Home » Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force » Zucker’s List: Enemies of the Rajavi Cult Terrorists

Zucker’s List: Enemies of the Rajavi Cult Terrorists

Professor Rabbi Daniel Zucker, a promoter of the Iranian Communist MEK (MKO, PMOI, NCRI, Rajavi Cult, or Pol Pot of Iran) terrorists, has made a new list of the enemies of this evil cult.

It is a high honor to be placed on a list of enemies of these communist terrorists who have murdered American military officers, Rockwell International employees, and large numbers of Iranians and Iraqis.

Supporters of the MEK have committed terrorist acts in many countries, including in America in 1992. In September 2002, the White House published a background paper listing the MEK as a Saddam Hussein-supported terrorist organization. In 2003, American and coalition forces attacked the MEK terrorists at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. During a period of war with American soldiers dying in Iraq, Zucker is promoting a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), a Marxist terrorist organization as classified by the State Department. Currently, the Federal Government is prosecuting MEK supporters who duped large numbers of persons at Los Angeles International Airport into donating money to the MEK terrorists.

Even the New York Times, with its long history of promoting communists, reported the following about the Pol Pot of Iran terrorists:

“This past winter in Iran, when such a popular outburst among students and others was still just a dream, if you mentioned the Mujahedeen, those who knew and remembered the group laughed at the notion of it spearheading a democracy movement. Instead, they said, the Rajavis, given the chance, would have been the Pol Pot of Iran.”

–Elizabeth Rubin, "The Cult of Rajavi", New York Times Magazine, July 13, 2003

Zucker can demonstrate his knowledge of the MEK by revealing the location of Massoud Rajavi, leader of the MEK. Is Rajavi being held as a prisoner in Iraq for a future war crimes trial or being protected until the American military invades Iran?

It is a pleasure to correct the following false characterizations and to repeat requests that Zucker makes honest disclosures about himself and his sources of funds for his organizations.

Disinformation Campaign in Overdrive: Iran’s VEVAK in High-Gear

Professor Daniel M. Zucker – 9/3/2007

“Professor Paul Sheldon Foote of California State University at Fullerton (Accounting)[lxiii] spent time in pre-revolutionary Iran where he met his wife Badri. A self-styled old school conservative (he likes to call neo-conservatives “Neo-Trotskyites”), he is a frequent contributor to VEVAK sites such as Iran-Interlink,[lxiv] hambastegimeli.net,[lxv] and Mojahedin.ws.[lxvi] Foote serves as the regime’s “attack-dog” against the Iranian resistance organizations NCRI and MEK and their supporters, and is also an apologist for the Tehran regime. Now, not everyone needs to like the NCRI and MEK; we do live in a free country and have a right to pick whom we support and whom we don’t. But unlike Dr. Kenneth Timmerman who is a vocal opponent of the MEK but even more vociferous critic of the Tehran regime, Foote defends the IRI. I guess that being as conservative as he claims to be allows him to be comfortable with the conservatism of Iran’s radical Islamist clerks.”


Conservative Credentials

This article is not the first time that Zucker has questioned my conservative credentials without establishing his own conservative credentials. Please see Zucker’s comment and my reply at The Conservative Voice:


I have been a registered Republican for my entire voting life. My political party registration is a matter of public record. Anyone can verify my political party registration by researching the records at:

Neal Kelley, Orange County Registrar of Voters

1300 South Grand Avenue | Building C | Santa Ana CA 92705 | 714.567.7600


It is also a matter of public record in Los Angeles County, California that Republican voters elected me to the Republican County Central Committee in 1990 and that I was a Republican candidate for State Assembly in 1992. The California Republican Assembly (CRA) endorsed me in 1992. United Republicans of California (UROC) co-endorsed me in 1992.

My political contributions to conservative Republican candidates are posted at the Web site of California’s Secretary of State.

Is Zucker a registered Republican?

Military Service

During 1968 and 1969, I served in the American Army in Vietnam. I volunteered to fight against the communists.

