Vocal Media is Exploring the alleged Pasteur Street incident, Iran’s security response, and the controversial history of the MEK opposition group:

The organization Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) has claimed that around “250 of its operatives” carried out an attack in central Tehran targeting the office and residence of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. However, Iranian officials and state media have denied that any such incident occurred.

No evidence or images of the alleged attack have surfaced. The Pasteur district—where the Supreme Leader’s residence, the Presidential Office, the Supreme National Security Council, the Judiciary Secretariat, the Guardian Council, and the Assembly of Experts are located—remains under strict security measures.

In a statement issued last night, the MEK said its operatives launched the attack on Monday morning at that location and caused some damage, but that “100” of its members were killed or arrested.

Iranian media described the claim as a “comical and theatrical reaction,” writing that four MEK members had attempted to create noise in central Tehran using “a plastic pipe made to resemble a children’s toy,” but were arrested during a patrol.

Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani, a member of the Iranian parliament’s National Security Committee, said: “I think it is unlikely for them to carry out such an operation, but I am not aware of the details of this news, nor do I know whether such an incident has occurred.”

The extremist group Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which blends Islamic and Marxist ideology, supported the 1979 Iranian Revolution that led to the overthrow of the Shah. However, its relations with Ayatollah Khomeini soon deteriorated.

The MEK is banned in Iran. The Iranian government designates it as a terrorist organization and accuses it of conspiring and carrying out actions against the state. Many MEK members have been imprisoned or executed for membership in the group.

What did the MEK claim, and what are Iranian officials and media saying?

The MEK said its operation began at the time of the morning call to prayer and continued until noon. According to its statement, the attack targeted the “Motahari Complex” inside the Supreme Leader’s residential compound, and “150 out of 250” operatives safely returned to their bases.

The group further claimed that its members inflicted “heavy casualties” on the security personnel guarding the complex. Pasteur Street and its surrounding area house the Supreme Leader’s residence, the Presidential Office, the Supreme National Security Council, the Judiciary Secretariat, the Guardian Council, and the Assembly of Experts.

Although Ahmad Bakhshayesh expressed ignorance about the source of the report, he added: “They believe the country has become weak and that the security and intelligence institutions are preoccupied with other matters, so they want to portray the country as weak through terrorist operations.

The website “Bolten News,” which is considered close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, wrote that “last night, the sound of consecutive explosions in the Pasteur Street area considered the most secure area of the capital raised serious questions among officials and supporters about how the enemy dared to reach the heart of Tehran.

Yesterday, the hashtag “Pasteur” briefly trended on the social media platform X in Iran. However, aside from reports of explosions and gunfire, no images or concrete evidence have emerged so far. Iranian news agencies have denied these reports.

According to the newspaper Hamshahri, strict security measures are in place around Pasteur Street, South Palestine Street, Azerbaijan Street, Keshvar-Doust Street, and Imam Khomeini Street. Entry into the area requires a special card, and only security units, armed forces vehicles with green license plates, or vehicles belonging to authorized officials and diplomats with special permits are allowed access.

The anti-Iran group Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK)

The MEK is an exiled opposition group that supports the overthrow of the Islamic Republic. It is also known as the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI).

Founded in 1965 as a left-wing militant organization, it strongly opposed the Shah of Iran and participated in protests that ultimately led to the end of his rule and the establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979.

Initially, the group supported Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic Republic. However, after its leader Massoud Rajavi was barred from participating in the first presidential election, the MEK adopted an anti-government stance.

It began an armed struggle to overthrow the Islamic Republic and claimed responsibility for the assassination of several key figures.

As authorities cracked down on MEK supporters also known as the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI) Massoud Rajavi fled to Paris.

Later, he and most of his followers moved to Camp Ashraf in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq near the Iranian border. There, the movement gradually took on characteristics of a cult, including the veneration of Massoud Rajavi and his wife Maryam.

Maryam Rajavi joined the resistance movement as a student in Tehran in the early 1970s and, in 1985, assumed joint leadership of the group at her husband’s direction.

During the 1980s Iran–Iraq War, the MEK carried out several armed attacks inside Iran with the support of Saddam’s forces, which caused it to lose much of its domestic support.

The MEK’s relationship with the West has been complex. During the presidency of reformist Mohammad Khatami, the United States and the European Union designated the group as a terrorist organization. However, during the tenure of his hardline successor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, those designations were later revoked.

The MEK achieved a propaganda success in 2002 when it revealed the existence of key Iranian nuclear facilities, contributing to prolonged tensions between the Islamic Republic and the West.

In post-Saddam Iraq, the group disarmed and was eventually relocated to Camp Liberty, a former U.S. military base near Baghdad. Later, the MEK transferred its members to Albania, where they now reside at Camp Ashraf 3. Today, the organization’s headquarters is based in Albania.

Camp Ashraf 3 is located near Manëz in Albania’s Durrës district and serves as the central headquarters for the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (MEK), housing approximately two to three thousand members. After relocating from Iraq, the exiled Iranian opposition group has settled in a secure compound, focusing on activities aimed at overthrowing Iran’s government.

The MEK’s leaders are based in France, and in 1993 they selected Maryam Rajavi as Iran’s “future president.” Group members also refer to her as the “President-elect of Iran in exile.”

The Council on Foreign Relations, in an article about the group, wrote that analysts describe the militant organization as a cult due to its complete loyalty to the Rajavi family. It has been reported that in the late 1980s, older women in the group were forced to divorce their husbands, and young women were not allowed to marry or have children.

The article also states that Massoud Rajavi has been missing since the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, and his current status and whereabouts are unknown.

Some analysts consider him dead. Iran expert Karim Sadjadpour told the Council on Foreign Relations in an interview: “Cult leaders generally don’t retire. They either die or go to jail. If Massoud Rajavi is alive, I would be surprised.”

Real Content, Vocal Media

The post Exploring the MEK’s Claims on Pasteur Street incident appeared first on Nejat Society.

Representatives of government institutions,

Respected human rights experts,

Representatives of international organizations,

Ladies and gentlemen, friends and participants of this conference,

It is a great honor for me to speak today, on the World Day of Social Justice, on a topic that touches the very essence of human dignity: human rights, social protection and legal responsibility towards the most vulnerable members of society, especially refugees and Iranian citizens defected from the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) Organization, who have been deprived of their fundamental rights for years.

This day is not just a symbolic date on the calendar; it is a collective reminder that societies are measured not by economic or political power, but by how they treat their most vulnerable people.

Social welfare is not a privilege; it is a fundamental human right. The concept of social protection emerged from the historical need to ensure that no one is left outside the human protection system. After World War II, the international community understood that without social justice, lasting peace is not possible.

Social protection includes:

-Minimum economic security

-Access to health services

-Right to legal identity

-Protection from abuse and exploitation

-Social and legal integration

But above all, it expresses the recognition of the value of each person as a human being. Human rights are not privileges granted by governments. Human rights are born with the very existence of man. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights established the following principles:

-Every human being has the right to be free.

-Every human being has the right to think and choose.

-No one should be subjected to inhuman treatment.

-No one should be separated from family or community.

When these principles are violated, it is not just a legal problem; it is a moral crisis. Refugees are among the most vulnerable groups. International law requires states not to return people to countries where they are in danger, to guarantee legal identity, to provide access to justice, and to protect their physical and mental health.

The Geneva Conventions set a clear standard: protecting the human person is above any political interest.

But the real problem is not the absence of law; it is its implementation. The situation that many Iranian citizens who have separated from the MEK have experienced in this organization includes social isolation, restrictions on personal freedom, prohibitions on contact with family, psychological pressure, loss of personal identity.

After the separation, many were left without legal documents, economic support, full access to the legal system, or a public voice. This situation requires concrete legal solutions, not just human sympathy. The law is there to protect the individual from the abuse of power, whether it be state or organizational.

When an organization restricts individual freedoms, these legal questions arise:

– Has individual autonomy been respected?

– Has psychological coercion been used?

– Have family rights been violated?

– Has freedom of choice been restricted?

If the answer is yes, we are facing a serious violation of international human rights standards.

Leaving the closed structure is not the end of the problems. People who leave face:

-Psychological trauma

-Social distrust

-Economic problems

-Cultural isolation

Social support should include:

-Psychological rehabilitation

-Legal assistance

-Education and skills training

-Social support

Society should not only save people from injustice; it should also help them rebuild their lives.

The mission of Nejat Society Albania is not political; it is humanitarian.

Its objectives:

-Defense of fundamental rights of individuals

-Legal aid

-Reestablishment of family ties

-Social and professional integration

In practice, it means giving back to the most important thing to man: his voice.

The global challenges that stand in the way of this path are: mass migration, ideological conflicts, psychological control and disinformation. The law must evolve to protect the individual not only from physical violence, but also from psychological and social control. And the main tasks of governments are:

-Preventing violations of rights

-Protecting victims

-Reintegrating individuals into society

Without these three pillars, social protection is just a theory. Silence in the face of injustice is not neutrality; it is complicity with it.

Conclusion:

Every era is judged by how it treats the powerless. If we want a just society, we must protect the most voiceless. Social protection is not politics; it is humanity in action.

Thank you.

The post Speech by Ilir Murra, lawyer of Nejat Society Albania, at the World Day of Social Justice Conference appeared first on Nejat Society.

Ritter believes that the United States is using diplomacy less as a route to agreement than as a tactical tool to buy time, apply pressure, and shape the conditions for confrontation. In his remarks to the Tehran Times, he outlined what he sees as the real thinking behind U.S. and Israeli demands, warned against misreading Iran’s deterrence, and described the potentially catastrophic consequences of a war for the region in which the MEK, the monarchists and the separatist groups take part.

“The United States, on its own admission, orchestrates a currency collapse in Iran,” Scott Ritter told Tehran Times about the recent protests in Iran. “People went to the streets in legitimate protest, which the Iranian government did not violently suppress. Then that protest was hijacked by the CIA, by Mossad, with agents inside who created violence.”

Ritter believes that Israel and the U.S. are fomenting unrests to lead a regime change project in Iran besides military invasion. He explains: “So, when we bomb Iran—and I unfortunately believe that we will bomb Iran—we will be seeking to suppress the regime’s ability to respond to civil unrest. We will encourage uprisings and suppress the government’s capacity to respond. The objective, therefore, is to have the government collapse.”

According to this prominent critic of U.S. foreign policy,  this is American’s vision about Iran following a US-Israeli invasion on this nation: “you’re going to have ISIS-type trucks running through your cities, with gunmen from the Mujahedin-e Khalq and gunmen from the monarchists, who are going to run in and say, “We’re now in charge.”

Ritter believes that the Iranian government needs to capture the emotion of the Iranian nation and use it to weaponize itself, to make itself invulnerable to efforts by outside powers to divide it.

As an American, he says: “That’s what we try to do. We support the MEK, we support the monarchists, we support the Kurds, we support Azeri separatists, we support the Baluch, and we exploit economic divisions in the mainstream Iranian population. The United States, Israel, and others are looking to fracture Iran, to break it apart, to cause it to collapse from within.”

He suggests that the Iranian government and the Iranian people have to find a way to unify themselves. “If not, then we’ve just told you what we look for: the divisions, and we exploit the divisions,” he states.

Ritter has previously written on the role of the MEK as operatives of the US intelligence in Iran. In 2005, Ritter revealed that the MEK had begun receiving training from the CIA. In a 2006 interview, Ritter described the MEK as a “cult” and a “terrorist” group, accusing elements in the U.S. government of using them to destabilize Iran. Ritter has also noted that the MEK has often acted as a source of intelligence for Western and Israeli officials regarding Iranian nuclear sites.

The post Scott Ritter: Gunmen from the MEK in Iranian Cities appeared first on Nejat Society.

This event was organized with the participation of Iranian and Albanian speakers, human rights experts and social activists and was dedicated to examining the concept of social justice, human dignity and cases of human rights violations.

The conference program included speeches and video messages from local and international speakers, thematic video screenings, professional discussions and the closing speech of the president of the Nejat Society Albania, Aldo So Sollulari. The conference also addressed injustice and violation of fundamental human rights within the structure of the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization, (MEK).

The detailed report of this conference, which includes photos and videos of the program, will be published below. The full text of the speeches and the full report of the conference will be made available to the public later.

February 20 of each year has been declared the “World Day of Social Justice” by the United Nations General Assembly. In 2026, the World Day of Social Justice is commemorated under the theme “Renewed Commitment to Social Development and Social Justice”.

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice

The post Conference of Nejat Society Albania on the World Day of Social Justice appeared first on Nejat Society.

Here are four deteriorating parts that are considered to be taken by the MEK defined by four different experts with different political views:

The MEK unable to unify opposition

For Middle East expert Andreas Krieg, the MEK’s ability to unify opposition is inadequate. “When it comes to MEK, it is important to separate perceived reach from real on-the-ground traction,” Krieg told DW.

About the MEK’s deficiencies he says: “The organization is disciplined, media-savvy, and able to generate noise, lobbying pressure, and messaging volume from abroad. However, it has deep legitimacy problems among many Iranians because of its history, internal-control allegations, and its long exile posture.”

Krieg confirms that the MEK is a useful tool for disinformation campaign launched by warmongers and anti-Iran hawks. “The MEK is easy for multiple actors to instrumentalize in the information space, including anti-Iran hawks in the US and Israel,” he told DW.

While the MEK’s spokesman in Washington, Ali Safavi tells DW that his group’s “resistance units direct, coordinate and organize the resistance against the repressive forces”, Kreig clarifies that “it does not at all have any role to play in leading these protests”.

A chameleon cult to decoy the West

The MEK’s illegitimacy among Iranians has been widely stated by experts. The American historian, foreign policy analyst and government adviser Michael Rubin once more states that the recent Iranian protests have confirmed that the MEK has no backing or legitimacy among Iranians. This time he asked the secretary of the US state department to re-designate the group.

Rubin believes that the MEK is a cult-like political chameleon that “shifts its rhetoric to support whomever it thought its patrons might be.”

“When it solicits Congress, it feigns commitment to democracy, even as its actions and its internal rhetoric suggest it remains unchanged and unabashedly anti-American,” he wrote in the Middle East Forum referring to the group’s anti-American background including the assassination of the US citizens in Iran in the 1970s.

The MEK deteriorates everything

As an anti-Iran Israeli, Zina Rakhamilova of Israel Hayom finds the MEK “a threat to Iran’s revolution”.

Rakhamilova is a supporter of Reza Pahlavi who is concerned about the MEK’s abstracting role in her “struggle” against Iranian government. “On the surface, the MEK’s opposition to the regime may appear principled, but this is misleading, and non-Iranian observers should not be deceived,” she writes. “The MEK is a leftist group that historically aligned with Muslim extremists to topple the government of the day. Their past shows consistent antipathy toward democracy, human rights, and the West, and should they ever rule Iran, the standard of living and humanitarian situation would likely continue to deteriorate.”

She correctly warns about the undemocratic and violent nature of the MEK presenting an example: On January 11, during a pro-Shah rally in Los Angeles, a U-Haul truck drove into the crowd, injuring several protesters. The truck was emblazoned with MEK slogans “NO SHAH. NO REGIME. USA: DON’T REPEAT 1953. NO MULLAH”, aligning with the MEK’s historical modus operandi.

The correspondent of Israel Hayom reminds Western politicians about the MEK’s terrorist activities and its alliance with Saddam Hussein to suppress the Kurdish uprisings against Iraqi Baath regime. She notifies, “US State Department reports document acts of violence against civilians. Maryam Rajavi reportedly instructed fighters: “Take the Kurds under your tanks, and save your bullets for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards”

MEK agents for Mossad-run sabotage in Iran

Regarding the recent unrest and killings in the streets of Iran, the American whistleblower and former CIA officer, John Kiriakou, revealed that these events are the result of a joint CIA and Mossad operation. Referencing public statements made by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Kiriakou stated, “We know this is a Mossad-CIA operation thanks to Pompeo’s own comments.”

Kiriakou noted that while the CIA does not typically maintain personnel on the ground, Mossad has an extensive field presence. He alleged that both agencies work in close cooperation with the MEK.

The MEK’s history as well as its current cult-like structure has made it overlooked for Iranians inside and outside the country. Thus, for decades, Maryam Rajavi and her disappeared husband, Massoud Rajavi, has made efforts to rebrand their group as a democratic alternative to the Iranian government but these days, they are no more in the center of attention except for some experts or journalists to make the world aware about their threat for the future of Iran.

