From: asghar@me.eng.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: CBS News and Mojahedin
Originator: harrsen@rainier.eng.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 23:56:19 GMT

In article <ETXMAJZ.92Dec28172732@solsta-c.solsta.ericsson.se> etxmajz@solsta-c.solsta.ericsson.se (Majid Zolfaghari  TX/DKG) writes:
>Sorry, I happened to send my article before it was complete,
>please ignore it. But here is the real one!
>
>> >I can complete the question:
>> >Why an "anti-imperialist" group is so honored when it meets the president
>> >or other authorities of the "imperialist"? Especially when just 1 year
>> >ago, MKO was ready to fight against U.S. under the "Gulf War".
>>      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> The above is absolutely false. For the 1000 times, no
>> resource of either NLA or Mojahedin have ever been (or will
>			    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> ever be) used except to fight the current illegitimate and
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> the illegal regime in Iran. I suggest whenever you see a
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> news item which in any way contradicts this fundamental
>> principle, you recheck your source and be very suspicious of
>> it. 
>
>You try to answer a non-question again. What I said was that
>"MKO was ready to fight ...". I do not say that they really did
>it. Even the Iraqi army had no real chance to do it really.
>(It shows how empty such anti-imperialist shouts are. This is used
>by dictators to keep people busy with non-real problems).
>But what I said was that "MKO was ready to ....". There is
>a big different between these two things. But my source, if
>my memory is not failing, I read that news in "Keihan London". I
>think that it was Maryam Rajavi who stated that the whole Mojahedin
>army was ready to help brother Saddam ... or something like 
>that. Please correct me if I am wrong, or if Maryam did not say anything
>about that issue or if you think that Keihan has quoted incorrectly...

Naturally, No official of Mojahedin (Maryam Rajavi or any
other Mojahed) has ever said such a thing. As a
matter of fact, I have never heard any Mojahed refer to
Saddam as Brother. However, many Mullahs in Iran called him
that at the beginning of the Gulf War.

I am not surprise to see Keyhan London and Tehran fabricate
such a news. They have become so good at it that from time
to time they use each other lies as a source of news as
well. 

>
>But why I believed that news?
>I should not believe it if someone says that Mojahedin was
>ready to help Panama or some other country against US. You can
>use some imagination and guess why I did believed that news from
>"Keihan London". I do not really mean that Mojahedin really love
>Saddam or they are born to be his spies or things like that. But It
>is not easy to believe that a dictator like Saddam who has murdered
>a lot of his own people and 100 thousands of Iranians (civilian and
>soldiers) a man who is really an anti Iranian racist may let
>Mojahedin to work without any pressure. Especially
>now after the Iraq-Iran war, one can not state that "We have common
>interests with Iraq to end the war." I, who do not really think that
>Mojahedin are spies of Iraq, can not imagine any common interest
>between Iraq and Mojahedin. Why should Saddam lets them to operate
>from his country if he do not use them as a pressure factor. I repeat
>again that I do not mean that Mojahedin intend to be a pressure factor.
>They have the intention to get the power and after that, they relation
>of Iran and Iraq can continue to be as bad as after Khomeini's comeback
>to Iran.

No body is doing anything for anybody for free. Both sides
are gaining a lot. Mojahedin naturally need the bases to
operate from. Iraq has a lot to gain as well. One of
Mojahedin's principle foreign policy has been that other
countries' internal affair are theirs. I am sure this is
shared by the majority of Iranians and therefore can be
safely regarded as a principle foreign policy of the
democratic Iran. This is a sharp departure from
the policy of export of fundamentalism and terrorism
advocated by the current regime.

>
>> As for being anti-imperialist, it should be only looked at
>> in the context of Iran.
>Please explain this a little more. I did not understand it.

In simple terms, everyone is responsible for his or her own
homeland. If country X wants to be independent and free, its
people should be ready to pay for it much the same way that
Iranian people have been paying for their democracy. We will
not take arms against say US, just because it invades say
Panama. If that does not make me anti-imperialist, then be
it. 


>Majid Zolfaghari, Ericsson Telecom AB	

Asghar

Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian