The Link For Freedom Foundation campaigns to assist Iranian supporters of the third way, achieve peaceful democratic change for the better in Iran. These organisations are in turn supported by International Parliamentarians, current and former Ambassadors, and Military Organisations familiar with events on the ground in Iran and the wider Middle East.
Plain Truths Overview
18th November 2013

What is the Iranian regime's case against the MEK, as seen on its supporters' numerous websites ?   Let us look.

To quote a report posted on  5 November by Iran Interlink, one of the main pro-regime websites, they define the MEK as "the weird terrorist cult with bottomless pools of money", adding that the MEK has hardly any support, either inside or outside Iran.   The so-called evidence they provide is both vague and contradictory.

They repeat the Shah's claim that the MEK combine Islam with Marxism, although the first requirement of Islam is belief in a God called Allah and one of the fundamental principles of Marxism is that God doesn't exist.   After working for the Soviet Union, they apparently fought for Saddam Hussein and are now "owned" by Israel (though it doesn't trust them).   Their American supporters are all "neocons" - Marxist Zionist neocons ?

The number of people the "terrorists" have killed varies so much it suggests total inability to count.   I have seen it quoted as "hundreds", "thousands", 17,000, 19,500, 40,000 and "hundreds of thousands";  I once saw "thousands" and "hundreds of thousands" over the same signature on the same day, on two different websites.   I also saw the claim that the MEK had been at Ashraf for "almost a decade":  are 26 years less than ten ?

The MEK's size seems uncertain.   It is frequently described as a "grouplet" (often "insignificant" or even "dying") but in August 2013 the Interlink reported that it had "hundreds of kadres" [sic] in Kosovo.   There have been so many reports of members defecting from it, including those high up in the organisation, that it's surprising there is anyone left.   (We are never told how they managed to escape from a camp surrounded by desert.)   Reports of its impending death appear, at a conservative estimate, about once a week.   Just before Nouri al-Maliki's visit to Washington a report headed "Meet the Weird, Super-Connected Group that's Mucking Up U. S. Talks With Washington" quoted an "expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace" who said:  "Once those deep pockets run out they're basically going to be rendered irrelevant."   We are never told how an insignificant grouplet finds all that money (though one recent suggestion, made by "many experts", was that it came from Saddam Hussein;  they often describe the MEK as "Saddam's private army"), and if it has the power to "muck up" talks between governments, is it so insignificant ?

Its alleged influence varies at least as much as its size.   This is the fundamental inconsistency of the anti-MEK case:  those responsible apparently can't make up their minds whether they are talking about dangerous terrorists or pitiable has-beens.   Coming down on either side of the fence poses dangers:  calling them dangerous means treating them as a force to be reckoned with, calling them pitiable makes it hard to justify cracking down on them.   The procedure the websites adopt is to do both, apparently hoping readers won't notice the contradiction.

For example, on 17 November the Interlink quotes a statement from the Iranian regime's Fars News that Iraqi NGOs "asked the Baghdad government to expedite expulsion of the members" because "its presence poses a grave danger to the crisis-hit country."   It's apparently frightening enough to make it worthwhile for a country undergoing an economic crisis to run a whole department of the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), with the Orwellian name of Department of Disinformation, devoted to damning it, to hold 120 anti-MEK exhibitions in Iran, and at least one at Baghdad University.

On 12 November the Interlink showed a video (which has now disappeared from the site) by a "former British Intelligence Officer" and the site's founder, Massoud Khodabandeh, describing the MEK's delisting as an "atrocity".   He said:  "They have killed 16,000 Iranians, 25,000 Iraqis.   I am not going to compare, but September 11 we had only 3,000" (if that isn't comparing, what is it ?), accused the British government of "aiding" terrorism and concluded that MEK members who have British citizenship should be stripped of it.  

Six days earlier, it had described the MEK as "old men and women who suffer from various diseases and are nothing but pale memories of the murders that they have committed" and three days later, its Weekly Digest quoted an article by the Irandidban site:  "The MEK have become a rent-a-crowd carnival service ... mere cheerleaders for terrorism so far have they been demoted".

All the MEK's supporters, including those who make it "super-connected", are said to be bought.   Consider the amount that would be needed to buy them all, including the law courts of all the countries that have taken the MEK off their lists of terrorists.   Another question:  if these people are all for sale, why don't they sell themselves to Iran, which could pay them far better ?   We have all heard of people selling themselves to the highest bidder, but the MEK's opponents would have us believe that scores of dignitaries and courts from all over the world are selling themselves to the lowest.

Everyone who attends MEK conferences has also, allegedly, been bought, which may explain why their numbers are consistently understated.   The rally outside the State Department in Washington in August 2011 was estimated on the Interlink as "a few hundreds", while the BBC (among others) stated it was 10,000 (I was there, and can vouch for it that there must have been thousands).  

