centrifuges and more enriched uranium. Now it is clear to the Obama administration that the regime did not accept what they had offered the regime. The question is what would the fundamentalist regime accept in order to fully stop enrichment program. If the position of the fundamentalist regime is that it would not stop enrichment no matter what the U.S. would offer then no negotiation would succeed in stopping the regime from enrichment.

It appears to me that the Obama administration has given up on the possibility that the regime could be appeased. So, what NOW?

A number of things have occurred in the past 2 years.

1. The Green Movement (fortunately) rose and (unfortunately) fell. The hard-liners successfully repressed it (for now at least). The Obama administration by holding meetings with the officials of the hard-line regime, in actual fact provided legitimacy to Ahmadinejad-Khamenei.

2. The PMOI succeeded in winning several court cases in the UK and EU. The PMOI then succeeded in removing the PMOI from the UK and EU terrorist lists. Therefore, according to UK and EU, the PMOI is not a terrorist group.

3. The PMOI won a court case in the U.S. The court asked the State Department to review the case and allow the PMOI and its attorneys to challenge the designation.

4. Via some PR group, the PMOI has held several fantastically successful conferences where former TOP officials in the U.S. diplomatic, political, security, military, intelligence communities presented arguments for support of de-listing of the PMOI. Many made glowing support for the PMOI. They include liberal democrats, conservative republicans, neo-conservatives, Realists, etc. These are great victories for the PMOI.

5. These efforts may lead to the de-listing of the PMOI.

I think in the next several months we will witness more efforts to have the PMOI de-listed. On one side will be the PMOI which will concentrate its efforts to de-list itself. I guess that the IRI is very upset about this. My guess is that the fundamentalist regime will tell its agents and supporters to do all they can to stop the de-listing of the PMOI.

My guess is that the PMOI will win this fight. Why? It is in the national interests of the U.S. to de-list the PMOI. The Obama administration has lost all hope to get the regime to agree to suspend uranium enrichment. So why the hell to negotiate with the regime if there is no chance that the regime would stop doing things that could provide them with the possibility to have nuclear weapons. The PMOI has provided intelligence to the U.S. Moreover, with the de-listing of the PMOI, the PMOI could increase its activities outside and inside Iran. American (and European) assistance would increase the power of the PMOI, which would allow it to become more active inside Iran. The more powerful the PMOI becomes, the more it could help the U.S. with intelligence and the like. If the regime would get close to acquiring nuclear weapons, then the U.S. could cooperate with the PMOI in sabotaging the nuclear facilities. Or in a war scenario, the PMOI could play the same role the Northern Alliance played in the U.S. war against al Qaeda-Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001. That is the U.S. would bomb (missiles, smart bombs from airplanes) the coercive apparatuses (IRGC, Basij, Ministry of Intelligence, Niroyeh Entezami) of the fundamentalist regime and then the PMOI forces would enter to fill the vacuum.

In other words there are a lot of REAL BENEFITS to American national interest by de-listing the PMOI and using the group. There are also disadvantages to the U.S. interests of de-listing the PMOI. One may criticize the U.S. for working with a group that itself had listed as terrorist. The U.S. has worked closely with groups once described as terrorist such as the PLO (and Yasser Arafat), ANC (African National Congress and Nelson Mandela) , IRA, etc. The U.S. has also has been working with former insurgents in Iraq and elements of Taliban in Afghanistan. In actual FACT the Obama administration engaged in negotiations with officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which the state department has classified as the number one state-sponsor of terrorism. So the U.S. has already been engaged in negotiations with the biggest terrorist in the world, so using a groups that has committed one-zillionth of those would not be much of a headache.

My guess is if the hard-liners arrested Mousavi and Karrubi in the next few days and there was a mass uprising and the regime successfully repressed the uprising, then the U.S. would lose all hope in the Green Movement. Then, the Obama administration would de-list the PMOI in a short order. In a cost-benefit analysis, the benefits outweigh the costs for the U.S. by de-listing the PMOI.

