66 readers online now

98,582 comments by 26,202 readers

Go to Mobile Site
Homepage Articles Blog Reviews Spoken Books Other Languages Biographical Middle East Forum About this site Mailing List

Latest Articles

 

ADVERTISEMENTS



Premium Links
by Wikio

• Computers
• Electronics
• Communication
• Appliances

eXTReMe Tracker

MEK-Our Ally??
Reader comment on item: [Mujahedeen-e Khalq:] A Terrorist U.S. Ally?

Submitted by Shahin Shadmer (United States), Aug 19, 2003 at 00:06

Mr. Pipes:

The Iranian people have a big problem with MEK. MEK has brainwashed thousands upon thousands of youngsters in Iran during 1970s. MEK has not abolished its main slogan of Marxist-Islamist ideology. My neighbor was killed by the hands of the mullahs in Iran because he was a member of MEK. MEK was the group that planned to take the Americans as hostages in 1979. The main forces were MEK members that brought catasrophe to Iran in 1979. MEK leaders mainly Rajavi thought that he could share power with Khomeini, but he found out that his ideology is not as same as Khomeini. As an Iranian I can assure you that if MEK were in power today in Iran, massacres and religious presecution would have been worse than what we see today. Please do not think that MEK has abandoned their ideology. MEK like PLO that has stock to its "Phase Plan" will not give in to its destructive ideology, which is not suited for today's Iran. Today Iran needs democracy and not another communist regime. The EU, especially the French government tries to do favors for the theocratic regime in Tehran, by handing MEK members to Iran, but we all know that it's all about Iran's gas and oil, in which the mullahs have been selling for free. I am strong enemy of the mullahs, but let us not forget what MEK members, the traitors of Iran, has done to Iran for the past 32 years.

Thanks,
Shahin S.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Submit a comment on this item

Search by Enter name or date
Search Forum Comments:

Reader comments (39) on this item

Title By Date
Finally the UK is taking the MEK off of the terrorist lists; can the USA be that far behind? [20 words]WhitneymuseDec 16, 2007 21:24
MEK are not terrorists [27 words]from the heart of TehranAug 11, 2007 23:31
Why we should not support the MEK [553 words]Arash PertaniSep 12, 2006 12:02
On MEK a Muslim Organization [41 words]Ali AghaDec 11, 2005 20:08
MeK; Don't worry [210 words]A SoldierJan 25, 2004 10:00
Hear, hear, shahin [71 words]Peter J. HerzOct 14, 2003 04:42
⇒ MEK-Our Ally?? [248 words]Shahin ShadmerAug 19, 2003 00:06
Terrorists or just a terrorist tag? [234 words]M. H. JazayeriJul 22, 2003 19:20
The Gullible Western Civ. [251 words]Darwin BarrettJul 6, 2003 20:21
about MEK [226 words]Max Rose RastgaranJul 3, 2003 19:48
The enemy of your enemy isn't necessarily your friend [115 words]Temur KhanMay 31, 2003 08:15
Good terrorists? [27 words]Boris GurevichMay 26, 2003 11:45
Democratic secular government [44 words]S.C.PandaMay 26, 2003 07:27
Playing with fire? [97 words]Pat KunzMay 24, 2003 11:19
Terrorist allies or business as usual? [123 words]R.D. CrockettMay 23, 2003 11:12
MEK are terroriosts [38 words]moeMay 22, 2003 07:16
TV station. [56 words]Yousef SafaMay 22, 2003 00:48
Common Sense [81 words]Brent W. BurnetteMay 22, 2003 00:35
future allies? [38 words]Alan SullivanMay 21, 2003 21:36
Terrorism is terrorism no matter who's the target [307 words]Mike RudwianMay 21, 2003 17:32
↔ shame!! [104 words]samNov 4, 2006 09:40
Enough machinations [187 words]endurnzMay 21, 2003 14:30
A Terrorist U.S. Ally? [14 words]TL MillerMay 21, 2003 14:21
This is too small a definition of terrorism. [107 words]Bill SmithMay 21, 2003 13:52
MEK and facts. [259 words]Yousef SafaMay 21, 2003 13:49
MEK [39 words]MassoodMay 21, 2003 12:06
Supporting the MEK, but at what expense? [199 words]Safa HaeriMay 21, 2003 10:55
The Enemy of Our Enemy is NOT Necessarily Our Friend [70 words]Kenneth StahlMay 21, 2003 10:05
Brilliant analysis, as usual [50 words]Maryallene OtisMay 21, 2003 09:50
Excellent [4 words]Maureen ThompsonMay 21, 2003 09:02
Sounds like trouble [265 words]Robert KosloverMay 21, 2003 00:49
MEK [172 words]Michael PodgoetskyMay 20, 2003 21:51
A rose is a rose is a rose..... [78 words]Roy WeeksMay 20, 2003 20:52
MEK: Terrorist or Legitimate Iranian Resistance [402 words]Shahin MohammadiMay 20, 2003 20:19
Monopoly on the use of violence [93 words]Marc BaronMay 20, 2003 20:09
A Terriorist U.S. Ally [84 words]JeanMay 20, 2003 19:49
MEK, friend or foe? [178 words]David WigotskiMay 20, 2003 18:44
On MEK [239 words]Ali JMay 20, 2003 13:11
Thank you [18 words]Dan GurtaMay 20, 2003 11:06

Comment on this item

Name
Email Address (optional)
Title of Comments
Comments:

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

See the 25 most recent outstanding comments.

ADVERTISEMENTS

All materials written by Daniel Pipes on this site © Daniel Pipes. Email: meqmef@aol.com