The MEK resistance to the Mullahs’ regime in Iran

American Thinker.com ^ | May 15, 2022 | Saeed Sbed

[Kaslin]

Anyone who studies Iran today will quickly see its internal battles, but they may not understand why there is such a deep religious conflict.

The answer is that Iran has two types of Islam that are completely opposed to each other. A single event can illustrate the difference: When Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic republic, sought to pass a retribution law, which permitted barbaric stoning and cutting off hands for crimes, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) declared that such a bill was not only anti-Islamic but also "anti-human.”

Today, the MEK and the Iranian regime have been fighting for forty years, with a brutal and unprecedented repression on the part of the regime and an all-out resistance with great sacrifices on the part of the MEK.

Logo of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran

As another example of religious differences, Khomeini opposed women's suffrage, and even now, the Iranian Constitution disallows women to be judges or become president. But the MEK deeply believes in gender equality, which is part of the reasons why it has been greeted with enthusiasm from Iranian youth and especially women.

That is also why, in 1988, Khomeini issued a fatwa ordering the massacre of 30,000 political prisoners, 90% of whom belonged to the MEK.

History of the MEK

Under the Shah, all democratic institutions were abolished, and political opponents—including the MEK leadership—who wanted freedom and democracy were imprisoned or executed. The 1979 revolution that ousted the Shah created a political vacuum that enabled Khomeini to take power, but his regime betrayed the revolution by establishing a fundamentalist Islamic regime.

[No name given]

Just like Venezuela.

[Wuli]

“Under the Shah, all democratic institutions were abolished, and political opponents—including the MEK leadership—who wanted freedom and democracy”

Like the Mullahs, they wanted to use “democracy” as a means to and end - power. Once in power there is every reason to believe, with the MEK philosophocal foundation in trying to blend Marxist and Islamist ideologies, they would have turned as harshly against their opponents as the Mullahs did.

There is plenty of reason to oppose the Mullahs of Tehran. To lift up and cheer the MEK is not one of those reasons.

Between the Mullahs and the MEK there are no “white hats”.

And most unfortunately the MEK remains the largest functioning single-source political network opposing the Mullahs. There are others, and more “democratic” than the MEK and not all united as one. A heavily likely scenario is that the MEK will reach a point they can depose the Mullahs, forming a “coalition” with many other political groups. It will be - like it was with the Mullahs - a coalition of convenience with the MEK making sure it is the leaders of. Like the Mullahs did they will, after “victory” turn on their “revolitionary coalition partners”, and again moderate true “democrats” will be cannon fodder useful tools of another Leftist “victory”.

[Lurkinanloomin]

All types of Islam are evil.

There is only one Koran and it contains the evil.

[marktwain]

Looks like MEK are the Iranian communists.

As I recall, they allied with the Ayatollahs, thinking they could sieze power when the revolution got rid of the Shaw. But the Ayatollahs backstabbed them first, and killed off most of the communists.