III. Losers

1. The BIGGEST LOSER is, of course, the fundamentalist regime. The IRI is most worried about the PMOI.

2. Those who promote appeasement of the fundamentalist regime.

IV. Winners

1. The BIGGEST WINNER is, of course, the PMOI.


V. Ramifications of De-Listing of the PMOI on the Opposition Groups

1. The Democratic Opposition (Iran National Front, NAMIR, Iran Liberal Party, etc)

The democratic opposition does NOT have any lobbying group in the U.S. If the democratic opposition had a lobbying group, then this lobby group would have openly and explicitly lobbied against the interests of the fundamentalist regime.

If the PMOI is de-listed, they would lobby against the regime. To the extent that a group (ANY group) works against the interests of the fundamentalist group, to that extent that is bad for the fundamentalist regime. With some exceptions, the policies that HARM the fundamentalist regime, of course hurt the regime, and thus are good for the Iranian people.

The PMOI would also lobby to benefit itself. This obviously would not be good for the democratic opposition.

The question is what is more significant? And relatedly, on BALANCE, are the advantages more or are the disadvantages more? It depends on the nature of the PMOI. The PMOI is by far the MOST organized opposition group. No other opposition group comes close. This is of course, the fault of us in the other opposition groups. The FACT that Jebhe Melli and monarchists and Marxists or not as organized is OUR fault. The PMOI is also intensely opposed by many Iranians, inside and outside Iran. Therefore, in a free and democratic election, the PMOI would get something like 5% of the vote. In other words, the PMOI could harm the fundamentalist regime, but in a democratic system could NOT harm other opposition groups.

Policy Ramifications for Iranian Democrats

If there are free and democratic elections in Iran, in all likelihood, we will win. Therefore, we do not have to fear any scenario in which there will be free and democratic elections. The PRIMARY obstacle for democracy in Iran is the existence of the fundamentalist regime. Therefore, OUR primary goal is to weaken the fundamentalist regime so that it would be overthrown or the regime accept free and democratic elections. The weaker the fundamentalist regime, the higher the likelihood of the regime being overthrown. The weaker the fundamentalist regime, the higher the likelihood of the regime accepting free and democratic elections.

If the fundamentalist regime is strong it would NOT accept free and democratic elections. If the regime is strong it would not be overthrown.

The PMOI does not pose any threat to the Iranian democrats as long as there will be democratic and free election. Many democrats hate and oppose the PMOI. In my opinion, the regime will send its agents and supporters to try to manipulate the members of the Iranian American community in order to use them as useful idiots in the regime’s fight against the PMOI. We should not fall for their tricks. We oppose the PMOI, but our MAIN enemy is the fundamentalist terrorist regime. As long as the PMOI does not attack us, they pose no threat to us. We should be smart and not allow the supporters of the regime fool the less politically astute and use them to help the fundamentalist regime.

Also all the opposition groups (JM, monarchists, Leftists, Greens, ethnic parties) should try to make their organizations stronger.

2. The Monarchists

The monarchists, by and large, prefer the fundamentalist regime to the PMOI. A smart plan of the Ministry of Intelligence would be to pose as an opponent of the IRI or supporter of monarchy in order to mobilize the monarchists to attack the PMOI. If a member of the Ministry of Intelligence arrived and said that he or she is a supporter of Ahmadinejad, he or she would not be very successful in mobilizing many in attacking the PMOI. But if that same person claimed to be an opponent of the IRI, then he or she would have a good change in fooling many in a campaign against the PMOI. Here the role of Reza Pahlavi and top monarchist personalities could counter the plans of the Ministry of Intelligence. RP and monarchist personalities have to find a way to prevent their supporters being used by the fundamentalist regime agents and supporters.

Unfortunately for RP, the bulk of the monarchists are not very politically astute. They say things that harm the cause of monarchy. RP talks about "emrooz faghat etehad" day in and day out, but his supporters insult and attack every person who is not a monarchist or a sycophant of RP. Reza Pahlavi needs to find a way to prevent his supporters from being manipulated by the Ministry of intelligence and supporters of the fundamentalist regime and used as useful idiots.