Mazda Parsi

The post Western experts warn about MEK threat for future Iran appeared first on Nejat Society.

Rubin is an American historian, foreign policy analyst, government adviser, and military lecturer who holds the position of a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He has long been a critic of the Iranian government as well as the MEK.

In his recent article published by the Middle East Forum, supporting the protests in Iran, Rubin warns about the MEK’s violent background. “Mujahedin bombs killed hundreds of Iranians, as the cult-like group cared little about collateral damage” he writes. “As a result, many Iranians consider them terrorists.”

The American historian correctly notifies that “more damning in Iranian eyes was the Mujahedin-e Khalq’s defection to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq at the height of the Iran-Iraq War.”

About the MEK’s current status as a “chameleon cult”, he writes: In the decades since, the Mujahedin has grown only more cult-like even as it has become a political chameleon, shifting its rhetoric to support whomever it thought its patrons might be. When it solicits Congress, it feigns commitment to democracy, even as its actions and its internal rhetoric suggest it remains unchanged and unabashedly anti-American. “Victory or martyrdom, fighting with America rises from our voice. … Compromise is a shame. Shout from your heart: destroy America!” goes one Mujahedin-e Khalq anthem.

Although this anti-Islam foreign policy analyst seeks the overthrow of Islamic Republic government, he truthfully asks Marco Rubio to designate the MEK as a Foreign Terrorist Organization because he thinks that this unpopular group might deviate the aspirations of Iranians.

He assumes Rubio as the right person to do so: “Rubio, unlike some predecessors, has never accepted Mujahedin-e Khalq bribes under the guise of donations or honoraria; he is not beholden to a group Iranians despise.”

The post Michael Rubin: Rubio Should Re-Designate the Mujahedin-e Khalq appeared first on Nejat Society.

In a report published by Sharq Daily about the killing of Zahra Bohlulipour and several other students during the protests, her friends are quoted as saying that on Friday, January 10, Raha and several of her friends came to the conclusion that the dormitory was not safe; for this reason, they gathered their belongings to go to a friend’s house. They arrived at one of the city squares where they were shot by some motorbike riders.

After the shooting ends, the group tries to escape until one of her friends notices that Raha is still there. When he turns to her, he sees that she is bleeding. Later, at the hospital, they say that the bullet hit her heart and lungs.

Raha was laid to rest on January 14 in Firuzabad, a city near Shiraz.

An MEK-affiliated website, titled “Women’s Committee of the National Council of Resistance,” published Raha’s photo claiming that she was a member of the MEK: “Mujahed Martyr Zahra Bohlulipour (Raha), born in 2007, was a student of Italian language at the Faculty of Languages ​​and Literature of Tehran University.”

The MEK-affiliated media even went a step further and published a message from Ali Safavi, an official of the so-called NCRI in the United States, who addressed Raha as “My dear sister, Zahra!” and wrote: “You now stand among 100,000 MEK martyrs”.

This extremely opportunistic and hypocritical act by the MEK has sparked a wave of anger and hatred among Raha’s friends who knew her closely. Her friends and acquaintances tried to clarify that she had no link with the MEK by publishing messages on social networks. Her family had previously denied their young daughter’s connection to the MEK.

Following this claim by MEK, the General Student Union Council of Tehran University also issued a statement strongly condemning rumors about the connection of Tehran University students with armed terrorist groups including the MEK.

One of Raha Bohlulipour’s friends wrote on her X social media account: “Raha (Zahra) Bohlulipour has never been linked to any armed group, including the so-called MEK, false claims and manipulated images spread by this discredited group aim to mislead public opinion and whitewash crimes.”

Another friend, who is also very upset about Raha’s blood being confiscated by the MEK, wrote: “Raha was the most alive person I had ever seen in my life. Be Raha’s voice. Raha has nothing to do with the MEK.”

Another user wrote in defense of Raha’s name: “Raha Bohlulipour has nothing to do with this dirty organization. A free, loving girl full of life…”

Yes, Raha, like many other Iranian girls, loved life and could not be a member of a group that denies life in practice and even removes the word “life” from the manifestations of its struggle. The fake narrative of the MEK that Raha’s blood was attributed to them can be proven in different ways. While the so-called NCR Women Committee website has included the fake slogan “Women, Resistance, Freedom” on its front, Raha wrote “Women, Life, Freedom” in her last message on Telegram.