The June 2013 Grand Gathering was too big to be ignored even by the Interlink, which, however, claimed that all the audience had been enticed to come by having their expenses paid, and neither knew nor cared about the issues.   It also claimed that hardly any of them were from Iran, proving that the MEK have no Iranian support.   Again, I was there, and the gathering was fairly evenly divided between Iranians and others.   The picket outside the White House during Maliki's visit was "ten or twenty paid people who nobody took any notice of" (Le Monde reported it).     

Iranians, we are told, hate the MEK even more than the mullahs (a claim which cannot be contradicted, since admitting to supporting the MEK inside Iran incurs a mandatory death sentence).   The Ashrafis' property was stolen from the Iraqis:  according to the Mehr News Agency in Tehran, "Camp Ashraf and property and assets are part of the pubic [sic] resources, which were granted to MEK by Saddam Hussein when they entered Iraq."   The MEK members who haven't left have all been brainwashed by the leaders of the "cult".   Certainly nobody who wasn't brainwashed would do what they are said to have done, such as deliberately making Camp Liberty uninhabitable (including breaking the sewage system) in order to discredit the Iraqis.  

The leaders' powers are surprising, since Maryam Rajavi is described as too stupid to make decisions herself and her husband, to whom they are attributed, as "retarded".   (She is sometimes called his "widow" but if he's the decision-maker, he is presumably still alive).   Since the presence of women in leading roles can't be denied, the theory is that they are only put there in order to make them despise men and men despise themselves.

One report, which appeared and disappeared very quickly during the summer of 2013, compared Ashraf to Auschwitz.   Much more frequent are descriptions such as that of one Jeremiah Goulka (5 November):  "the MEK required its followers to attend regular sessions where they were forced to admit whether they had sexual thoughts.   Those that admitted to them were publicly humiliated, while those that denied having them were derided as liars and criticized anyway."  

Massoud Rajavi, conveniently in hiding and therefore unable to defend himself, is frequently accused of forcing women to dance naked in front of him and even raping them.   The Weekly Digest reported on 8 November:  "people are refusing to attend lectures and not obeying orders and ... the imposed controls are cracking."   Again, this is stated so frequently that it's surprising that they haven't all cracked by now.

The Interlink's coverage of 1 September provides the perfect example of their methods:  at first, it was a gas or cooking oil explosion.   When photographs of people with gunshot wounds made that untenable, it was an attack from outside, or if Iraqi forces were responsible (which Maliki himself denies), the Ashrafis attacked first (unarmed refugees provoking armed guards ?  or did they have secret weapons which eluded the searches of the American army ?).   The most recent explanation is that it was an "internal dispute" (again, where did they find the guns ?) and that the survivors (including the "alleged" hostages) were the perpetrators.  

The Weekly Digest reported on 8 November:  "A lot of people ... notice that 52 were killed and then the remaining 42 then arrived in Camp Liberty.   Maryam has replied that 'keeping these people there and sacrificing top members was pre-planned.   The plan has worked and the result is that the blood of these people has meant that we came off the US terrorism list'".   The delisting was on 28 September 2012:  more bad arithmetic !

The digest also refers to the "so-called" hunger strike, quoting someone who "explained how the MEK fake the actual hunger strikes, but choose some people who are ill or have other problems to place at the front to show to journalists.   This is not to say they won't kill one just to prove the strike to the media".   Evidently the Interlink is hedging its bets, in case someone dies.

Similarly, when the British newspapers finally began covering the hunger strike, the Interlink stated that it "only made it to the local [Hendon] free paper" (it was also covered by the Metro and the Evening Standard).   This is their editor's account of the strike:  "Massoud Rajavi apparently doesn't know how long it takes for a normal human being to starve to death, even on a diet of sugar and water.   It is surely a lot sooner than 74 days, though perhaps these women have not quite used up their fat reserves yet.   But then, everything the MEK does and says seems to be based on fiction ... And of course, the diplomats and the public at the American embassy can see for themselves what a joke this outfit is.   We bring it to you 'just for the LOLs'.   The article is illustrated with a picture of a laughing cartoon face.

The discovery of three women kept as slaves in London was a gift to the Interlink, especially as their abusers led a Maoist cult.   Anne Singleton, Khodabandeh's wife, wrote that it "has echoes of the situation in Camp Liberty.   In each case ... emotional and physical abuse was used to enslave the victims against their will ... the escapees from Camp Liberty have described the systematic use of psychological, emotional and physical abuses behind closed doors to keep them under control of brutal, exploitative leaders."   They need to be "protected from their former 'owners' who will try their utmost to collect them back up and return them to conditions of slavery."