Some monarchists who have been trying to get assistance from the U.S. government might feel jealous that the PMOI has succeeded in gaining support from the U.S. government. RP and monarchist officials need to analyze this rationally and not emotionally. They need to develop future alternative scenarios and see what policy they take today will help them in the next stages. Certainly siding with the fundamentalist regime against another opposition group – what exactly the Tudeh Party and Fadaian-Majority did between 1979 and 1985 – will be regarded the same way people view the policies of the Tudeh Party and Aksariyat as regime collaborators. The question for Reza Pahlavi is this. Realistically, does RP think that monarchists constitute more than 5 to 10 percent of the population? Realistically, does the PMOI get more than 5% of the vote? If RP really wants to see the fundamentalist regime overthrown, then which of the following policies would serve his goal? Policy ONE to engage in fight against PMOI; Policy TWO leave the PMOI alone and instead concentrate on building monarchists’ own organization.

Policy ONE to engage in a fight with the PMOI would definitely 100% help the fundamentalism regime and would definitely weaken the monarchists and would weaken the PMOI.

Policy TWO leave the PMOI alone, and organize monarchists own supporters and try to also gain some support from U.S. government as well. The fundamentalist regime would definitely 100% be the loser. The PMOI benefits a little. The monarchists will benefit a little.

3. The Marxists

The bulk of Iranian Marxists are highly educated and highly politically astute. Therefore, they could not be easily manipulated by the agents of the Ministry of Intelligence.

During Feb 1979-1985 or so (1983?) , the Tudeh Party and Fadaiyan-Majority did side with the fundamentalist regime and against other opposition groups (democrats, other Marxists, PMOI, Kurdish groups, etc). Many of them were executed by the terrorist regime in 1988 during the massacre of political prisoners.

Due to the weakness of Iranian Marxist groups, several pseudo-leftists have been fooling Western progressives in order to help the appeasement of the terrorist regime. Many leftists in the U.S., UK, parts of Western Europe, and Latin America are susceptible to being fooled and used as useful idiots by the fundamentalist regime and its supporter, agents and apologists.

Fortunately, in the past few months, I have noticed a rise in the activities of Iranian Marxists. This is a welcomed phenomena. First, Iranian Marxists can prevent the agents of the Ministry of Intelligence, the supporters and apologists of the fundamentalist regime from fooling Marxists around the world and use then as useful idiots. Second, Iranian Marxists can gain the solidarity of leftists around the world with progressive Iranians. Third, Iranian Marxists are part and parcel of Iranian society. Therefore, to the extent that they accept democracy and freedom, they can play a very positive role in the fight against the terrorist regime and a positive role in the construction of a multi-party democracy after the overthrow of the fundamentalist regime.

Unfortunately, almost all the Iranian Marxist groups in 1979 were terribly dictatorial. Equally bad were their wrong analyses, which made some to constantly attack the democratic forces (called us liberals, bourgeois, jadeh saf kon imperialist, etc), while some supported Khomeini and sided against JM, Bazargan, and Bani Sadr. Neither Fadaian-Minority, nor Peykar, supported the democrats. Tudeh and Fadaian-Majority totally sided with Khomeini and called democrats "jasos" and supporters of imperialism. There were some leftists who were democratic such as Sazeman Vahdat Kommunisti, Shoray Motehhad Chap, and National Democratic Front, but, unfortunately, they constituted a small minority of Iranian leftists.

Ramifications for Iranian Left

Like the democratic opposition, the left should simply remain quiet on the issue of de-listing of the PMOI.

The Iranian left should become more active in condemning the pseudo-leftists who engage in fooling the western leftists.

I think it would be helpful in the struggle against the IRI if the leftists would explicitly state that:

a. they oppose the one-party dictatorship that existed in the former USSR, China, and what was the so-called actually existing socialism;

b. they now fully support civil liberties for all and multiparty democracy;

c. their policies in the 1979-1980s were wrong, that they should have cooperated with the MODERN DEMOCRATIC groups (JM, Bazargan, Bani Sadr) and opposed Khomeini; and

d. now they are willing to fully support working with the liberal democratic forces in order to create a democratic secular republic, with freedom of the press, parties, and elections as well as human rights.

Once the Iranian leftists do these, it would become easier for those of us in the democratic opposition to make the argument that today’s leftists are not like the old Stalinist tyrants who massacred millions and millions. This would help all of us to concentrate all our attacks on the fundamentalist regime.

4. The Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdestan

The DPIK is well organized and enjoys great mass support among the Kurdish population inside Iran as well as among Kurds in the diaspora. The DPIK has moved from being pro-Soviet party (1940s to 1979), to a Euro-communist (1979-early 1980s), to Euro-socialist (mid 1980s to 1990s), to a pure ethnic party now. The DPIK has developed a close relationship and friendship with the U.S. government. In my opinion, the DPIK would benefit if the PMOI was de-listed. Both DPIK and PMOI wish the U.S. govt to stop appeasement of the fundamentalist regime. Their social base is also different, they do not compete for support among the same persons. The DPIK’s social base is among the Sunni Kurds and the PMOI’s social base is among non-Kurdish Iranians. The two groups could help each other in many ways in Iran, in Iraq, and in Washington DC. A PMOI-DPIK alliance or cooperation (formal or informal) would greatly enhance their abilities to gain support from the U.S. and other countries around the world.

The above may also hold for Komeleh. If I am not mistaken there are 2 or 3 Komeleh factions. I think that the above would hold for all them.

5. Greens

I see the Greens as being comprised of many elements.

a. Reformist Greens

The reformist faction (supporters of Mousavi and Karrubi) will not be happy with the de-listing of the PMOI. I guess that many of them will vocally condemn it. But paradoxically, it also may help them. Nothing scares the daylight out of the hard-line regime than the PMOI. The reformists have always presented themselves to the hard-line elements as a group (inside the fundamentalist oligarchy) that could successfully deflect the threat from the U.S. In other words, the reformist ARGUMENT to other members of the ruling fundamentalist oligarchy has been: "we and our policies will stop the U.S. from harming the nezam." If the hard-liners believe that there is no real threat from the PMOI or the U.S., then the hard-liners could easily repress the reformists with no worry. But if there is a possibility of real threat from the PMOI (or monarchists, or democrats, or DPIK), then the hard-liners would be worried to get rid of the reformists. In other words, sharing power with the reformists is actually good for the Nezam, both domestically and internationally.

My guess is that the reformist Greens will make many public statements against the de-listing of the PMOI. Many are emotionally intensely opposed to the PMOI. The reformists were those in the 1979-1980s who were among the leaders of the fundamentalist regime and were directly involved in the brutal fight against the PMOI. But ironically, they would not be a loser if the PMOI is de-listed. Some of their less astute supporters may think that the PMOI is going to get more powerful and thus would undermine their ability to get support and attention. That would be a little true outside Iran. But inside Iran, the de-listing of the PMOI could shake the hard-liners and make them stop the repression of the reformists. Although it should be kept in mind that the hard-liners may not think very rationally and do what is against the interests of the nezam.

In my opinion, the de-listing of the PMOI would have some advantages and some disadvantages for the reformist wing of the Greens.

b. Democratic Greens

Democratic Greens or Secular Greens are the ones whose slogans are "Esteghlal, Azadi, Jomhuri Irani" [Independence, Freedom, IRANIAN Republic], and "Marg bar Asl Velayat faghih" [Death to the Principle of Rule of a Cleric]. Their ideals are identical to those of the Iran National Front and other pro-democracy groups (i.e., they want a democratic secular republic). I don’t think the de-listing of the PMOI would have any measurable impact on the Democratic Greens. There might be some minor advantages and some minor disadvantages.


My guess is that in the next few months many of us will not be happy with some of the things we will see. But eventually, I think the BIGGEST loser is the fundamentalist terrorist regime. I do NOT think that the process will undermine the democratic forces (JM, NAMIR, Iran Liberal Party), or the monarchists, leftists, or Kurdish groups.

The de-listing of the PMOI will make the PMOI only a little more powerful. Their social base is very limited. It is about 5% of the population, but they are highly devoted and highly organized. The more powerful PMOI would be able to help the U.S. much more in gathering intelligence and perhaps some sabotage of various facilities of the terrorist regime on behalf of the U.S.

I think the BIGGEST LOSERS will be the fundamentalist regime and its supporters.