Raha’s young body now rests in a corner of Iranian soil. Her grieving family and friends no longer have Raha, the very girl who was passionate about life. They are enduring this great pain while worrying that their beloved’s name will be tainted by the MEK’s notorious name.

Mazda Parsi

The post Raha Bohlulipour’s Friends Reject Her Connection with the MEK appeared first on Nejat Society.

None of this changes a basic reality inside Iran. Many Iranians have taken to the streets because daily life has become punishing. Prices have surged, the currency has lost value and families have watched wages fall behind the cost of food, housing and medicine. The Trump administration’s sanctions have played a central role in tightening that vice, sharply restricting Iran’s ability to trade and access global markets, and adding momentum to inflation and financial instability.

Yet public discussion often stops there, as if economic pain tells the whole story. It does not. A second layer matters for anyone trying to understand what is happening, and for anyone tempted to treat escalation as “support for the Iranian people”: the question of foreign encouragement and involvement.

Mossad’s messaging and Israel’s public claims

Israel’s intelligence service, Mossad, has not confined itself to quiet signals. Mossad used social media to urge Iranians to mobilise, writing: “Go out together into the streets. The time has come… We are with you in the field.”

Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu also spoke in unusually direct terms, referring to an operation he called “Rising Lion” and saying that Israeli forces had operated on Iranian soil and had people active there “right now”.

Former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo reinforced that message with a tweet: “Happy New Year to Iranians and Mossad agents beside them.” Last year, Mossad director David Barnea said Israel would continue its activities in Iran, declaring: “We will continue to be there, as we have been.”

Taken together, those statements do not prove the scale of any operation. They do something else: they normalise the idea of foreign intelligence activity as a legitimate companion to civil unrest. That is a dangerous precedent, especially in a region where covert action has repeatedly escalated into open conflict and where civilians pay the price first.

The MEK’s self-declared role

Another actor frequently cited in discussion of the protests is the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), an exiled opposition organisation with a long and divisive history. The group presents itself as an organiser of protest activity and has issued sweeping claims about casualties and arrests.

The MEK says it has identified 1,449 people killed as of 30 January, 2026 and describes the unrest as a nationwide uprising. It also claims Iranian authorities have detained students accused of links to the organisation. These are serious allegations, but they originate in the group’s own statements and should be treated with caution until independently verified.

The organisation’s history helps explain why its presence triggers such sharp reactions. Founded in 1965, the MEK carried out armed attacks against the Shah’s government and US targets in the 1970s, and it initially supported the 1978–1979 revolution. It later turned against the new Iranian state and went into exile. Its decision to align with Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War remains, for many Iranians, a line that no rebranding can easily erase.

The US State Department designated the MEK a terrorist organisation in 1997, a label that remained until 2012, when the United States removed it during Barack Obama’s presidency.

The organisation’s history helps explain why its presence triggers such sharp reactions. Founded in 1965, the MEK carried out armed attacks against the Shah’s government and US targets in the 1970s, and it initially supported the 1978–1979 revolution. It later turned against the new Iranian state and went into exile. Its decision to align with Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War remains, for many Iranians, a line that no rebranding can easily erase.

The US State Department designated the MEK a terrorist organisation in 1997, a label that remained until 2012, when the United States removed it during Barack Obama’s presidency.

Trump’s call to escalate

Foreign encouragement has not come only from Israel or exiled groups. On 13 January, 2026, Trump urged protesters to intensify their actions and seize state institutions, writing: “KEEP PROTESTING – TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! … HELP IS ON ITS WAY.”

That language matters. It does not read like concern for rights or support for democratic participation. It reads like an invitation to confrontation, paired with the suggestion of outside backing. In a country shaped by long memories of foreign interference, that kind of messaging can deepen polarisation, raise the risk of violence and harden the very security posture it claims to oppose.

What would “regime change” even mean?

Even if one sets aside legality and morality, the strategy collapses under its own questions. If Iran’s leadership fell, who would govern a country of roughly 90 million people? Some proponents point to the Shah’s son, but his support inside Iran is widely contested and he has lived abroad for decades, including in Maryland.

Then comes the issue of force. What would occupation and administration require in manpower, logistics and political cover, particularly in a society where many already distrust US intentions? A project of that scale would not resemble a “targeted strike”. It would look more like a prolonged crisis, with predictable spillover and unpredictable end points.
There is also a religious dimension that outside actors routinely underestimate. Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, carries religious authority for many Shia Muslims. A direct assault on Iran risks being read by parts of the region as an assault on a community’s dignity and security, not simply a dispute between states.

Regional actors would also respond through their own interests. Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and powerful Shia political forces in Iraq have long understood that an attack on Iran shifts the balance of power across the region. If they believe Iran’s fall makes them next, they will not disarm out of goodwill. They will prepare for survival.
Finally, escalation dynamics rarely stop where planners imagine. If the United States attacked and Iran inflicted serious damage in return, would Washington or Israel accept that outcome, or would they climb further up the ladder in pursuit of “victory”? In a world where nuclear threats have returned to political conversation with disturbing ease, that is not a remote concern.

A historical warning, and a hard question

Iran does not approach this moment without history. In 1951, Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, became Time magazine’s Man of the Year. Two years later, a CIA-backed coup removed him. Decades on, the legacy still shapes how many Iranians read foreign pressure: less as humanitarian concern, more as a recurring pattern of control.

That history sharpens a final, uncomfortable question. If an Iranian citizen believed that only a credible deterrent could prevent an existential attack, would they support pursuing nuclear weapons? If not, what real alternative would allow Iran to escape sanctions, threats and covert action while protecting its sovereignty?

These are not abstract debates. They sit at the center of today’s crisis, and any honest discussion of Iran’s protests has to hold them alongside the country’s genuine internal grievances.

Jenny Williams, Middle East Monitor

The post The MEK’s self-declared role in Iran protests appeared first on Nejat Society.

Kiriakou asserted that while CIA officers swear an oath to protect the Constitution upon entering service, many fail to uphold that commitment. Recalling his first day at the agency, Kiriakou remarked: “When I stood with about 300 others and raised my hand to swear to protect the Constitution, I had to conclude that I was the only one there who truly meant it.”

In 2002, Kiriakou was asked if he wished to be trained in “enhanced interrogation techniques.” He recounted identifying the initiative as a torture program and stating it was illegal. According to Kiriakou, officials responded by saying, “It’s not illegal; the President approved it and the Department of Justice authorized it.” He emphasized that he was the only member of a 14-person team to refuse the offer.

Addressing the assassination programs conducted during the Obama administration, Kiriakou described how then-CIA Director John Brennan met with White House and Department of Justice officials every Tuesday morning to finalize a list of individuals to be killed that week.

Kiriakou described the process in stark terms: “Once the names were agreed upon, teams would deploy across the globe to carry out the assassinations, only to reconvene for the following week’s list.”

He also touched upon the practice of “extraordinary rendition,” reminding viewers that sending suspects to countries where they are known to face torture is illegal. Citing the example of a Tunisian suspect captured in Afghanistan and rendered to Egypt, Kiriakou argued that such practices lack any legitimate legal foundation.

Regarding the recent unrest and street demonstrations in Iran, Kiriakou contended that these events are the result of a joint CIA and Mossad operation. Referencing public statements made by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Kiriakou stated, “We know this is a Mossad-CIA operation thanks to Pompeo’s own comments.”

Kiriakou noted that while the CIA does not typically maintain personnel on the ground, Mossad has an extensive field presence. He alleged that both agencies work in close cooperation with the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK). He reminded the audience that the MEK had previously attempted to assassinate a US ambassador and was once designated as a terrorist organization before being removed from the list in 2009 during Hillary Clinton’s tenure.

Kiriakou also highlighted the organization’s lobbying efforts in Washington, noting that “everyone from Rudy Giuliani to Howard Dean began lobbying for the MEK.”

Commenting on the burning of mosques and fire trucks during the Iranian demonstrations, Kiriakou argued these actions do not align with demands for democracy. “If you are demonstrating for democracy and freedom, why would you set fire to mosques and fire engines? Mossad and the CIA want chaos in Iran,” he evaluated.

The program also addressed remarks by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent regarding the devaluation of the Iranian Rial. Evaluating Bessent’s admission that economic chaos was being used to trigger street protests, Kiriakou stated such actions fall under “covert action,” which requires presidential authorization.

“To implement a plan of this nature, one needs a ‘finding’—a document of authorization signed by the CIA General Counsel, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, the National Security Council, and ultimately the President,” Kiriakou explained.

Turning to Israeli operational methods, Kiriakou claimed that Mossad utilizes Afghan refugees in Iran for intelligence gathering. “The Israelis take Afghan refugees who are in desperate straits and have no access to state services, paying them $200 a month to carry out surveillance tasks,” he alleged.

In response to questions about whether Saudi Arabia possesses nuclear weapons, Kiriakou cited information from the legendary CIA operations officer Duane Clarridge.

Kiriakou stated that Saudi Arabia financed Pakistan’s nuclear program. “The Saudis provided the money the Pakistanis needed to develop a nuclear bomb as a counterweight to India. In return, I assume the Pakistanis have shared those bombs with the Saudis,” he said. While it remains unclear if Saudi Arabia possesses a missile system capable of carrying nuclear warheads, Kiriakou emphasized that their access to nuclear weapons is highly probable.

Evaluating the links between Contra guerrillas in Nicaragua and the influx of cocaine into the US during the 1980s, Kiriakou stated that the CIA’s role in this process is documented.

He noted that while the CIA armed Contra groups in the north, groups in the south were smuggling Colombian cocaine into the US, and the agency, at the very least, turned a blind eye to the traffic. Rejecting claims by his former colleague Jack Devine that the CIA was not involved in the drug trade, Kiriakou countered: “I believe Jack Devine is mistaken. The evidence shows the CIA facilitated the importation of cocaine.”

Kiriakou argued that Congressional oversight of the CIA has weakened significantly since the 1980s, signaling the end of the era defined by the Church and Pike Committees (1975–1982). He suggested that current intelligence committees act more as supporters of the agency than as overseers. “The CIA pushes the boundaries until someone pushes back. If no one resists, they gain new ground and they never give it back,” he remarked.

Finally, commenting on newly surfaced documents regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case, Kiriakou noted that the possibility of Epstein having ties to the CIA has strengthened. Kiriakou mentioned that Epstein’s lawyers had approached the CIA to confirm a relationship between Epstein and the agency, though no response was given.

“Epstein was seeking a role with the CIA, and it appears he had similar relationships with MI6 and the Israelis,” Kiriakou concluded.

Harici.com.tr

The post Former CIA officer Alleges Joint CIA-Mossad Campaign to Destabilize Iran appeared first on Nejat Society.

On Saturday, February 7, at the MEK’s so-called Free Iran rally held to mark the anniversary of the victory of the 1979 revolution, in Iran, Iman Sefati, an Iranian-German journalist who works for the German news outlet, Bild, was attacked and verbally abused by Maryam Rajavi’s bodyguards because of a single question he asked Maryam Rajavi.

A short question from the journalist turned into a crisis for Maryam Rajavi’s bodyguards. Iman Sefati was met with silence by the side of Maryam Rajavi for asking a question that criticized the background of the MEK, and her answer was replaced by an onslaught from her bodyguards. The question was: “Ms. Maryam Rajavi! What is your opinion about Saddam Hussein?”. The journalist referred to the group’s collaboration with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war.

The attack by Maryam Rajavi’s elderly bodyguards began with verbal abuse and labeling the journalist as Iranian spy. They tried to forcibly take the cell phones of Iman Sefati and his colleague, but they were unsuccessful due to the intervention of the Berlin police.

Along with publishing a video of the incident on his account, Sefati wrote to Maryam Rajavi and the speakers of the event on the X social network:

As a journalist, I just wanted to ask you some questions. A basic right in a democracy. Reaction: Kicks in the groin, blows to the torso, pushing and choking. Is this the group’s understanding of democracy, freedom of expression and diversity of opinions?

The post Maryam Rajavi’s Bodyguards Attack BILD Journalist in Berlin Rally appeared first on Nejat Society.