She adds:  "Several residents of Camp Liberty are already on enforced hunger strike over a spurious issue;  their option to continue or not has been removed as they are being denied access to food.   Other residents have ... been placed in great danger of attack as in the 1st September incident."   If this is true, it's no joke.   The only possible way to reconcile these accounts is to suggest that the hunger strike in Liberty is enforced and the ones in other countries are all faked.   On 26 November Mazda Parsi, one of their contributors, claimed that "the alleged 84-day (!) hunger strike by the group supporters and members received no sympathy from anybody in the world."  

I can vouch for at least one other outright lie.   The 15 November Digest claimed that "the MEK had not been invited by [the European] parliament, but only by a media representation which has no relation with the EP or EC and that what ... MEK have been claiming about being invited by the EP was simply a lie".   I was at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg on 30 September and saw Maryam Rajavi there.

The reports I mention probably won't be visible for long:  one feature of the Interlink and similar sites is that content appears and disappears very fast, whereas anyone who reads the Resistance's sites can see everything that has been posted there from their inception.  There is nothing, however, to stop readers printing it out or taking handwritten notes.   If you doubt what I have said here just look at those sites for a day or two and see how long it is before you encounter two statements which are in flat contradiction.

You will also notice, if you examine them for any length of time, that the same pictures appear over and over again, and that many of the them are obviously montages.    You will see the same statements repeated too, often with no supporting evidence;  for instance, the one that Maryam Rajavi "directly ordered" the massacre of Kurds (if she had, Kurds would hardly have expressed such outrage at the 1 September attack, just as Palestinians would hardly have done so if the MEK were really owned by Israel).   The only "proof" ever given is pictures of Mrs Rajavi with her mouth open, as if that proved anything.   Similarly, I have seen a picture of a "torture chamber", supposedly at Ashraf,  which merely shows a rather dilapidated room (for all we know it may not be in Ashraf at all).

The "experts" quoted are nearly all anonymous, except for those from the Iranian regime's own news agencies such as Fars News and Press TV.   "Much of the international community" is said to list the MEK as terrorists, though in fact the only countries that still do so are Iran and Iraq.  

NGOs are also said to condemn them, but the only one named is Human Rights Watch, which is the only one that actually did so, and the only documents mentioned are their report (based on unconfirmed reports by 12 of the alleged ex-MEKs) and those by the Rand Corporation and US State Department, all several years old.   The evidence against these is ignored;  so is the evidence against the Iraqi forces, and any mention of human rights violations in Iran.

18th September 2013
Italian Conference urges UN-US-EU intervention for international probe into crime against humanity in Ashraf

 Archbishop Tutu calls for the immediate release of seven Iranian dissidents taken hostage in Camp Ashraf
The Iranian regime officials have looted tens of thousands of historical books and documents from the Regime's Cultural Heritage Organization, a former employee has claimed.

The source said 47,000 items went missing while they were being transferred to Shiraz.

18th September 2013

Tehran calls on the United Nations to come up with a plan to relocate the remaining members of the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq out of Iraq, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said Tuesday.

Her remarks came after the notorious Camp Ashraf, which hosted a few dozen [sic - more bad maths] MKO terrorists in eastern Iraq, was fully evacuated by the Iraqi authorities from its much-hated residents on Wednesday night.

In an unprecedented move, the spokesperson of the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization threatened to resume assassination attacks on the lives of Iranian and Iraqi officials.

Posted on the website of the grouplet late last week, MKO's spokesperson threatened that Iranian officials will face a fate similar to that of Iran's slain officials Lajevardi, Sayyad Shirazi, Ayatollah Dastgheib, Madani, Ashrafi Isfahani, and Hasheminejad, all of whom have been assassinated by the MKO, Habilian Association reported.

There is a clip on YouTube with footage of the massacre, showing that Iraqi police were on duty in Laleh Square. The link is at

30th Aug 2013     

The PMOI has been promoted from an 'insignificant (or 'dying') grouplet' to a hydra-headed monster ! The regime, finding that ignoring it won't make it disappear, has been forced to provide an explanation. This was the one given by one Sattar Orangi on the Interlink: 'Some cult expert believe that it is hard to totally annihilate a cult as they can grow offshoots in the manner of the mythical hydra, for each time one head was cut off, another moved in to replace it. The terrible truth about many of them is that they can easily and immediately adapt, recover and rebuild their organizational setup, rather than withering away, if partly disintegrated or broken into smaller groups ... MKO as a terrorist cult is no exception as it is rebuilding its cultic structure in any country its members are being transferred.' The purpose of this is evidently to frighten other countries out of taking PMOI members.

Further evidence: As well as the 120 anti-PMOI exhibitions already held, the regime is now planning a 15-part TV series (called a documentary) and country-wide festivals, aimed at the young and particularly students. What can the mullahs do? Ignoring the PMOI hasn't worked, so they evidently feel they must put their case against it, but as Lincoln Bloomfield points out in his book, they can't do that without recognising their enemies' existence and giving them publicity.

Rand Report Cam
3  signatures so far
Join by PayPal or Credit Card
 View action
Other stuff