In which military organization has Zucker served? Has Zucker fought in any way against communists at any time?

By contrast, one of the strongest supporters of the MEK in Congress is Congressman Tom Tancredo (Republican—Colorado and 2008 presidential candidate). Tancredo is a chickenhawk neoconservative who avoided service in Vietnam using a mental excuse. See:

Crazy for You

By Patricia Calhoun

Published: December 3, 1998


Tancredo is the co-chairperson of the Iran caucus in Congress with Congressman Bob Filner (Democrat—California and son of a communist party candidate for Congress).

Living and Working Experiences in Iran

Zucker claimed wrongly that I met my wife, Badri, in Iran. I met my wife in London, England. We were working in the Chief Foreign Branch of Barclays Bank in 1967. Badri, who became a manager at Bank Melli Iran, received her international banking training from Barclays Bank.

My first trip to Iran was in 1968 for our wedding in Tehran. The Bureau of International Commerce of the United States Department of Commerce sent me to work at the American Embassy in Tehran during the summer of 1970 (between my first and second years of studies at Harvard Business School). From 1971 to 1972, I studied Persian (Farsi) at Harvard University. Later, Singer Sewing Machine Company sent me on assignments to Tehran and to other locations in the Middle East and North Africa. Our daughter was born in Iran. Our son attended his first schools in Iran. My last trip to Iran during the reign of the Shah of Iran was during the summer of 1976. To my shock, the Shah of Iran abolished all political parties and created a new, single-party state. I predicted to my wife and to others in Iran that the Shah of Iran had made a fatal blunder and would be forced from power.

The Iranian Revolution of 1979 ended my plans to live and work in Iran for my entire career. Events in Iran have placed tremendous strains upon our family, such as: Iran hostage crisis, the American navy’s shooting down of an Iran Air jet, the Iran-Iraq War, and current neoconservative warmonger plots to bomb Iran.

Contrary to Zucker’s implication that I have not returned to Iran during the period of the Islamic Republic of Iran, I have visited Iran in 1995 and in 1996. During my vacations from work as a professor at Sultan Qaboos University in Oman, I taught at an English language institute in Iran.

Zucker has failed to disclose if he has ever been to Iran or has ever studied Persian (Farsi). If Zucker has never been to Iran, then why has he chosen to promote the Pol Pot of Iran terrorists? Why does Zucker want to see the killing fields of Cambodia repeated in Iran by another communist?

My Iranian wife has lost relatives who died fighting for the Rajavi Cult. How many family members of victims of the Rajavi Cult has Zucker met? How many funeral services for Rajavi Cult victims has he attended?


Zucker implied that I am the only person to use neo-Trotskyites in writing about the neo-conservatives. Today, there were 1,030 Google hits for neo-Trotskyite and 112 Google hits for neo-Trotskyite with Foote.

Those who have studied the neo-conservative literature know that that neoconservatives prefer to use Trotskyist. See, for example, Irving Kristol’s “Memoirs of a Trotskyist” in his book, Neo-Conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea.

While dishonest neoconservatives deny connections to Trotskyism, neoconservative writer Jacob Heilbrunn explained the connections in “The Neoconservative Journey” (Chapter 5 of Varieties of Conservatism in America, edited by Peter Berkowitz).

Justin Raimondo (Antiwar.com), another writer of many articles critical of the MEK and of neo-conservatives, prefers to use Trotsky-cons. See:

“Today’s Conservatives Are Fascists”


The neo-conservatives were able to dupe many Americans by supporting President Reagan’s hard line foreign policies against the Soviet Union. Casual observers assumed that neo-conservatives are anti-communists. Neo-conservatives were anti-Stalin and those who followed Stalin in the Soviet Union. Admirers of Trotsky believe that Stalin was responsible for the murder of Trotsky in Mexico.

If the neo-conservatives were truly anti-communists, then they would focus on the gains of communists in many countries. Their focus would not be upon toppling anti-communist Islamic leaders in the world.

