Home » Daniel M.Zucker » Ravings of MKO’s Zionist Supporter

Ravings of MKO’s Zionist Supporter

Distorting history and producing different versions of a same historical event is an illness, with long history in the MKO.

For different reasons, including whitewashing the crimes of the past or to win the attraction of new supporters, MKO distorts the history and broadcast new versions of it through its propagandistic outlets.

It was determined recently that this kind of illness is contagious and that MKO supporters also get this illness following their deals with this group.

During past few days, MKO websites published an article by Zionist supporter of Mojahedin, Rabbi Daniel Zucker, who’s responsible for protecting Israeli interests in the US. After meeting Maryam Rajavi a few months ago, he officially asked the Israeli government to recognize his real friends (terrorist MKO) and support it.

His recent article is ridiculously full of lies and distortions so that the MKO itself has refused to publish the article in full, because it knows that all Iranians would find the lies in the article.

However, since the Rajavi’s gang is opportunist, it has taken only one sentence of the article, which says that " The MEK is the grandchild of Dr. Mohammed Mossadeq, the popular nationalist prime minister".

Zucker stresses at the beginning of his article that:

"Most Americans have no idea who and what the Mojahedin-e Khalq is, and for what it stands."

In fact, the secret behind MKO’s claims and distortions should be sought in this very fact.

However, like the MKO itself, Zucker relates this to the efforts of Islamic Republic and to prove this cliché, he resorts to very naïve lies:

"The reason for this difficulty is that the Iranian regime has disseminated a highly successful disinformation campaign about the MEK, a trick that the mullahs learned from studying with the Soviet Union’s KGB. In the period before the fall of the shah, many of the student followers of Ayatollah Khomeini spent time in the USSR learning revolutionary tactics and strategy. One such individual is the present Supreme Leader of Iran, the Faqih, Ayatollah Ali Khameneí, a graduate of Patrice Lumumba Friendship University in Moscow, the Oxford of terrorism."

There’s no doubt that the paragraph above needs no explanation. The only thing worthy of note is that such lies are expressed to pave the way for other lies, in order to decorate and hide the real face of MKO in the West.

When the Israeli regime is massacring the innocent people of Lebanon, Zionist supporter of MKO comes to prepare broader cooperation fo MKO with Israel; to win the support of Zionist lobby in the US, he writes:

"One of the errors about the MEK is the allegation that they were involved in assassinating U.S. Army personal and military contractors in the early and mid-1970’s. The accusation derives from the fact that little was known about the MEK by American intelligence at the time, and not much has been learned until recently. In 1971 the leadership of the MEK was arrested by SAVAK, the shah’s secret police for their pro-democracy activities. While the leadership was in prison, a dissident group broke away from the Muslim Mojahedin and formed a Marxist faction. It was this latter group which used the Mojahedin name but violated its principles and attacked and killed Americans."

After 25 years, Mr. Zucker wants to distort the documented history; It would be good for him to study MKO’s own journals published at that time, claiming and admitting the killing of Americans in order to get political advantages.

Elsewhere in his article, Zucker tries to distort the realty on the role of MKO in takeover of US embassy in Tehran. His efforts are aimed at showing the MKO members as good and polite boys, while he roguishly points to the name of Iranian president:

"Another false accusation against the MEK is the allegation that the MEK supported the student takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Teheran in February 1979, and subsequent 444 day hostage crisis. MEK members actually tried to protect the U.S. Embassy from the street gang Komitehs that sought to take control of it for the Islamist faction of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Khomeini’s student followers, including people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, clashed with the MEK, and forbade their entrance to the embassy. Indeed, the Islamist leaders of the embassy-takeover themselves have written that the MEK was not part of their group and would not have been allowed to participate because of major doctrinal differences."

It seems that Zucker thinks Sate Dpartment and the White House officials are stupid when he even ignores the fact that they have access to the archive of MKO journals; that’s why he calls MKO "the protectors of US embassy"!

Then, he writes:

"The claim, heard occasionally around Washington, that the MEK is unpopular with the masses in Iran does not add up. If the MEK is so unpopular, why has the regime’s media attacked the MEK 350% more than any other group?"

It’s not clear whether the popular support should be recognized from popular gatherings and demonstrations or (according to MKO’s logic) from those who curse this group!

Zucker asks:

"Why is Teheran scared of the MEK, but not of Reza Pahlavi and the monarchists, the Tudeh Party or Ibrahim Yazdi’s Freedom Movement of Iran? How is it possible for the MEK to uncover details of the regime’s nuclear and missile programs if the people don’t trust and respect the MEK?"

However, the question is "if the people are aware of the details of nuclear program that MKO’s awareness- if true at all- can bring them popular support"!?

In his article, Zucker enters the battlefield of MKO and Monarchists on getting the support of the US. In several occasions, he takes position against monarchists:

"Dr. Michael Rubin’s testimony on the sins of the Islamic regime in Teheran is always first rate. However, Rubin is a supporter of Reza Pahlavi and the monarchists. As a result, his views on the MEK must be held as suspect. I have written elsewhere about Dr. Rubin’s sympathies and those of his colleague Dr. Kenneth Timmerman for the monarchists. I would again ask, how reliable is the opinion of those who support the Iranian monarchy? …Timmerman and Rubin are fine scholars about the regime, but their biases must be recognized when one talks about the Iranian resistance and the question of regime change. The MEK is the grandchild of Dr. Mohammed Mossadeq, the popular nationalist prime minister that the CIA toppled in 1953 so as to bring the shah back to power. The Iranian masses have shown a decided preference for the MEK over any possible return to a Pahlavi monarchy."

In the end, Zucker points to MKO’s main problem, namely being unpopular and lacking popular base; he asks the US government to support the MKO:

"It would be prudent for the State Department to de-list the MEK and the NCRI to allow them to lead the Iranian people to make the necessary changes to bring about a secular democracy in Iran."

That’s why the MKO efforts during past 10 years to get out of terror list have all failed, because they are wholly based on lies and distortions.

MKO thought all other politicians and government officials are stupid to believe in lies and distortions of realities.

Irandidban –  2006/08/13

You may also like

Leave a Comment