I do not think the PMOI has made a democratic transformation. If they remain dictatorial, they would become a nuisance to the rest of us. If they make a democratic transformation, that would be helpful in the post-fundamentalist Iran for the prospects of stability and democratization.

The BEST policy we all could take is to make various opposition groups stronger and stronger. Of course the stronger the pro-democracy groups, the higher the likelihood of transition to democracy in Iran.

With hope for a free and democratic Iran.

My 2 cents,


P.S. My apologies for the typos.  I would probably not be able to respond for the next 4 or 5 days.


more from Masoud Kazemzadeh


by farhad450 on

Loudspeakers now up to 210!!! In case anyone forgot or anyone cares.





by hass on

The Clinton administration did NOT put the MEK on the FTO list as a reward to Khatami. The MEK was a charter member of that list: it was on the list ever since the list came into existence. That's because the MEK had been characterized as a criminal terrorist organization LONG before the list came into existence in 1997. The annual Patterns of Global Terrorism report issued by the State Department listed the organization as terrorists before the FTO list was created.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Dear G, Rahmanian

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


I do not want to repeat myself and waste your time so I will make it short. I do not trust the MKO leadership. Siding with Saddam was just one of the many reasons. I do not approve of the way Rajavis treat their own members. I do not like the extreme control they have over every day lives of the rank and file. I do not like their Islamic nature.  Any group I support needs to meet a minimum standard that MKO does not meet. 

You know how I feel about Islam. Why would I ever support a group that is dedicated to an Islamic based regime? I want the IR gone but not to replace it with a new Islamic regime.

I reside in the USA. I do not consider the USA the enemy. Besides people in USA enjoy a great deal of personal freedoms unlike people in Camp Ashraf. I am not told whom to marry; what to think or what to wear. This in contrast with MKO and its relation to Saddam. For one I do not have to go shoot at Iranians to live in USA. If I did then I probably move. I am not criticizing MKO members to living in Iraq. I am criticizing them for actively fighting along Saddam to break up Iran and hand it to him.


G. Rahmanian

Dear VPK:

by G. Rahmanian on

I don't think you understood what I meant. As I have said before, I don't want to engage those who are against the IR in any dialogue or debate unless it helps both sides. Although I have read contradictory remarks by you, I have avoided getting involved in reminding you of them, simply because I don't want to take your time!!! The word "attack" also means strong criticism. For example: a scathing attack on an article. Please look it up in your own dictionary, if don't trust mine. Now, I have a question for you. What should decent Iranians do when  their country is run by "Arabs?" Should they try to take it back whatever it might take or should they sit back and wait for the regime to "dissolve" on its own? On Feb. 21 you wrote: "Iran is a slave to the filty Arab leftovers from the past 1400 years. Maybe next time the nationalists take over we should take care of them. No more fifth column Islamist BS. Iran will never be free while it is run by seyyeds aka Arab Tokhm." If those who are in power not Iranians, then getting help from the rest of the world to take back the country should be considered okay! To many intelligent people who love or care to establish a democracy in Iran, the US  is only a preferred choice. You have certainly read a lot about the US involvement in the 1953 historical events. The US has always been considered an enemy, but a preferred power by some/many Iranians. Do you see Iranians shopping for residences in Russia or China? Why is the US the country of choice for many who say, "Death to America" or condone such slogans. Why is it okay for many Iranians to deal with one "enemy" and not another? According to the regime in Tehran, Saddam was an enemy of Iran, the US is an enemy, even today. The PMOI has made mistakes. So have many other groups. When many who are residing in the democracies of the world were enjoying their lives, Iranians were being bombed day and night. Seeing the regime as enemy number one was only natural for millions of Iranians. The regime provoked the war andprolonged it. If you want to call anyone traitors, then you may consider going back a little further in the history of the revolution and call all those who trusted Khomeini and helped him come to power, without any clue what was in store for them and Iran, traitors as well. That of course, includes  the PMOI, too. But since we cannot label everyone a traitor, then let's criticize the mistakes and encourage the right things all those opposing the regime, do.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Dear G. Rahmanian

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


I have a response and a question:

  • How do you define "attacking". To me attack means violence. No one is using violence here; but we are indicating our extreme displeasure at MKO.
  • Just being anti IR does not make one right; nor a better choice . It takes more than just being anti IR to get my respect. MKO is an Islamist gang no better than IR; maybe worse.
  • The MKO is against IR because Rajavi wanted the job of VF. He and Mollahs both wanted to be the dictator. Mollahs won. I will not want to trade one dictator for another.


I worked it out, It's a logical function!

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

If you get the following logical function  (swap the 4 parameters at will for alternative combinations): 

(mko) AND (nuke) OR (neda) AND (zionists) =1

Where Logical 1 = displaying your extreme anger and hatred with aggresive comments on 

Then you got a islamist regime "supporter"!

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

G. Rahmanian


by G. Rahmanian on

Did I forget to tell you attacking Iranians who oppose the regime in Tehran must be relegated to its hired goons?


"Respect the rights of all"

by comrade on

What did I tell you? Now we have a drama in parallel to the "Waco siege" here.  

Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Here is my position:

  • I do not trust the MKO leadership. Nothing they say or do will change this. That means I do not trust the MKO as an organization and will never work with the MKO leadership.
  • The rank and file are a different story. I have said before. Post IR there should be amnesty for the rank and file who have not killed anyone. They should be able to join Iranian society and be like anyone.

This is not hatred it is realism. Actions have reactions. The actions of MKO leadership are the reason for how I feel about it.

G. Rahmanian

Highly Speculative!

by G. Rahmanian on

Lots of speculations and not much factual data. That's why I thought it might be a good idea for PMOI members to inform us, as well. Certainly, they couldn't have lied through the delisting of their organization from FTOs in Europe. Or could they? As for needing to be blessed by the US, that is what many organizations or individuals seem to long for when fighting against or trying to protect tyrannical rulers in their countries or do business. The US interest groups may even handpick such individuals or set up such organizations from scratch. We must have learned by now, American interest groups are essentially concerned with protecting America's interests. There's nothing wrong with that per se. The problem arises when an organization's declared objectives in dealing with such interest groups are not transparent. Or when what the organization claims to be its true objectives do not match their activities on the ground. Also, we can express our opinions on different issue and support whomever we want to lead us, but we cannot sit in washington, Paris, London, etc. and say people WILL vote or WILL NOT vote for this or that person, if or when there's a regime change in Iran, no matter how much we love or loathe an individual. Such sloganeering does no befit intelligent talks. 


To commenters: Respect the rights of all

by farhad450 on

It saddens me when I see such cutthroat hatred especially towards the iranians who I love.  I will never forget the cutthroat reaction of everyone when ashraf attack happened, and right now when no one cares about the 180 loudspeakers used against them.  You bring hate against thousands of innocent people over incidences that happened decades ago.  There is nothing to argue here, I know you will not let go of your hatred.  From what I have read of their platform, they want the same things you want.  Secularism, human rights,a 6 month transitional government until democratic election.  Yes democratic election, where ALL participate and vote.  I am not a member, and it's not my place to defend them.  It's your ruthless hate comments that brings me back.  The more hatred I see from you guys, the more I want to help them.  They are not terrorists, and of course the label should be removed.  I hope responsible respectful iranians bring unity not hate.  Respect the rights of all.


Call them Marxists, or whatever you like

by Rea on

It is a failed ideology. Just as dangerous as IRI.

Either you are with us or you are against. 

Briefly, never trust a marxist. Religionist neither. Two sides of the same coin.


A different perspective, in short

by MM on

Military/terror activities:

PMOI was directly involved in killing Americans, Iranians, and Iraqi Kurds:

1A. PMOI boasted about murdering Lewis Hawkins (a military attache') on 13 Khordaad 53 on the 10th anniversary of 15th Khordaad.


2A. PMOI was partly responsible in quelling of the Kurds when Sr. Bush called for Iraqis to rise.

3A. PMOI was directly responsible for killing of Iranians and Iranian soldiers when they slept in Saddam's bed doing his dirty work.


1B. PMOI selected president-for-life and husband are revered like cult symbols, and the whole organization is run like a cult with forced marriages, etc. (Rev. Jones camp sound familiar?).  PMOI believes in a militaristic Islamist form of government and they extend their reach into every aspect of their members, and those who want out are severely punished. 

2B. In order to reach their goals, they have said everything and done everything to move ahead, whether sleeping with IRI, Saddam and now with nut-jobs like John Bolton.


There are several expressions that come to my mind, 2 suffice for now:

English: A leopard trying to change his spots!

Farsi: It is the same donkey with a different packsaddle (paalaan)!

As the author pointed out, however, the problem with some American think-tanks is that the geopolitical goals outweigh idealism and folks like Bolton will risk electrocution by pi$$ing on a plug if he thought that it would progress his overall goals.

The problem with Iranians is that we do not seem to be able to unite under a set of rules that will define a democratic movement for the future, be it monarchy, federalism or republican.  Now, are we going to just forget, e.g., what happened to the 50 lies under an apple tree (// and trust another Khomeini-like or do something different?

One of the better options for unifications now is for Reza Pahlavi to correct the flaws in the 1906 constitution, see, e.g. (// which, by the way, will make the 1906 constitution his own 201? secular constitution, and unite with all other freedom loving seculars, federalists and republican to form a viable front against IRI and PMOI.  And, finally, for heavens sake, stop talking about it and do something like calling for a meeting of ALL of the freedom-loving minds.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Is practiced all over the world. Some are just better at it. Soviets did it; BBC does it; Shah; IRI; USA; Israel; they all do it. 

IR does it in many ways. It was interesting trick they used on Karroubi. Of course analyzing the results will be difficult. Will someone not show up because they suspect a trick?

Misinformation is also the enemy of true democracy. People make good choices when they know the truth. But of course no politician or leader will admit:

I want the job so I can rob and cheat the people. To give jobs to my friends and family. To rape and kill anyone who disagrees with me ...

This is how Khomeini got to power. But now no one believes IR. So they use Persian names; avatars and pretend to be Green. 

People just have to figure if a particular person is genuine.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Thank you for explaining. I apologize for mistaking your intent. 

MKO "worthier" than to engage us in debate. Now that is comdey. MKO does not want debate. They want to rule; wil never happen,


VPK: misinformatin, disinformation, misrepresentation

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

Are all trade marks of the islamist regime. MI6 gave them good training in these araes! It used to work in earlier days, but as you have probably noticed, it is just too obvious now.

One example: I was looking at Green opposition blog sites late last night and it was full of comments from "Green supporters", asking people out immediately (instead of planned next tuesday), because "they had information", that Karoubi was murdered and Mousavi badly beaten up! This morning similar blogs. This kind of misinformation  is designed to test the resolve of opposition in case of harm to Mousavi/Karoobi, and also make people  indifferent to when it actually happens.


"Personal business must yield to collective interest."



by Mehrban on

My comment is a response to G.Rahmaninan who ascribes other reasons to MEK's absence on this site.  

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


Dear Mehrban

What do you expect the reaction from us to be? To welcome traitors with open arms! If they are not able to handle it too bad. Remember the hatred for MKO goes across board.

If USA is stupid enough to use them as an option they get what they deserve. More hostility from Iran and this time well earned. You may "see" MKO as you wish. I see them as traitors and I am not alone in this. They have the nerve to anoint one of their own as "President" of Iran. It reminds me of the guy who got kicked out of the village; then went back demanding the hand of Kadkhodah's daughter in marriage.

Truth is that MKO will never gain control of Iran.

  • Their leadership is power hungry and in my opinion quite mad by now. They are mostly good at fooling European politcians and Israel into giving them money and a place for a cushy life.
  • Their ideology is outdated and a proven failure. We know Marxism failed. We also know Political Islam failed. That's their ideology.
  • Their membership is dwindling band of middle aged men and women. They are mentally scarred by years of abuse at the hands of MKO leadership. They have no real military value. The IR will wipe them out completely in any head on battle. Therefore they have no choice but resorting to terrorism. That wil just make Iranian peole hate them more.
  • People of Iran hate tlhem. They will not get any popular support. In a democratic election they are luck to get 1 % and I will be shocked if they do that well. I know many people who will not even speak to a member of MKO much less vote for them.