Neo-conservatives are not conservatives. Anyone who does not understand this should read: Justin Raimondo’s Reclaiming the American Right and Patrick J. Buchanan’s A Republic, Not an Empire.

Contributor to Web Sites

Zucker claimed that some of my articles have been posted at VEVAK-supported Web sites. Zucker offered no evidence of VEVAK’s financial support for any of the Web sites he listed.

Zucker failed to note that some of my articles have been published at Web sites in many countries representing the entire political spectrum. Web sites are free to copy my articles posted at my blog and at my Yahoo! Group, Traitors USA. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/traitorsusa/

I welcome the postings of my articles at Web sites anywhere in the world, even at Mossad-supported Web sites in Israel or elsewhere.


Zucker failed to note that the MEK operates a spoof Web site with the same name: Iran-Interlink.

Zucker failed to note that the Web sites he listed do not publish all of my articles.


Zucker did not disclose his failure to meet with victims of this evil cult:

Nejat Association’s appeal to Rabbi Professor Daniel M. Zucker –

"the time for ignorance is past"

Nejat Association, September 21, 2006

We noted with interest your recent article ‘Iran’s VEVAK: Disinformation, Inc.’ which was written in collaboration with the Mojahedin Khalq.

Regardless of this article, the seven member delegation from Nejat Association which is currently in Paris, would very much like to meet with you to share our concerns about the human rights violations inside the Mojahedin’s Camp Ashraf in Iraq.

After a twenty year absence, why is a mother not able to visit her son for two hours? This is her only request. Why will the Mojahedin not allow her this simple request, which under the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention on Protected Persons, is a basic right.

Article 116 – Every internee shall be allowed to receive visitors, especially near relatives, at regular intervals and as frequently as possible.

If you are unable to visit Paris to meet with the delegation, we will be happy to meet with you in Washington where we will be arriving shortly.

Rabbi Zucker, the time for ignorance is past.


Zucker did not disclose that many of the opponents of the Rajavi Cult are former cult members, including Anne Singleton (author of the book, Saddam’s Private Army):

‘Agents of the Intelligence Ministry of Iran’ – Understanding Mojahedin Activity from a Cult Perspective


Anne Singleton, June 26, 2007


On Sunday 17 June I was scheduled to speak on this subject at a public meeting in Paris. The meeting was unfortunately disrupted by an unusually large number of Mojahedin cult members who had lain in wait at the venue in order to prevent people speaking. Regardless of the implications for freedom of speech in a European country, this kind of disruption has become emblematic of the Mojahedin’s inability to even vaguely disguise its cult nature. Similar disruption has taken place in meeting after meeting held by former members of the cult; Paris, April 2005, Amsterdam, October 2005, Washington, D.C., October 2005, London, November 2005. (click here to see a montage of these meetings)

During the disruptions, charged-up cult members rant at former members accusing them of being ‘agents of the Iranian Intelligence Ministry’, ‘agents of the regime’, ‘mercenaries of the Iranian regime’. In my speech I explain the reason this is done and why, even though I was unable to speak at the time, I and other former cult members, rather than feeling angry or intimidated, have nothing but the greatest sympathy for those victims who are still trapped inside this dangerous, destructive cult.


Masoud Banisadr’s book, Masoud: Memoirs of an Iranian Rebel, provided details of the cult’s bizarre practices, including: mandatory divorces, wife assignments, urine analyses to ensure that no one is masturbating, torture, and killing of cult members. Does Zucker dare to disclose how Maryam Rajavi became a “wife” of Massoud Rajavi? Which Islamic religious leader performed the wedding ceremony? To whom was Maryam Rajavi married previously? How many other wives did Massoud Rajavi have? Does Rabbi Zucker condone the evil practices of the Rajavi Cult?

In June 2003, some of the cult members burned themselves to death in protest of Maryam Rajavi’s arrest in France.

Does a rabbi condone having cult members burn themselves to death?

Religious Conservatism

Zucker is a rabbi at

Congregation Beth Sholom




315 Roosevelt Blvd., Long Beach, NY 11561

fax: 516-889-1015

Rabbi Daniel Zucker

S,DM,L,RS,AE email: bethsholom@peoplepc.com


Zucker needs to explain how it is possible for a conservative rabbi to promote communist terrorists while conservative clerks oppose communist terrorists.

Regardless of whether someone is religious, an agnostic, or an atheist, I remain anti-communist.


In March 2006, I debated on the “Power of One” satellite television program on NITV with Zia Atabay and with Manook Khodabakhshian, strong supporters of regime change in Iran. In this program and in many of my writings, I have covered the topic of theocracy. I have noted that my Foote ancestors left England nearly 400 years ago seeking religious and political freedoms.

While England remains a Christian theocracy and a monarchy, I do not advocate an American military invasion of England.

While Israel is a Jewish theocracy, I do not advocate an American military invasion of Israel. Please note the problem of Israel and theocracy posted at the Jewish Virtual Library:

“Israel is confronted with the dilemma of how to exist as a pluralistic, democratic state and, simultaneously, retain its Jewish character. Although there is now a growing sentiment in Israel that an Israeli nationality can be distinguished, no such distinction has been acknowledged to exist in the past. In a landmark Supreme Court decision, Justice Agranat ruled against a man who wanted to have his nationality registration changed from ‘Jewish’ to ‘Israeli’ saying: "There is no Israeli nation separate from the Jewish people." He asserted further that "the Jewish people is composed not only of those residing in Israel but also of Diaspora Jewry.”


Is Zucker an American?

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocracy. Fortunately, Iran is no longer a monarchy. That is more than you can claim for many countries in Europe. While I am opposed to any theocracy, I am opposed to any American military invasion of Iran to satisfy neo-Trotskyite or Zionist insanities.

Neoconservatives Opposing the MEK and the Islamic Republic of Iran

Zucker is correct that a few of the neoconservatives oppose both the MEK and the Islamic Republic of Iran. In addition to Kenneth Timmerman, he could have added: Michael Rubin and Michael Ledeen. See:

Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq

by Michael Rubin


January 13, 2006


Hitting the Mark on Iran

by Michael Rubin


January 27, 2006



In many of my posted writings, you can find a reference to my question for everyone: In 1981, would the world have been better if the MEK had defeated the Islamic leaders?

While I did not vote for President Jimmy Carter, I agreed with his strategy that the world would be better with a zone of Islamic nations than with an expansion of the Soviet Union.

When the Shah of Iran fled from Iran, the nationalists were able to hold power for only 37 days. Given the two choices of the Pol Pot of Iran or of Islamic leaders, I am delighted that the Pol Pot of Iran had to flee to France. Only very sick people would like to see the scenes of the killing fields of Cambodia repeated in any other country.

Is Zucker an apologist for Israel? Which of Zucker’s articles have been critical of Israel?

Zucker’s Funding

The Web site of Americans for Democracy in the Middle East (ADME) does not include any financial disclosures:


When will Zucker make a full disclosure of his sources of funds? When will Zucker disclose if he has received any money or expense-paid trips from the MEK?


For an account of a KGB agent stationed in Iran familiar with dealings with the MEK, read: Vladimir Kuzichkin’s Inside the KGB.

On page 203, he described the MEK as: Islamic Marxist, anti-imperialist, anti-American, and anti-Israel.

Why does a rabbi support an Islamic Marxist, anti-American, and anti-Israel terrorist organization?

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

Note that Zucker was not critical of Max Boot at the CFR. For a critical evaluation of the CFR, read James Perloff’s The Shadows of Power.

Stop War on Iran

Zucker has failed to explain why Americans across the political spectrum have signed petitions opposed to war with Iran. Neoconservative liars have duped many Americans into believing that only leftists are anti-war.

Please note the signers of one statement at:


Prof. Paul Sheldon Foote teaches at California State University-Fullerton.

You may also like

Leave a Comment