The only thing they have is organization mostly outside Iran. Yes I give them credit for being well organized. Plus they have some very dedicated members: misguided but dedicated. Their power in Iran is minimal.

If USA tries to give them power in Iran it will be a huge mistake. The only way to do it will be by military force: USA military. Then they will be known as puppets from the beginning. We know how people react to puppets. 

It won't work.


One last question: why do they have so many names? MEK; MKO; PMOI; NCR; 

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Roozbeh_Gilani: Suggestion

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

Any member using a totally misleading avatar, who defends and promotes the exact opposite of the ideology, thought, person or the place behind that avatar should:

I wholeheartedly agree. It should also apply to names. Like when someone who hates pre Islamic Iran uses a pre Islamic name. I am very serious. No more hiding behind totally misleading names and avatars.



Why isn't MEK on this site?

by Mehrban on

It is not from lack of trying.  I recall two (?) blogs and a number of comments written by the members of the organization at IC, their contributions were faced with such vehement hostility by the majority of the commentators here that they stopped, this type of reaction towards this group is not unique to this site.  I wish they would come back and that we could hear what they are up to and what they are thinking at this time. 

I am seeing MEK emerging (for now) as contingency option for the US.  Too bad!


I suggest a new house rule for!

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

 Any member using a totally misleading avatar, who defends and promotes the exact opposite of the ideology, thought, person or the place behind that avatar should:

1) Change his avatar to something appropriate to his line of comments, or something neutral (pistachio nuts is a good candidate for aneutral avatar).

2) To redeme himself, he "should start with the total denunciation of his "entire" leadership and their cultist mentality. And nothing short of it, absoloutly nothing."

Or else, he should be sent to the very rear end  of the barbari line, just behind shahid firooz!

How's that?! 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

G. Rahmanian

You Guys/Gals Have Learned

by G. Rahmanian on

Not to trust anything. For small-time traitors, though, the winning margin is always abysmally insignificant. And, as they say, easy come easy go. Unless one fears the sudden collapse of the mullahs, property is the best way to go! Zamin asasyeh peerist. Leaving some in the trust of the gnomes of Zurich wouldn't hurt, at all.


Of goosheh zadan...

by comrade on

Markets differ. There is a pragmatic one and there's an Idealistic one. Winners and losers on both sides. Nowadays the Political day traders have crowded the space; you know the risky hedge-fund of modernity...


Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

None of us are going to set any preconditions! We are not the admin.

  • This site is already blasted by plenty of IR supporters.
  • If MKO wants to speak let it do so. We are all free to respond.

G. Rahmanian


by G. Rahmanian on

Is that secured by the greenback or some verdant property back home? I'd go for the property fearing the volatility of the greenback's exchange rate!!!


Of siding and leaning

by comrade on

If I invited a buddy of mine(!) from IRI here, a similar precondition should apply. Fair. 

Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.


G. Rahmanian

Pretty Amusing

by G. Rahmanian on

That those who side with the IR murderers should set the preconditions for others!

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Re : Where are PMOI

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


I have no personal contacts with them so I have to guess. They tried to post thier views on IC a few times. Each time they got slapped down pretty hard by all sides including me. So I guess they have decided IC ain't worth it.

The MKO knows that it will never get anywhere among Iranians. IC is a primarily Iranian web site. We know MKO too well. So they go for people who do not know them. It is far simpler to fool EU and American than Iranians who are well aware of their past; present and behavior.



by comrade on

Except for those of us whose ultimate desperation has caused them to become fully aligned with the US policies, MKO remains as a terrorist organization whose criminal activities which have been committed since its inception can not be subject to diplomatic considerations and leniency.

If they have anything to say at this site, it should start with the total denunciation of their "entire" leadership and their cultist mentality. And nothing short of it, absoloutly nothing.

Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

For Monarchists, so far as I have seen, they are not but a BIG joke, especially RP!

Why do you have to make below the belt punches? RP is a fine Iranian. I am not a Monarchist but I will take RP over Rajavi or IR any day. In fact I will gladly support RP or even go back {impossible} to days of the Shah.